tdierikx

There are LOTS pesh... and that's where is gets very hard... must select only the better ones... *grin* I pruned all the really crap ones out - still have 950-ish pics to choose from! I've sorted them into folders of each main critter this morning - so should only have to sort out a select few from each type to share this evening when I get home from work. T.

A Whippet with a very full tummy... now there's a sight you don't see every day... *grin* Stunning girl - and I'm sure she's going to have stunning pups. T.

No crossbreeds or similar... *grin* Done. T.

I've just gone through 1400-odd photos from today... and there are definitely some OMG moments... *grin* At one point we thought we might see some giraffe nooky... I was almost afraid to take pics of the 2 lovebirds, but they spared us from the more intimate stuff... lol! I've got all the "staples", lions, tigers, gorillas, chimps, giraffes, elephants... and LOTS of each. It seriously going to take some time to select the very best/coolest ones - there are so MANY of them... but I promise it will be worth the wait until tomorrow evening... I'm completely shattered right now and really need to eat something then veg in front of the TV before I crash. I really need to get me a Zoo Friends pass, and a longer zoom lens (say something up to the 400 or 500mm mark? Sigma ones look like decent bang for the buck)... the shots I reckon I could get would be worth the spend methinks. I promise to post some of today's best shots tomorrow evening, OK? T.

Well... I DID go again today... *note to self: need to get a yearly pass if I'm gonna do this on a regular basis* Took around 1400 photos... errr! Almost as soon as I got to the zoo I got chatting with a lovely lady who goes there every weekend, and she took me around to a lot of the good spots for getting photos - we had a great time snapping away all day. She knew all the names of the Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, etc, and we also met up with a friend of hers that knew all of the Chimps off by heart too... I had the best Zoo day ever! Now all I have to do is go through all the photos and pick a few really nice ones to share... aarrgghh! T.

My shots were taken on a windy afternoon in full Auto mode... *grin* I suppose I didn't do too badly considering... lol! I'm pretty steady when hand holding the camera - you learn that when taking long zoom shots in lowish light... errr! I actually haven't pulled out the macro lens since that first attempt... kinda got sidetracked by going to the Zoo TWICE this weekend. Seriously, I'm thinking of getting the 100-400mm lens for Zoo work - will be able to get really good Chimp and Gorilla shots with one of those methinks. I will get back to the macro at some point, just gotta get me some inspiration first... T.

We have one that was adopted from us a few years back - and he comes to us for holidays when his mum does. He is an awesome little man, and I can fully understand the "Tibbie Tragic" syndrome... T.

Black dogs are very special... and they get only the very best owners... so that's why Smudge is getting less hits. Only the best people are looking at her... *grin* T.

OMG!! Isn't he such a handsome boy? T.

Run free Solo... T.

Fascinating shots CC... I'm scared of spiders, but your little lady is actually quite cute. Don't think I'd be getting that close to many spiders though... I'm a bit of a girlie when they start scuttling... T.

The lions were bloody hard to get a good vantage point for by the time I got there - it was crowded and there were a lot of rude pushy shovey people trying to lift their children up to the glass to put their slimy hands all over it... I was off to the side and had to use full zoom and sports mode on the camera to get any shots at all of the male. The light wasn't perfect either... I did get some nice ones of one of the females though, as she graciously came right up to the spot I was standing and looked dead at me from about 3 feet away. God they are divine animals! Tossing up whether to go again today and see if I can get some good tiger shots - also missed the elephants, the gorillas, all the Australian fauna, etc... I mainly went yesterday to have a go at shooting the reptiles... I spent a good 90 mins doing that, and did get some nice pics of slithery things... *grin* I think I did pretty good getting around 1200 photos yesterday, and only deleted around 300 that were complete crap. T.

... last lot... Some of the pics aren't the greatest - lots of reflections on the glass and smeared kiddy fingerprints don't make for ease of photography - not to mention that it was pretty crowded at some of the exhibits. T.

... part 2... ... more coming...

I was supposed to go help a friend with something today, but she got called in to work at the last minute... so I decided to go to the Zoo instead... *grin* Here are the fruits of my labours with the camera... More coming...

Please do not use the word "Stafford" and "type" in the same sentence, the word "Stafford" is used by the breed enthusiast when discussing the "Staffordshire Bull Terrier". By all means "Staffy" away, as that's the terms for the generic brindle pound mutt and the "type" without papers. Sorry WIW - but the average Joe isn't going to make the distinction between "Stafford" or "staffy" when one is rushing up to greet them and it scares them, are they? T.

There is "attack" - resulting in injury... Then there is "menace" - behaviour that can ONLY be construed as possibly leading up to an "attack"... And then there is the average Stafford type of greeting with completely over the top pushy "pat/love me now" attitude... *grin* If someone isn't dog savvy, the last scenario may be reported as "menace" in the very least - more than likely due to stupid reporting of stats like those in the OP... grrr! T.

But they should be and they are, if purchased from a registered breeder who breeds for type, temperament , structure and soundness. The "pedigree dog" is the superior product. If it weren't there would be no dedicated registered breeders who believe in the dogs they produce. I agree with you for the most... but that kind of "attitude" displayed by those with pedigeed dogs can also be a put off for the average person... T.

OI! No popping in without new photos Andrea... T.

When "attack" is construed as "any act that causes fear in the recipient" - the statistics presented will be skewed. Stafford types will ALWAYS factor high in those sort of statistics because a high number of them will be way too friendly for their own good and will rush up to anyone and anything wanting to say hello in an over-enthusuastic manner. The numbers as presented in the OP don't actually state how many of these "attacks" actually resulted in any injury at all - yet the average Joe reading them will correlate "attack" to mean that injury occured, and come to the (most likely) wrong assumption that Stafford types are dangerous, evil, bitey dogs... ... and THAT is the reason that I don't trust any statistics regarding this particular topic. They are presenting a "fact" that the people who designed the data gathering want to "prove"... and the assumption they are trying to prove with thos stats is just wrong from the get go. T.

I'll agree that dogs being stolen by those operating dog fighting rings DOES happen - but I don't believe it's the epidemic that some portray it to be on social media... T.

If we have any pure dogs/pups in our rescue, it's amazing how many enquiries we get for them. People DO want purebreeds... but some are of the perception that breeders "charge too much"... It's amazing how many times we'll be asked if our rescue dogs have testing scores for whatever is tested for in that breed - and we usually point those people towards registered breeders to source a pet from, explaining that rescue dogs are generally what you see is what you get, but registered breeders can give many more guarantees about long term health and temperament because they actually carefully select their breeding lines for those specific traits. We have convinced quite a few people that the price of a registered pedigree dog/pup is a very worthwhile "investment" when factoring in possible long term costs - and you know EXACTLY what you are getting from them. What really gets my goat is those from either "camp" (pure or mixed) that slag off the other's dogs as being "inferior"... many people have mixed breed dogs that don't have any health or temperament issues, and there are those who have purebreeds that do have issues. Carefully selecting the individual dog for your family/lifestyle is more likely to land you a great family pet - regardless where you source it from. That said, I'm very naughty when it comes to pet shops and seeing people considering buying anything from a glass enclosure - I quietly let them know the possible conditions those pups were born in, lack of proper socialisation from spending their critical learning periods being tapped at through the glass, the fact that they only come with their first shot (regardless of age at time of sale), etc... glad to say that I haven't seen anyone I've spoken to actually go in and buy a pup... *grin* T.

It must be the day for it today... I came home to lots of feathers in the kitchen - no body, just lots of feathers - way too many feathers for the bird to have gotten away. It was possibly a small magpie, or a willy wagtail from the look of the feathers. I'm tipping Pickles as the one who caught the bird, because Zeddy is too old and arthritic to catch one. But how the heck Pickles managed it is a mystery too, because she's mobility challenged (in a sort of spastic way) herself... Everyone lined up for dinner though, so it can't have been all that filling... Tomorrow's poo patrol will probably tell me for sure who did it... look for the feathered poops... *grin* T.

Awww.... T.

So, really, the system of reporting is a bit "broken" at best, yes? And then we are to rely on the stats produced as some sort of "proof" of what? I remember when I did a Statistics course, and the main tenet was that you need to gather the data in such a way as to "prove" your theory... it didn't have to be actual fact, just be able to be presented as such due to the nature of the data gathering process. I've taken ALL "statistical data" with a very large pinch of salt since then. It will only ever prove what the gatherer intended it to prove. T.