Greytmate

They look the same, they share most of their genes. But they are not the same. One is a recognised registered breed, so there is a body that has some 'control' over their breeding direction selection. The good individuals can be identified from the bad. The really bad temperament dogs couldn't even be taken to a dog show, so that rules out some of them. The breeders are in a position to do even more to help their breed. But they need to concentrate on their breed's strengths, and not join the losing Team Pitbull. Pitbulls are not registered or recognised in Australia, and there is really no accurate way to identify them as a separate breed. While that makes the idea of banning them problematic, it also makes it hard to argue why a ban should be lifted. I would never suggest that people buy a Pitbull over an Amstaff. Those arguing that they are the same, why have pitbulls at all? Those that are arguing the differences had better be able to explain how those differences make the pitbull desirable as an unrestricted pet. High levels of 'gameness' seems to be all that is ever mentioned. I can't see the attraction, as many amstaffs are already quite 'game' enough. If we look at other types of BSL, some greyhounds are covered by muzzle laws, some are not. The dogs are almost identical genetically. But it is the differences that mean one will have legal restrictions and one will not. The argument that papered dogs should be banned because they look very like pitbulls does not wash with me. It is how a dog acts that needs to be looked at.

Breeders may not want to sell their dogs to people that have no respect for their agenda. You talk as though there is a large dog factory out there supplying all the breeders with stock. You would do better if you saw the best bred dogs as being hand-crafted individually by an artist. Not everyone will get one, and your attitude almost guarantees that some breeders will never sell a dog to you. Not all breeders just "sell dogs". Some breed for the improvement of the breed and that may mean that some breeders will not place dogs with people that have no respect for their breeding agenda. If they were only interested in retail sales they could put the puppies in the shop to sell. Word gets around too. Your opinion has probably been noted by many.

Her face doesn't look very houndy. It would be helpful to see a profile shot of her whole body to see whether she might have some hound in her. Some greyhound and staghound crosses will also give you a wolfie looking dog, with no wolfhound at all. How big is the dog? Purebred wolfhounds are huge, very tall.

You can't always get what you want. The breeder holds the dog and if there is enough demand for the dog, the seller can put as many conditions as they see fit. Not every person is fit to own a dog. Good breeders recognise that, and may put conditions on the sale to prove the buyer's commitment. If there are two puppies available and ten people want them, why wouldn't a breeder sell to the people that agree to look after the dog exactly the way the breeder likes it to be done? You would hope the breeder would prioritise their puppy buyers with welfare as a priority, rather than just selling main registered dogs to the highest bidder.

It can usually be reproduced by repeating the mating. The desexed champion may or may not have been able to reproduce its own excellence. Not all champions do. A big yes to fun, involvement and interest. :D

Yes. Be very careful, ivomectin is in a few things.

I love those pink and blue collars. I would love something like that for Woody, as he doesn't have a GAP collar. He would look great in soft sage green, or maybe lavender. Can anyone make me one like that?

It was this condition especially that inspired my post - " it cannot be desexed until it is an adult and the breeder wants the option to take it back if it is of show quality (if not, then you can desex it and keep it)" That is purely boarding it for the breeder, and I would discourage any pet buyer. The one that you wouldn't accept - "it can never be taken to any vet but needs to be taken back to the breeder herself if anything is ever wrong with it " I would accept it as part of a health guarantee. But not as a general condition. For instance if the dog had bad hips, I would give the breeder the right to take the dog to her own vet for an opinion, before I would make any demands for treatment or compensation. If they have to pay, they get to choose the vet. However I would not buy a dog where I did not get the choice of vet at all, and I would want to choose who actually treated my dog. If my vet was more expensive than the breeder's vet, it would be my choice to pay extra. When I was selling dogs, one condition of sale that we had on our contract was that the owner would obey all local dog laws. If you live in Brisbane, the law says you have to vaccinate your dog, regardless of what your breeder thinks.

That person isn't selling pets. They are needing a foster carer to hold the dog for them at their own expense until the dog is fully developed. Then they can decide whether it is good enough to breed from. In the mean time, by using their own vet and their groomer, they know the dog will be well cared for and they will have access to the dog's full history, should they take it back. They might need to sell pups this way, because they have more dogs than the council will allow, and by placing it in a pet home, they know the dog will be better looked after than it could be in a boarding kennel. It also makes dog breeding more affordable, maybe even profitable. Having this arrangement might mean that a breeder is able to keep their line going strong, instead of it dying out. A good thing for some breeds. Would I buy a pet with this arrangement? Maybe, if I was prepared to maybe say good bye to it in two years time. But I would only do it on condition that the breeder is paying me $55 a week.

You must have seen them on a collar for a different breed. On greyhounds, the widest part goes to the front when walking, as others have said to protect the delicate neck. The traditional greyhound collar has a buckle, and the traditional lead has a buckle instead of a clip. This is because the entire collar is removed for work, rather than just the lead being taken off. The collars are worn very tight. Because the head is small, the collar has to be worn tight enough that you cannot get your fingers under. So to avoid neck damage the collar has to be wide, and be very soft too. Many are felt lined.

Some of the spot on liquids will last for about a month, but if there are fleas in the environment, it will take a while before you stop seeing them. You may have to spray the soil, and wash the beds on the one day, and give the dog a Capstar tablet that will immediately kill any fleas on the dog. Then give an Advantage spot treatment each month, and eventually you will have a flea-free environment. You need to keep using the Advantage to prevent fleas. If you stop using it and wait until you do see some fleas on the dog, by then the environment will be infested again. The fleas on the dog are only the tip of the iceberg of the flea population in a dog's environment. If you have cats they must be treated too, as cats carry fleas around and leave them everywhere, but you rarely see a flea on a cat.

In some breeds ear carriage is important for work. Not at all. Look at racing greyhounds. They look exactly like greyhounds are supposed to look like. Yet they are only ever tested for working ability. By breeding for work, you end up with a dog that has the conformation to do that work. By breeding to a written standard, more extreme looks have started appearing in some breeds, and those dogs can no longer do the work as well as they were originally bred for.

Not necessarily, although in theory that is how it works. In practice you may find that a dog that is slightly larger or smaller than the standard may be the most excellent worker. The only way to test for working ability is to give the dog work.

I am not saying she is not a good breeder. What I am trying to work out is how you would aim for excellence without having something to measure against. How you could say that your dogs are better than anyone else's. If she is a professional working in dog psychology, she may be measuring her dogs against something that I am unaware of. Temperament is a valuable criteria, but you don't 'aim' for it. You need to know what temperament traits you are aiming for, and be able to distinguish the differences between adequate and excellent.

Only rare and elusive if people are breeding for quality. If they are breeding specifically for blue, the pups will be neither rare or elusive. It doesn't take skill or good fortune to buy two blue dogs, put them in a pen together and pump out a litter of blue pups.

No, but you haven't been able to explain why she is an excellent breeder, rather than just another pet quality breeder. How can we measure the excellence?

They are. Excellence in any field can only be ascertained by competition. How else would you know who was excellent, and who was just adequate? But it doesn't seem that your breeder is aiming for excellence in any of these fields are they?

I would disagree. Breeders of excellence breed dogs that excel in their field. They cannot do that without some sort of competition. Your breeder doesn't sound excellent, she sounds like she breeds good pets though. Breeders of excellence also produce pet quality, but their goal is to produce something more than just nice, friendly, healthy dogs.

I agree with this too. That is what you would be learning about before buying your foundation bitch. Depending on what work you want to do, you choose the breed. Then as well as (or sometimes instead of) showing, you would be learning which breeders and bloodlines are tending to produce the best dogs for the work.

I agree with Trisven. Your best bet is to get one from a reputable rescue group. Most groups will have carers who live on acreages with cattle and will know the temperament of the dog... Are you limiting the size to medium because of activity levels or room? I foster large dogs and have had some of the laziest, quietest dogs ever. So easy to look after and not yappy:) This is the way to go. A reputable rescue group will be able to match you to a dog that has shown while in foster care that it is happy to rest quietly while you work, and a dog with the right level of guarding instinct for your home. Be honest with them, be guided by what they say, and be prepared to wait, because sometimes it can take a few weeks to get the right dog. Sometimes wanting a dog that is quick to learn and easy to train is at odds with a wish for a laid back dog. If you need to make a compromise, a reputable rescue will give you the best advice for your situation. Having livestock around, there is huge potential for harm if the wrong dog is brought home, so it is extra important that the dog you get has been assessed properly in a rural environment.

There are plenty of DA little dogs out there, yapping their little heads off and seriously wanting to kill other dogs, but it is rare that these little dogs cause more than an annoyance. Their behaviour is unacceptable to me, yet society does generally accept their DA behaviour. Contrast that with a large dog (of any breed) that has the same attitude. There you have a dog that should be muzzled when out in public, and should be kept in a very secure enclosure when unattended. It is a dog that will kill other people's dogs, because it has the physical capacity and the instinct do do it. Pitbull people need to address this instead of attempting to invalidate people's fears. What are responsible owners of these dogs prepared to concede if they really are committed to keeping their breed going in this country?

And this is precisely why I DON'T go to 'dog parks'. Thats fair enough and I would expect other people who dont want their dogs to be greeted by other dogs to also stay away from dog parks, there are plenty of parks that are not designated dog parks where they could take their dogs. The law requires people to be able to keep their dogs under control. This is so everyone with a well-behaved dog can use the park, not just those that want their dog to interact with strange dogs. The parks are there so that dogs can be exercised off-lead. If you want interaction with other people and dogs, it is manners to check if it is wanted first. There isn't a law that requires me or anyone else to put up with your dog interfering with my dog if we don't want that to happen, and if that interaction causes a fight or injury, you can expect to be fined for not controlling your dog.

Yeah, but some people with tiny little dogs would totally disagree. And that is fundamentally the right thing for them. Also, barging right up to somebody is not necessarily saying "Hi" I assume the OP has read "He just wants to say Hi by Suzanne Clothier"? Essential reading for all dog owners, especially owners of overenthusiastic dogs.

Never going to happen. Labs don't have a genetic predisposition for fighting with or killing other dogs. Fact is (and one of the reasons BSL debates are often unrealistic) is the often blatant refusal by the ABPT's staunch supporters to accept or acknowledge what they were bred for and what they still have a predisposition to do if not raised very carefully. For the most part.. the amount of socialising a Lab needs to remain dog friendly is vastly different to the work needed to establish and maintain a dog friendly ABPT (and yes, I know there are dog friendly ABPT out there... but it isn't the 'norm' for them to be accepting of most other dogs off the bat). Labs are bred for their amiable nature... and always have been. (yep, there are some not very nice ones out there.. but it is quite uncommon to find one inherently dog aggressive). Yes, I agree. We were able to get BSL for greyhounds amended, because we acknowledged why the law existed and were prepared to honestly assess our own dogs and their behaviour. Sadly, Team Pitbull seems to have taken a completely different approach with their lobbying, and that has been most ineffective for them.

Brisbane and Ipswich CC have fencing regulations for domestic dogs in their subordinate local laws, and they are available to look up. Here is the relevant one. IPSWICH CITY COUNCIL Subordinate Local Law No. 7 – (Dogs) 2005