Greytmate

All dogs are different, they all ended up in rescue for different reasons and there is no benefit in comparing one to another in terms of how long problems take to fix. There are plenty of dogs being adopted from Rescue organisations that are very well-behaved right from day one. Most normal dogs take a week or two to settle in. No reputable rescue organisation would adopt out a dog that fear bites as well as the rest of that behaviour. I think your friend's experience of taking 5 - 6 months is very unusual. Not every one wants a problem dog and most rescue dogs wouldnt have such severe problems. I hope the organisation that you adopted the dog from is assisting you with the probblems you are now having. A reputable rescue group would.

Temperament and the likelihood to become anxious is genetic. Environment will then affect that baseline temperament. Not all anxiety is easily cured with common sense and TLC and there sometimes is a need for complex behaviour modification. The OP is making a good start with a program designed to overcome separation anxiety, but should know that more help is available if the behaviour worsens. It can be very gratifying for adopters to imagine that their dogs have been abused or severely neglected and that this can be fixed with giving the dog the love and attention it didn't get before. Sometimes they are right, but commonly this over-attention given to the newly adopted dog doesn't reduce the likelihood of separation anxiety type behaviours and can even increase them.

Genetic predisposition, triggered by environment. It doesn't matter what the trigger was, if she is showing anxiety when left alone in your yard, you need to continue working on that.

How much of a literature review did you do? There are tests that are reliable and valid that people are already doing in Australia to assess dogs. Is it that you did not review those tests, or are you saying that all tests now being used in Australia to assess dogs are unreliable and inaccurate? Starting 'from scratch' won't build on any of the existing knowledge we have. That is disapointing. The sample of 200 dogs is so tiny. Doing a survey to find out that people want an amicable dog is like reading through dating classifieds and counting how many people value the 'good sense of humour'. Everybody says they want it, everybody's definition of it is totally unique to the extent that the term becomes totally meaningless.

How is the 12% labradors scored any better than the 12% scored by another breed? Comparing the two they look as bad as each other. The same percentage. The only difference is that labs are a popular breed, so there are many thousands of them having beeen diagnosed with HD. Is that really better than you thought it was?

Since July 2009 there has been an exemption on muzzling for approved dogs. So you wouldn't have to put a muzzle on a GAP greyhound. Some of them can be extremely cuddly, it just depends on the individual. You could be matched with a greyhound that has a personality that suits you.

Greyhounds don't tend to get HD at all. The Greyhound Adoption Program screen the dogs properly and match families with a dog that will suit. Not only would you be helping a dog find a home, but you would be getting a registered purebred dog. GAP QLD

Hope you get a diagnosis soon. Have they considered this? Rhabdomyolysis also known as: (Exertional Myopathy, Tying-up, Monday Morning Disease) This acute exertional myopathy of racing Greyhounds and working dogs is characterized by muscle ischemia secondary to exercise or excitement. Avascularity and lactic acidosis cause muscular lysis, myoglobin release, and a nephropathy. Clinical signs include muscle pain and swelling 24-72 hr after racing. Severe cases are characterized by stiffness, hyperpnea, collapse, myoglobinemia, and acute renal failure. Urinalysis reveals myoglobinuria; serum potassium, phosphorus, and muscle enzymes are increased. Treatment includes supportive care such as IV fluids, bicarbonate, body cooling, rest, and muscle relaxants (eg, diazepam). Prognosis depends on severity. That came to my mind too. How is he going Trish?

Steps do not make an area separate from another area, steps give easy access from one area to another. Steps are toddler magnets too. Perhaps the owner of the dog should have had it separated by a barrier so that children couldn't gain access to it via the steps.

I think it is ignorant to trust a large breed male dog at 16 months of age unsupervised. How can anyone say that they totally know and predict and trust a dog and how it will react to others at that stage of its social development? Only somebody with very limited dog knowledge would say that. This was an accident just waiting to happen. If it didn't happen with this toddler, it probably would have happenned with another sometime over the next few months.

Talking about SA law is irrelevant in a Victorian case. But I don't understand your examples anyway. Are you talking about a law where for a dog to be under effective control it must be attached to a leash no longer than 2 metres in length, with the other end of the leash held by a person 16 years of age or older? Or are you telling us the law says that you can take dogs into public access areas and leave them tethered to buildings and unattended by anyone?

Diablo this dog was unrestrained and under Victorian law. If the dog had been within 2 metres of its owner and attached to it by a lead, the owner would have had a better chance of avoiding his dog being approached by the toddler or stepping in between. In this case the owner was cutting hair, the toddler did what toddlers do when temptation is easily accessable to them. They went near the dog, and it seems nobody was watching closely enough to say what really happenned next. This may have been the first time the dog reacted to a toddler, and by the looks of things it wasn't a huge display of aggression, just a bit of an over-reaction. Maybe the dog didn't feel well that day. It may not have been normal for that dog, but it is not outside normal dog behaviour. It is unacceptable so we can try to look for reasons for it we cannot make excuses for it. We cannot guarantee it will never happen again either. I imagine the dog would be declared dangerous, and it will be up to the owner to maintain a positive attitude about that to make sure the dog continues to enjoy a good quality of life.

Having spent a lot of time at public events with my dogs, I can say that the vast majority of children are taught to respect boundaries and do not rush over to strange dogs. Most kids understand that you don't just touch dogs belonging to other people, unless they are sure that it is ok. (Unfortunately, it seems that some kids are conditioned to think its ok if the dog is tiny and cute or fluffy) But many toddlers suddenly do want to rush up to dogs. Unless they are physically restrained, they behave in a way that leaves them most vulnerable because they do not have the mental restraint that older children have. They rush towards things that interest them and they want to interact with interesting things. Dog control laws are a bit like pool fencing laws. Dogs and pools are great, and not intrinsicly harmful, but the responsiblity falls upon the owners of the dogs and the pools to provide a physical barrier to keep toddlers away.

If it is not stopped from roaming, it will possibly end up killing somebody's cat.

If the kid fell onto the dog, he could have reacted out of pain/surprise. Why should he have a DD order on him if that was the situation? A DD order in Victoria would mean that the dog would be muzzled in public and this would prevent a reoccurance. The dog would not suffer if declared dangerous. The restrictions are about fencing, muzzling in public and designation. The dog can still live a good life if the owners want it to. Given that the dog has seriously bitten a child, muzzling in public is a safety precaution. You never know when you might come across a small child in public, they are everywhere. I think the owners were ignorant in thinking their dog didn't need close supervision when in the same area as strange small children. All dogs should be supervised in that situation no matter how perfect their history. In this case I think the DD order is a fitting consequence for owners that have failed in their responsibility to keep their dog from harming somebody. I don't think that the bite was serious enough for them to lose their dog, but they need to keep things safe.

We have used Advocate on hundreds of different dogs over an average of three treatments each and have never had any serious side-effects. The only time we have had a flea problem with dogs on advocate is when the dog has been found to be living in a very heavily infested environment. If the environment is lightly infested you may see the odd poisoned flea on the dog. Advocate doesn't work instantly, it isn't that strong, so the fleas may be seen slowly crawling around for a while before they die. Healthy fleas on untreated dogs move quickly and are hard to see. Advocate works a lot better than any other flea product I have tried. It is also a heartworm preventative.

If you are aware you have done the wrong thing, why are you attacking people instead of trying to make amends?

I just want to thank the moderators for deciding to leave this thread up. I have no words for the OP.

Anna Deykin is a great vet and a lovely person too.

Swelling is another sign of a broken toe.

Yes, for donations. They didn't ask us for any money. They wanted our practical assistance. We lent them an 8 berth trailer to help get all the dogs down from Wondai to the shelter.

Sheridan the RSPCA did contact other groups for help.

Edge is a really good high energy product, you won't need to feed a lot.

Ask down at the greyhound track, somebody there will know. It may even be advertised at the track.

PDF Instructions for twin tub hydrobath.