Souff

Pet ownership is not a right, it is a privilege. It is also a big responsibility. One of the first checks that needs to be done BEFORE anyone takes on the responsibility of dog ownership is "Are the fences OK". Every set of legislation about dogs says that the dog must be under control AT ALL TIMES. People who do not contain their dogs at home not only put the public and other animals, including wildlife, at risk but they put their own dog at huge risk. Allowing a dog to roam is totally irresponsible and this dog was known to council. If a person cannot keep their dog at home, for whatever reason, then it is up to them to find ways of fixing the problem. If money is an issue, there is always a way of finding the money. A lot of people find a job and this provides the money to be able to spend on the things we need. Television sets and dogs are the sort of things that we can live without, believe it or not. They are luxuries, they are not necessities. We might love them and want them, but the bottom line is that we can live happily without them. Thinking that somebody else will pay for the fencing for this dog is daft. Would you like somebody to be paid to open and close the gate too? Souff

I think Mr Clements is the only person who can answer that question.

I would suggest to you that governments are already handing over quite a bit of OUR money to assist people who need financial assistance. And I would also suggest to you that no government is going to make a special case for this one and build a fence where the level of responsibility is so poor that the occupants would probably not bother to close the gate anyhow. The first and last rule of dog ownership is KEEP YOUR BLOODY DOG AT HOME! I don't want to see it chasing cars, I don't want it bailing up somebody's cat or some elderly person, fighting with other roaming dogs, I don't want it pooping all over the nature strip or outside the shops, and I don't want to hit it on the road with my car when I come around a corner on a dark night. If these people cannot safely keep their dog at home, then they should find another home for the dog, or surrender it to council. No government handouts of taxpayers money, no freebies, there are enough rorts already. Souff

My reading too. If a dog is born with a tail of any length, it is a "natural tail". Tails are such a small part of a dog and I am with you re breeders looking at the rest of the dog and getting that right first. What irks me most is that the freedom of choice, a choice that should be made in the best interests of the dog, was ripped away from the people who know the dogs best by people who had a political agenda that was wrong on so many counts. Souff

In the 1990s it was a stated aim of PETA and animal liberation organisations to end ownership of animals. Using the media and politicians, and using highly emotive and sensationalised material, they are well on their way to achieving those aims in Australia. However, it is not so much the case in other countries. If people are not already finding it difficult to buy a purebred pup, particularly in Victoria and Queensland, then they soon will be. Registered breeders have walked away in droves in the past few years and they continue to do so. Anyone looking for a well bred healthy dog in 10 years time will have very little choice, if any. The badly bred backyard mutts will be around and the animal libbers will have achieved their goals. Souff

Nope, sorry, it is not a Koala. Souff blew up the photo and took a closer look and confirmed my first suspicions. The skull shape is not that of a koala, the coat is not a koala coat, either in markings, colour or texture. The coat is more reminiscent of the brush tailed possums from cold climates but could also be from the rodent family. Where is the trade-mark wide leathery nose of the koala? The poor creature in the cage has a pointy snout. I will bet a big bunch of gum leaves that the creature is not a koala. Souff

Settle down everyone it is NOT a koala. I don't know what sort of possum or bear it might be, but it ain't a koala. To refresh your memory of what our beautiful KOALAS really look like, check out these sites http://www.thekoala.com/koala/photogallery.htm http://www.kidcyber.com.au/topics/koalas.htm

Oooh no, velly good velly good .. velly good for sore throats .... ;)

I am not quite sure who the "we" is, but you need to get your facts straight about the bobtail gene ... and then perhaps you can pass on what you learn to "we". The bobtail gene is NOT spina bifida. Natural bobtails occur in quite a few breeds of dog and the gene is not linked to spina bifida. The dogs which have the bobtail gene have a proper anus and many have a short tail. Some have no tail at all but are not afflicted with adverse health effects. Spina bifida is random and strikes the pups of LONG TAILED or short tailed parents. Breeders who have had the heartbreak of having a pup affected by spina bifida usually go on to give FOLIC ACID to bitches after that, in order to prevent the onset of spina bifida during pregnancy. Spina bifida occurs as a developmental problem early in pregnancy and the presence of folic acid in the bitch's diet can help to keep the condition at bay, just as happens in human mothers. Human mothers don't carry the bobtail gene ... yet folic acid is widely prescribed to ward off spina bifida. "Since Spina Bifida occurs early in pregnancy, often before a woman knows she is pregnant, it is important to take folic acid every day. Taking folic acid before and during early pregnancy reduces the risk of Spina Bifida and other neural tube defects." http://www.spinabifidaassociation.org Please do some proper research and find out the facts ... and don't forget to tell "we". Souff

The 'bigger than their head' rule works well here too. Whole shanks, dinosaur bones and whole brisket bones and no dramas. I love the tin can story .... the joys of dog ownership Souff

Oh thanks - he is only a little guy so a deer antler may be a bit big He won't chew on anything that is not food and is not interested in kongs. It is not the whole set of antlers, just a smaller piece of antler and is fine for small dogs. A large pigs ear for each dog is also a great chew that lasts for ages. Look, dogs are often not safe left outside these days.... too many predators. Snakes, other dogs busting in and attacking your dog, and people who thieve puppies. Tiled or timber floors and a pile of newspapers in the same spot each time are used here; not all dogs can hold on and you might get delayed. Roll up the newspaper and chuck it in the bin, without saying a word. It is so easy and there is no cost and it almost always is the first thing a tiny puppy wees on in the whelping box, so weeing on newspaper is second nature to most dogs. Newspaper editors may cringe, but being a doggy toileting facility really is the most vital purpose of newspaper. Music, radio or television MUST be on. Do you know how quiet and boring your house is when you are not there? Some animals think they have been abandoned when it all goes quiet. Talk back radio provides all sorts of voices of different tones and makes life interesting for the home-alone animals and a lot of their stress related behaviour disappears. Make sure your dog has been exercised BEFORE you leave. Sleep time usually follows exercise, so why not let this fall into the times you are away. If they want to play, then leave them some empty 300ml water bottles, without the lids on. These can still be recycled after they have been crunched and chewed by active dogs. The noise of empty water bottles on floors is something that a lot of dogs cannot resist. They can toss it, they can pounce on it, it rolls away from them and they chase it - and while they are so occupied with a couple of empty bottles, they are leaving your furniture in one piece. Endless fun for some dogs. The bottles might be a totally different shape by the time you get back, but who cares? That is no biggie. Also, do not give your dogs the run of the house, confine them to one or two rooms. Make a big fuss of them when you return - for looking after things while you have been away! Souff

Vets and vet nurses are just amazingly wonderful when it comes to this subject. Souff has sat and bawled with them, still holding the one we had tried so hard with but probably knew deep down that we would lose the battle. On other occasions I have opted not to hold the dog, because the dog wasn't mine and I had not bonded with it. You have to have a bond with the dog in the first place for the process to be distressing and I take some comfort from this and that this also helps the vets and vet nurses to cope. I would give myself all the justification in the world why it was kinder to give my 15 year old Prince Charming his wings, and I would go and discuss the matter with my favourite vet .... and all that happened was that we would end up sharing stories of his old dog with dementia and age related illness, and my old dog with dementia and age related illness, and making no decisions at all! That process was repeated quite a few times and then I realised then that the vet too had bonded with this dog, whom he had known since a tiny puppy and was always a firm favourite. In the end it was one of his colleagues who agreed that the time had come (favourite vet was away) and as heartbreaking as it was for us, I do know that we set our old dog free from pain and that it was the right thing to do. His heart would have gone on for much longer, but what good is that when everything else is breaking down? He died with dignity, and we were able to say our goodbyes to him through the tears. Had he died when we were away from home, we would not have been able to say our goodbyes and would have felt terrible because we weren't there with him at the time. He was a dignified dog all his life and he knew that he was loved until the end and that we were there for him. This experience that made me realise that vets and vet nurses do bond closely with some patients and it can be very, very hard for them too, no matter how professional they are. If/when I have to make the decision for my next oldie, I wont be talking to my favourite vet about it at all. I will seek out one of the vets who has no emotional attachment. That might not suit some people, but it suits us. Souff

It's a 6 lane highway with very heavy traffic and no cycle lanes. If you choose to ride a bike there ...

Shazzapug, there are plenty of owners out there who are not registered breeders and they own Limited Register dogs which are not-desexed. Which register the dog is on often has little to do if the dog is used by unregistered breeders. Souff

Egos and "the cause" are put first; the wellbeing of the individual animal is not the primary consideration. Souff

ANYONE who is guilty of aggravated cruelty to animals can face these fines and sentences as far as I am concerned. Souff would make a horrid magistrate - I would throw the book (and more) at people for aggravated cruelty to animals. BUT .... does anyone know what penalties currently apply (to anyone) in Victoria for aggravated cruelty to animals? Souff Thanks Google. According to the article below, in 2009 the penalties for aggravated cruelty in Victoria were: "The maximum penalty for animal cruelty in Victoria is 12 months in jail or a $13,600 fine. In aggravated cruelty incidents, leading to the death or serious disablement of an animal, the penalties are doubled to $27,200 or 24 months in jail." Methinks the Victorian Government should make the fines the same for ALL offenders, breeders or non-breeders. Kirby speaks out against animal cruelty Amanda Woods May 10, 2009 FORMER High Court judge Michael Kirby has called for tougher sentencing for cruelty to animals and greater public awareness of intensive farming practices. Mr Kirby said Australians needed to be made aware of the conditions animals were kept in and to understand that animal welfare legislation did not offer any protection to agricultural stock. "I don't believe the people of Australia know the facts that are revealed in this book, and they should know them," Mr Kirby said at the launch of a book on animal law this week. Advertisement: Story continues below "If only the people knew the pain the animals go through, the cruelty that is inflicted on sentient animals, they would take action." Mr Kirby said many would be shocked to learn that intensively farmed chickens are kept in a space equivalent to the size of a piece of A4 paper and that most sows spend their lives in metal stalls that are so small they can't take a step forward or backwards. He said the book, Animal Law in Australasia, highlighted the need for tougher sentencing for animal cruelty, and that the examples used were astonishing. The maximum penalty for animal cruelty in Victoria is 12 months in jail or a $13,600 fine. In aggravated cruelty incidents, leading to the death or serious disablement of an animal, the penalties are doubled to $27,200 or 24 months in jail. But the acting inspectorate services manager for RSPCA Victoria, Allie Jalbert, said those penalties were not being reflected in sentencing. "In the five years I've been here, I haven't seen the maximum penalties applied to any case, even the most serious cases of beating and killing animals," she said. "Even when we do end up with a good penalty, in most cases it is appealed and they often end up with a lesser sentence. "Going through the court process can also be very expensive for the agencies that are prosecuting it, which are charities." Mr Kirby's comments came as debate raged over the future of jumps racing in Australia, after the death of five horses in Victoria this racing season, including three last week. Animal rights advocates condemn the sport as cruel. Mr Kirby said that while some believed cruelty to animals should not be compared to the suffering of human beings, the parallels between animal rights and important social justice movements of the past could not be denied. "We should all be upset, because it was when we got upset about slaves that something happened about slaves. It was when we got upset about Aboriginal rights that something happened about Aboriginal rights. Being upset is the beginning of the journey to solutions, " he said. "Advocates of change should address the fact that our species seems to have developed in part because of our dependence on meat. We need to address what we need to change and the challenge is to work out where to go from here." Mr Kirby said agricultural stock had been excluded from animal welfare legislation because of a choice made under the law to treat them differently. The launch of the book, edited by Peter Sankoff and Steven White, was part of the Voiceless Animal Law lecture series, which will be held at the University of Melbourne on Thursday. The guest lecturer at the series of free public talks is lawyer Bruce Wagman, who is at the forefront of animal law in the US. While animal law is still emerging as a discipline in Australia, Mr Wagman said Australia was set to follow in America's footsteps. In the US, more than 100 universities including Harvard and Columbia, have offered animal law courses since 1977. The first animal law course in Australia was taught in 2005, and this year the subject will be taught at six law schools throughout the country. Four of these universities will offer the course for the first time. With cases of animals being mistreated in agriculture, entertainment, biomedical research and domestic situations, Mr Wagman said lawyers focusing on animal law had tough decisions to make on which battles to fight. Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/kirby-speaks-out-against-animal-cruelty-20090509-ayp7.html#ixzz1blcJw8OC

ANYONE who is guilty of aggravated cruelty to animals can face these fines and sentences as far as I am concerned. Souff would make a horrid magistrate - I would throw the book (and more) at people for aggravated cruelty to animals. BUT .... does anyone know what penalties currently apply (to anyone) in Victoria for aggravated cruelty to animals? Souff

Innocent little child on a swing ... whizzing happily through the air ... past an animal that likes to grab moving things with its mouth ... When will people EVER learn how a dog thinks? Suffer little children ... because of the lack of thought and commonsense of those in charge. Souff

I agree with this.....and then breeders/puppy farms/pet shops should be forced to take responsibility for dogs no longer wanted by their buyers (owners). Then the pounds these dogs usually end up in could be eliminated. Souff just bought some new clothes, all ready for summer. Next year, after I have had a few good times with the clothes, I am tired of them so can I have them sent back to the manufacturer? What about that car that I have been driving for a while now? I am soooo tired of it. Can I have it sent back to Mr Toyota's factory? Please? I really feel that it is time I got another Audi. I miss those nice circles. I can see some useful precedents being set if dog breeders must take back a dog that they sold as a pup, years after the sale. Souff

Wow, you are excited. Can you describe to me what a puppy farmer is? I love to read a description. Editing to say that question is open to anyone, not just to Cheekygal. Definition of a "Puppy Farmer" .... anyone?

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/8364307/drunk-dog-spared-after-mauling-10-year-old Drunk dog spared after mauling 10-year-old 06:30 AEST Mon Oct 24 2011 A dog that mauled 10-year-old boy in England has been spared after it was found the Staffordshire bull terrier was given strong beer shortly before the attack. The dog named Diesel, owned by 24-year-old James Holmes, attacked Joe Pickering on July 2 after the boy leant over a fence towards the animal. Joe was gouged over his right eye and needed stitches, and a skin graft to repair the damage. But it was found that Mr Holmes' girlfriend's uncle, Paul Ashworth, had taken Diesel out for a walk during the afternoon without permission. When he returned to his Colne home, he poured some Stella Artois beer into Diesel's mouth because it was panting. Minutes later, Diesel attacked Joe. The police tried to bring a civil case against Mr Jones but were unsuccessful because it happened on private property. But police used the Dangerous Dogs Act to take him to court for failing to keep Diesel under control. "I just want to keep my dog. I'll do everything the court asked," Mr Jones said. The court spared the dog from destruction because of all the progress made since the attack, including Diesel's sessions with a dog psychologist. "I can't recommend the uncle be put down but I'll plead strongly on the dog's behalf," said animal psychologist, David Gilman. Joe's father, Paul Pickering, was furious the dog had been allowed to live. "What kind of behaviour is it to give strong lager to a dog like that?" he said. "It's obviously a dangerous animal and it should have been dealt with as such." _____________________

It is only in the last 30 years that de-sexing has become so popular in Australia and this fits in with a whole host of things that people changed to make life easier for them. I think the trend actually started in America in the 70s and we seemed to have followed the US. Like your aunt Nekhbet, good owners of animals MANAGED their dogs well here in Australia too. De-sexing is purely for convenience. The convenience of humans. Keeping the male and the female separate when the female is in season is a chore, and Aussies don't like chores and let accidents happen. In the UK and in most countries of Europe you wont find many people de-sexing their dogs for the same reasons that Aussies do. And in many countries there they have the dogs living inside with them far more than we do in Australia, because of the climate. One family I know send the male over to a relative's house when the girl is in season when they don't want a mating to happen. No fuss, no bother, just an accepted practice in their community. Commonsense really, and they have a history of being excellent carers of animals for centuries. Gene pools of purebred dogs in Australia have been weakened substantially by de-sexing but who is listening? All the time I see beautiful young dogs who could have contributed their genes back to the bloodlines, but no. The dog was sold as a pet and is now de-sexed because owners are told that that is the responsible thing to do. In the eyes of the today's society, that is. The health of the gene pools here in Australia is simply not a consideration and the gene pools are paying a high price in Australia. Souff

At some time in it's life every dog is going to find itself contained in a small pen/crate/cage/enclosure. Can you imagine how terrifying this could be to a dog who has never been crated in it's life? Each time your pet is hospitalised at the vets it will be in a crate out the back, it will not have the run of the place. Please, please, please .... crate train your pup as a youngster, if only to learn that crates are NOT scary places. For transporting, crates are the best and safest option. If your dog ever has to be flown anywhere, he/she will be locked into a crate at big noisy scary airports, and you wont be allowed to sit there with your dog to calm them. You cannot go past the security barrier. Can you imagine how terrifying this could be for a dog that has never been crated before. It is an act of cruelty. I have seen dogs throwing themselves against the sides of metal crates ... all of this stress could have been avoided simply by getting the dog used to a crate earlier on. If a dog is acting up in the crate at the airport, the airline crew have the right to say that the dog is NOT flying in their plane, and you can end up with a dog stuck at an airport with nobody wanting to take it. You could be thousands of kms away from your dog and the situation will be totally out of your control. Sorry, every pup should be crate trained at some point. Crate trained dogs are dogs that can be taken almost anywhere in safety. Crates should be a fun place where dogs can have their toys and blankies and bones at home, an everyday place with the door open. Close the door when you need to but just let a crate be part of the dog's life. Crates should be part of every pup's life. Souff

... manipulation ... gentle persuasion ... whatever. Breeder made sure that the humans got the dog that was the better choice for them. Breeder used his/her brain to achieve the best result for the pup. Souff

Espinay, thank you for saying what naughty Souff has wanted to say for years on here, but for fear of upsetting even more people has refrained from doing so. Very often the pup that "chooses the owner" by walking up to them first IS the pup who may well need more of their attention than they could ever believe. Very often this is the pup that throws out the challenges that may not be what they want at all, and many people simply don't understand or could predict this. Pups of many breeds are very smart little creatures and I suspect that they know that there are no fairies at the bottom of the garden. As one hard nosed writer put it in something I read some time ago, some place ago, only He knows where it was cos I have forgotten, dogs are OPPORTUNISTS. Dogs are PARASITIC. They latched on to humans back in neanderthal times cos they knew man was able to PROVIDE FOOD and WARMTH for them. In return, they could bring a smile to his dial as they helped to tire out the wilderbeest or whatever poor unfortunate creature he was trying to run to earth for the next week's dinners. This was a good game for most dogs as they enjoyed a chase. They could catch and kill those beastly little rats that were stealing his food while he was asleep and transferring bad things to him. Instincts are still with us. Pups are still choosing man or woman, and man or woman falls for it every time. Being the chosen one is not necessarily the best thing and breeders do need to match pups to people, whenever they can. Many thousands of years after cave man, dogs are still very smart little creatures Souff