tdierikx

Sounds very much like Alice's reaction to other dogs... and she gets that "staffy scream" going on, which is distinctively loud and has just the right pitch to hurt your ears. She doesn't redirect onto her handler though, just intensely focuses on the object of her anxiety and screams. No aggression, just anxiety and doesn't seem to know what to do unless told what we want of her. We have had good success with a check chain to get her attention back on me and to follow my lead. A check chain used properly is a magical thing, just check and release, and I can get her focus back to me and loose lead walking until she sees another object to be unsure of. What gets me about the situation in the OP is why, if their dog has the tendency to want to attack other dogs that might come up to it, the people that kicked up the fuss have taken it to an off-lead park where the chance of meeting other dogs is so high. Their dog looks to be a large breed and could do a lot of damage if it did decide to react badly to another dog. Maybe they need to rethink their exercise strategy for their dog and only take it to places it won't necessarily come into contact with another offlead dog. What would have happened if someone else had wanted to run their dog in the fenced offlead area they were using? Or had they possibly guarded the gate and warned off others who might have wanted to use the area until they had finished? From that video, I'm thinking that may have been the case too... which is just as stupid and entitled behaviour as that from the guy with the offlead dog outside the fenced area. While I'd love to take Alice somewhere to have a really good run and get some easy exercise (easy for me that is), I wouldn't dream of taking her to an offlead park and letting her do so. We've bought a flirt pole and I exercise her in my yard with it at regular intervals... and she loves it! 10 minutes of chasing a ball or the flirt pole flare and she's knackered... win-win! T.

From what was in the video, it appears that the people kicking up the stink were worried that their dog that had been free running in the fenced dog park might have issues with other dogs, and they seemed worried that their dog might have wanted to react unfavorably to the other guy's loose dog. I think that both owners could have handled the situation better - the guy with the off leash dog outside the park seemed to be a bit of an entitled pr!ck, but the people filming and kicking off about his dog stopping them from leaving the fenced area could have just waited until he and his dog had passed, then left safely without any real fuss. LG, your Albert and my Alice seem to be very similar... Alice gets anxious around other dogs and can get very noisy, but not aggressive thank dog. T.

Yep... me too... Then when you have contained it, they take their own sweet time coming to pick it up... grrr! I just take them to the local vet clinic, which is a holding place for strays anyways. T.

When was she last wormed? T.

And I'd rather that owners with ANY roaming dog take all care to contain them once they have been made fully aware of their dogs' aggressive tendencies. Why does it tend take an actual injury to someone for action to be taken by the authorities - usually to the dog's detriment - when all of that could have been prevented in the first place when complaints have been made to said authorities? Don't get me started on people excusing bad behaviour "because he/she is a rescue". I used to be with a rescue that specialised in taking in dogs with special needs, dogs who had been poorly socialised, dogs that had definitely been abused (with actual proof of that abuse), and we worked bloody hard to ensure that any behavioural issues were well and truly sorted before rehoming any dog in our care. I have personally been party to decisions to euthanaise dogs who just couldn't be rehabilitated enough to ensure that they were safe to be in the community. I have held "broken" dogs as they dropped into that final big sleep with dignity and love... more often than I care to count, but safe in the knowledge that it was the best decision for their circumstance. Any rescue that rehomes a dog with behavioural issues and spins some back story to "justify" that behaviour needs a good kick in the arse IMHO. My current foster dog is getting a lot of professional help to deal with her anxiety around other dogs. She has never displayed actual aggressive behaviours as a result of her anxiety, and we have been making great progress so far. Last weekend we had her walking in a public park on a loose lead about 5 feet away from the trainer's 2 dogs, and even though there were a couple of offlead dogs chasing balls on the other side of the park, she ignored them nicely and looked to me for any reassurance she needed at any point. Her behaviours are most likely due to lack of socialisation during Covid, so she just needs to learn at this point that other dogs aren't any real threat if she just ignores them and looks to her handler for any help she might need. So far she's going great guns on that front... good girl Alice. That said, Alice was completely in her element while all the activity was happening due to getting a new roof here, and a tree falling down requiring emergency services workers to attend. Her "toll" for the workers needing to use the bathroom was cuddles and pats... she is such a trollope with people... lol! All the roofers had to cuddle her before they left when the job was finished also... they actually asked to do so... nawww... T.

@Chihuahua pups Noosamaybe Michelle should refund Dee sooner rather than later if Dee is stressing enough about it to keep sending messages and threats then? Would save a lot of headaches methinks. Sometimes sticking to your guns on an issue isn't worth the long term hassle, yes? T.

Had council been to talk to the owner after numerous reports of these dogs being at large? My guess is no... If there was a report of the dogs biting someone months ago, why was there no follow-up to make sure the owner was complying with any containment orders after that attack? The system has failed here... and there is no dressing that up with claims of staffing, OHS, red tape, etc... they failed miserably and now 2 people have been hospitalised and the dogs destroyed. As much as the owner claims to be "sorry", they need the book thrown at them for not keeping their dogs on their own property. T.

Surely the catching of roaming dogs with unsavoury temperament should be part of the job description? All of the job ads I've seen for council rangers mention this particular aspect in the job description, yet the reality is that when you call council about a roaming dog, they want you to catch and contain the offending animal for them to collect at their leisure. What bollocks! If the dogs are roaming at large, every council is empowered to catch and impound them. A court order might only be needed if the dogs are back inside their own property by the time the rangers arrive, and one of those is easily (and can be quickly) achieved in those circumstances where the dogs have seriously harmed someone already. Other residents say in the article that these dogs have a history of being at large and menacing passers by. I'm confident that the owners knew their dogs were getting out regularly, and had not done enough to keep them contained regardless whether they had injured anyone up to this point. 2 serious attacks in 2 days by the same dogs indicates that these particular dogs had temperament traits that should surely have been known to the owners, and to not exercise due diligence by keeping them contained should be followed up to the fullest extent of the law. I have a small breed dog across the road who is regularly out chasing people, bikes, and the postie with menacing intent. I have reported it to our council on numerous occasions after seeing her nearly causing accidents with the bike riders, bailing up walkers in my front yard, etc. Council came and spoke with the owners in January after my first call, but despite the fact that the dog is not chipped ore registered, and their advice to the owners to get both done and to keep her contained, there has been absolutely no follow up - even after further calls about her continuing to be a menace in the months since then. 100% certain that if she was a larger breed displaying those tendencies there may have been much stronger action/follow-up, but until this small menace actually bites someone or causes an accident with a biker, I doubt anything is going to happen here. Meanwhile I can't leave the house with my dog reactive foster dog to work on her anxiety issues with other dogs (lack of socialisation as a pup during Covid, but not aggressive, just anxious about proximity of unknown dogs) for fear this small turd of a dog will try to bail her up in my front yard and undo all of the work we've been doing to make her more relaxed around other dogs. As it stands, I have to put my dog in the car and drive her up the road to start any walks we need to have, which is ridiculous, don't you think? Note that the only person this wee menace doesn't try to bail up is me, as I've challenged her on many occasions and she knows I don't take any crap from her, but I just herd her home as best I can. All that goes out the window though when she sees my foster dog, and she comes charging out barking and circling, which sets off my girl's anxiety and stresses her greatly. Neighbours have seen this menace as far up the road as a good 10 houses, so her "territory" is getting larger by the month... grrr! T.

The fact that the same dogs had put an elderly lady in hospital only the day before beggars belief... failure by the authorities to act then makes them just as culpable as the idiot owners who let them roam the streets. Hopefully the owners AND the council are held accountable, and this doesn't just end with the dogs being destroyed. T.

The OP does not have to accept a replacement, regardless of one being offered. The pup was returned as it had a major issue that the OP could not resolve, even after consulting a vet. Essentially the "goods" were not of an "acceptable quality", and the OP has returned the "goods", so is entitled to at least a majority portion of the purchase price as a refund. The pup was not returned to be sold on consignment, and the breeder mentioned is currently still selling pups regularly from other litters. Why should the OP have to wait until her particular returned pup is sold, when other pups have been sold since the return of that pup for the same price or more? The breeder should be financial enough to refund sooner rather than later. There is no excuse for either party to resort to nastiness in response to a situation like this, nor block communication from/with the other party before the issue is settled. T.

I read the $1800 as being the original $1500 purchase price plus $300 in the week the OP had her. She mentions that the pup required a vaccination, so you can chalk up a good $150 or more on that, depending on which vaccination was given - I think a C5 sits around that price nowadays. The rest could have included various types of other foods the OP tried to feed said pup. There is no mention of worming/flea/tick treatments, but I'm sure the vet probably at least suggested that when doing the vaccination. Regardless any possible "ignorance" on the part of the OP in dealing with this fussy pup, there is no excuse for the breeder or the third party Vicki being downright nasty in some of their messages to her. By all accounts, the pup arrived refusing to eat even the diet provided by the breeder, and the OP made all efforts to find a way to tempt her to eat to no avail, and also sought veterinary advice on the matter... so I would say that she gave her best effort at least, and deserves a little more respect/leeway than she has been given. At this point, the breeder now has both the purchase price AND the pup (and seemingly all the "power")... and the OP is just seeking help to resolve that, as she has neither for her effort/outlay. T.

If the offending is listed as occurring between April 2021 and February 2023, please tell me why they are backdating Barbie's six alleged litters to October 2020? I once had a Rottweiler who used to cycle every 3 months, but when she had a litter, she didn't cycle again until 6 months after that litter was born, then back to every 3 months until I bred her a second time roughly 18 months after that first litter. I desexed her after the second litter. Even if a dog cycled 3 months after whelping, that would put a roughly 5.5 month gap between litters, factoring in a 9 week gestation. Then there is the roughly 10 days into the cycle until the bitch is receptive, so the actual time between litters is closer to 6 months minimum... so 6 litters in 2 years (or in this case 23 months) would be a physical impossibility IMHO. Work out 23 months divided by 6 and you have Barbie whelping roughly every 3.8 months... huh??? Technically, that would have her cycling and being mated/impregnated with nursing pups still at foot... think about that for a minute... The only way "Barbie" could have 6 litters in 23 months is if there was some dodgy record keeping going on - which, although stupid, is not necessarily an indictable offence - nor is it actually/necessarily an animal welfare issue if more than one dog was used to represent "Barbie" in those dodgy records. I'd say that in the case of Barbie and the 6 litters the breeders would have a good case to fight that particular charge. Copping to a record keeping stuff up is much smarter than accepting a physically impossible charge of animal cruelty. Then again, this breeder may well have been guilty of other animal welfare charges... just not that one. T.

I've seen worse diets... personally, I'd go human grade mince and leave it raw in the mix. Could have tried human grade chicken mince also. My go-to is Savour Life Puppy raw food from Petbarn at the moment... and having good effect with the pups I've been fostering with it - but none of them have been fussy eaters. T.

@Deej722can you please post the breeder's food recipe here? It may help us to work out why she was averse to all of your feeding efforts. As a general rule, dogs won't starve themselves to death. At some point they will be hungry enough to eat and won't be too fussy about what food that is. Sometimes we owners need to be strong and wait the fussy ones out. At 16 weeks of age, Luna would also probably have been teething, so her mouth may have been a bit sore, and that can make them a bit more fussy about certain foods or presentations of same. Again, putting softer foods down and waiting them out usually works eventually. I would say that it wouldn't take much food to feed a 16 week old chihuahua enough to maintain reasonable health, as the vet found. Luna was maybe a little lean, but otherwise healthy, so your efforts had obviously been enough to maintain a reasonable level of health for Luna. Please take a little comfort from that fact... You mention you paid for a vaccination for Luna. At 16 weeks she should have come to you fully vaccinated. Was this not the case? Did she have documentation of when she had her other vaccinations and worming treatments? As for the refund, it looks like you may end up having to go to QCAT with your case. You have a receipt for the $450 deposit - does it say "deposit" on that receipt? As for the cash portion, if you withdrew it from your bank account before handing it over, there should be a record of that on your bank statement with the date showing the withdrawal around the time you took possession of Luna, so that may be evidence enough for the rest of the purchase price claim through QCAT. Worst case, you may be able to find an advertisement for pups for sale by the same breeder showing the price she regularly charges for them, which could also back up your claim. The text messages regarding the payment terms will also help as evidence. T.

Good girl Luna!! T.

Farming them out to other rescues to do the hard stuff is counted as rehomed in RSPCA's opinion... their work is done, accolades must be sought, and donations solicited for "all the good work" they do... T.

If you are going to want to breed dogs in Victoria, you might want to look at the laws/legislation regarding what you are legally required to do to be a breeder... and it's not as simple as you may think. Victoria already has some very stringent laws pertaining to the breeding of dogs, and it's only going to get more restrictive when they finally push through their new animal care and protection act. You will not only need to be a member of DogsVic or similar, you will need to register yourself as a domestic animal business and get local council approvals/permits regarding the number and type of dogs you have on your property, just to name a couple of costly startup measures even before you can put 2 dogs together. Then you need to know and follow more legislated regulations and COPs if/when you do decide to produce any litter of pups. There have been reports of breeders being refused applications regarding breeding in a number of local government areas, so good luck there... T.

Our rescue is getting another intake from the puppy farm this coming weekend... *sigh* T.

Our rescue has seen a marked increase in puppy farms closing down or downsizing, and all the ex-breeding dogs are being offered up to rescues in large numbers... T.

Are those 129 all transferred to other rescues to do the hard work, or are they with RSPCA Tas? The article isn't clear on that. T.

I think what this research shows is that 321 people answering an online survey over a 3 month period is not enough to actually draw any categorical result regarding this topic. It may be that this research paper could be used to instigate further in-depth studies (with many more participants) into the conclusions it draws. Breeds of dog/cats, or even rats, rabbits, reptiles, birds owned may also factor... it's not as simple as just owning a cat or dog and the owner's mental state. I think the research could be expanded to owners of all types of pets and their effect on certain mental health issues. Age of the participant may also factor, as will other life experiences before and after becoming a pet owner. There are plenty of published studies that show categorically that pet ownership does have a good effect on the mental health of humans, but this study seems to be claiming that cat ownership in particular might not be as beneficial to resilience in humans... which definitely needs further study to clarify whether that is actually the case. Factors like whether the pet cat is free-roaming or indoor only would need to be taken into account for a start... I'd say that indoor only cats that like to hang out with their owners would have more beneficial effect methinks. Personally, I know that when I'm feeling particularly low mentally, going out and having contact with a wide range of animals seems to calm those feelings. There is something about forming relationships/bonds with a completely different species that absolutely affects my mood in the most positive way... I call it "refilling my soul". I am much luckier than most, as I have friends with exotic animals like monkeys, meerkats, lions, livestock, native animals, etc... and just hanging out with some of those species and forming some form of communication/relationship with them is a buzz that is incomparable to anything else I've experienced... I highly recommend it actually. T.

Happy Gotcha Day Albert!!! You have chosen yourself the perfect forever family goodest boi! T.

So many levels of failure have to happen before a dog is found homeless and starving. 1. The owner who abandoned/"lost" him - if abandonment was preventable 2. No-one reporting a stray dog roaming - or did not follow up repeated sightings 3. Local government not acting to collect strays 4. No space in pounds/rescues/shelters even for animals at risk of being abandoned due to owner circumstances changing And the answer is not simply telling breeders not to breed their animals. The problem is not breeders, it's the consumer mentality... "goods" are disposable/replaceable. T.

Just a quick mention of the blood tinged poops... was it bright red blood and in relatively low quantity? If so, that could just be due to having diarrhoea, as the act of passing said diarrhoea can cause a small tear in the anal passage when going to the toilet, and it is actually not as serious as it looks. Only be concerned if the amount of blood is alarming (rather than smallish streaks of blood), or it looks like older darker blood that may have come from internal sources. I'm with the others suggesting that Molly only take the monthly versions of heartworm preventative from now on, if at all. Rebanne's treatment plan makes good sense, only giving the preventative when mosquitoes are actually active, and resting the dog's system in the cooler months. T.

Not all ethical breeders will want strangers traipsing all over their property to "see the parents and the conditions they live in"... but in this day and age of video calling, you can have a breeder do a tour of their place via facetime or similar method in real time. I wouldn't buy any dog from someone who wants to do the handover of the "goods" in a public carpark... in what universe is that ever going to be kosher? During the last NSW parliamentary inquiry into puppy farming, there were witnesses who inherently knew they were buying their pup from a puppy farm, but considered that they were "saving" is, so went ahead with the transaction... and one lady even went so far as to state on record that she wanted a puppy right then and didn't want to wait for one from elsewhere, so she bought a pup she knew was from a puppy farmer. Then there was the witness who didn't have any actual experience with buying from a puppy farmer, but she had seen stories about how evil they were on TV, which had formed her opinion... wtf?? T.