Greytmate

Life is not fair and other avenues are either risky or unethical. Children's safety has to be the priority.

Cheaper to import semen.

Yes, but their standards are incredibly high as well! The failure rate isn't only due to health reasons... although there are a few dogs that don't make it due to health problems. OCD, HD and ED are major diseases that commonly rule a dog out of the program. Just because a dog doesn't make it as a guide dog doesn't mean it won't be a terrific family pet- which many of them do turn out to be. The waiting list for a failed guide dog is 2 years + That is what happens when your standards are high, and people view your organisation with integrity. The 'pass' standard is high but the 'fail' standard is also high. If the wait is two years, the price is possibly too low.

I think you have answered your own question. You do not endorse purebreed dogs whole heartedly, you endorse what you consider good breeding of purebreed dogs. Whatever brand we choose to personally endorse as individual people (and celebs are no different ), we have to be sure that we agree with the whole package that we are endorsing, in order to protect our integrity. Separation of breeds into brands is an idea that is worth exploring. Like Steve says, the sub-issues brought up by this topic are mind boggling.

The price thing is one of the easiest things to solve - If the right steps are put in place first. Purebreed dogs are undervalued. There are ways of raising their perceived value to different people, so that realistic prices can be achieved for them.

Yes. First step is to work out what the "best practice" is. Like in any other 'industry', every process can be examined, changed, updated or improved, and documented. Then you have "quality assurance". And that is something you can use. A world of scientific jargon condensed right down to one little message of integrity that addresses a host of concerns.

I just keep going back and reading Steve's first post in this thread. To just start a media campaign endorsed by a celebrity isn't the answer. However valuable the media is. Recommendations from the "Bateman report?" Let's not hang around waiting for independent bodies to make laws out of that, while we sing the praises of purebreed dogs and parade around pet expos with puppies. Let's be proactive, commission or collect our own scientific reports, get what we can out of the Bateman report, make a big plan, make the tough decisions, and package that into a positive message to the (powerful, scary?) audience that has the concerns that Steve started this topic about.

I didnt say he was. Now I'm confused Just stick to the topic of addressing the bad press. What? I'm a puppy buyer and I'm addressing the issue of negativity against breeders. What press article/s specifically?

I didnt say he was. Now I'm confused Just stick to the topic of addressing the bad press.

Joe Blow doesnt want the ins and outs of how it's being dealt with. Look at the thread in news subforum. Do you think Mr Plod who wants to buy a puppy for his daughter wants to waft through all of that crap and infighting? Not really. He just wants to buy a puppy, and when he's happy with puppy and supernice breeder who doesnt talk scientific shit about genetics and health tests and ...I'm already going to sleep, he'll tell lots of people about his gorgeous little purebred dog and wonderful breeder who giggles when his daughter sends breeder email piccies of the dog. I think it was Jaxx who said - go back to basics and start with the puppy buyers. We spread the word about you guys. Joe Blow isn't giving us bad press. We have to address Bad Press. We have to address Joe Blow. Attempting to address them both in the one message will just confuse Joe, and disrespect BP.

I think people are mixing two messages. Yes, we want people to get the message that purebreed dogs are dogs that will meet their needs as pets. (rather than being showdogs or whatever) That does nothing to address the question "How do we counteract the bad press for purebred dogs?" "Bad press" can be counteracted by listening to what the "bad press" is, and specifically answering those concerns. Not by blindly promoting the dogs as pets. For me, the main difficulty is to have everyone working for the same goal. It cannot be said that concerns about purebreed dogs are being addressed when many of the people breeding them will not admit there is a problem, or accept any scientific evidence put forward. Which ever body that "we" is that is going to try to counteract the "bad press" may be have to be willing to compromise on some things, or make changes. Risk being really unpopular in some circles. And able to come up with sound plans to show a proactive approach to avoid future problems. There may be some truth in all the "bad press", to ignore it is dangerous.

If the dog bails someone up (or bites) it's a management problem. Manage it correctly and there won't be a 2nd time - and if there is then the owner needs to look at WHY and HOW it happened and fix the problem rather than blaming the dog. Your job as an owner is to protect your dog from that which they are fearful of, not place them in a comprimising situation then label them as dangerous or aggressive when they fail. Whether or not NicoleL has failed as an owner, there may no 'fix', and the dog does fit the label of being aggressive and dangerous. No point in apportioning blame to any person or dog, as that won't solve anything. I would say that unless a secure lockable pen is available for the dog, it will continue to be a danger. If the dog is out of its pen, you would need to make sure the house and yard were secured properly so that nobody could inadvertently walk into the dog's area. Basically it would need to be kept in the same way that any ferocious guard dog would need to be kept. To totally ban other children from the house seems overly restrictive of your own kids, and may not be entirely possible to enforce. This dog is certainly not a candidate for rehoming, yet it isn't really a suitable pet for the situation it is in now.

Why don't you trust her?

As long as the right tactics are used, you may be able to persuade the neighbour to move the trampoline. That would involve communicating the idea that the problem is yours and not theirs, and that there would be a benefit to them in moving the trampoline. I wouldn't do that. I would erect a temporary fence to block the view. A couple of hundred dollars is a wise investment for good neighbourly relations.

Well that begs the question - why arent the breeders out there for the breeders. How long do they have to wait before they work out that their CCs are not going to do it for them and do something ? I find this completely ironic. Not that long ago, there were a number of DOLers who wanted to do something for purebreds - promotions at shows, brochures, etc - and it died a death because the majority of breeders on this forum dismissed it as unnecessary. yes i get quite confused as there are a few double standards/mixed messages from breeders No. I see no point in breeders being keen to see a hastily organised 'promotion' of purebreed dogs to go ahead when many good breeders cannot currently fill demand for their pups. And it certainly wouldn't do anything positive to address this topic "How do we counteract the bad press for purebred dogs?" A tent full of people at the Royal show shows self interest, it doesn't counteract bad press. Yes. But who is 'we'?

Well that begs the question - why arent the breeders out there for the breeders. How long do they have to wait before they work out that their CCs are not going to do it for them and do something ? Some breeders are good at breeding. Some breeders are bad at breeding but good at marketing. Who is waiting for who? Are they waiting for themselves? You have done something Steve, you have taken the first step that needed to be taken. You formed the MDBA. I feel its a bit pointless to be having a discussion about 'us' and 'them' and 'we' and 'they'. We need to define those people. And let's define a brand before we even think about approaching people to endorse it.

What makes you say that? How would you define an expert?

Cut and paste and post it here so we can all share the LOLs.

By branding and marketing what you do have. And you have something really great.

As soon as you say that because I don't breed dogs that I would think a certain way about your 'fight', you are dismissing my concerns. When I say guidelines, I am talking about standards or parameters that can be built into legislation. thats not true Im not dismissing your concerns Im saying there are somethings which we have cncerns about that YOU are dismissing If the question is "How do we counteract the bad press for purebred dogs?" then the answer is not to air your own concerns. The answer is to show that 'you' are doing all that is reasonably possible to breed healthy, good quality dogs. You need to differentiate 'your' brand of dogs from the dogs from all the breeders that do not have the dog's health as a priority. Being able to meet the standards of an independant and expert 'governing body' is one way of showing integrity and transparency, and that would be one good way to "counteract the bad press".

As soon as you say that because I don't breed dogs that I would think a certain way about your 'fight', you are dismissing my concerns. When I say guidelines, I am talking about standards or parameters that can be built into legislation.

You counteract it by addressing people's concerns. I think Shortstep made some very valid points, and it isn't about chucking anything in. It is about compromise. Nobody has been thrown in jail lately for breeding a dog with hip displasia, so the fighting attitude seems a little over the top. I do not think the answer is to allow a committee of stakeholders to set the rules. There needs to be a governing body of independent and expert people setting guidelines. Steve you set up the MDBA in that way too. Its a way to stop politics overruling best practice. As a group you have a lot more potential to counteract bad publicity for your dogs than any of the canine associations or clubs do. But you need to be seen as addressing community concerns and not dismissing them.

Sydney doesn't do non-recovery surgery, but it does use cadavers from the pound for surgery training. See I have a problem with this. I think having to work with an already decomposing dog, instead of a freshly dead one, does not encourage respect for the animal they are working on. I am sure Sydney uni vet science department goes through more cans of air freshener than that one at UQ does.

It's good when people come back and tell you what they were on when they wrote that shit.

I would say no. I would also point out that it would not be a good idea to take that dog near any other dogs while she is minding it, because if there are any problems, her friends would be really angry with her. Don't talk to her about how to train dogs, just scare her off the idea of taking the little dog near other dogs or people. Tell her that if the dog bites another dog or gets in a fight, she will get a large fine and the dog will be taken away by the council.