corvus

No, they didn't exactly. They suggested it apply to "coursing dogs". The exact wording is: "(1) A person who: … (e) keeps or is in charge of any animal of a prescribed species at any place used for the housing or kennelling, training, trialing, training or racing of coursing dogs, is guilty of an offence." They did not define what they meant by "coursing dogs", which is problematic, as the Commission report flagged. My guess would be they didn't define a breed because they didn't want to leave an exploitable loophole whereby dubious racing activities could shift to another breed (e.g. whippets are bred for racing in other countries). They did not suggest this apply to all sighthounds and did not even mention the sport of lure coursing. The wording is broad probably because there are many ways people can find to get around very specific laws. It is probably too broad, and the Commission has acknowledged that. Seriously, has anyone ever actually spoken to management and scientists at the RSPCA? I have. They love dogs. Most of them own dogs. I don't know where people got this idea that the RSPCA doesn't like dogs or people that own or breed dogs. I am only going to say this once because I doubt it will change any minds so it is just for the record. The RSPCA are not against dog ownership. They have not attacked sighthounds. They are not campaigning towards the end of dog breeding or purebred dogs or dog ownership. They are FOR dogs. They just want them to be safe and well cared for and not exploited. They are responding to what has been revealed in the greyhound racing industry by making proposals that they hope will protect both dogs and other animals that may be cruelly exploited in dog-related activities. It is a shame they have to do this and I'm sure they would rather not, but this is their role - to provide advice in issues pertaining to animal welfare. This coursing dog recommendation is not part of some bigger plan to legislate the life out of the pet dog industry. They are heavily supportive of initiatives to boost pet ownership and dog-friendly environments and housing, and some of the money they have at their disposal goes towards those goals.

I've been reluctant to comment here, but I feel compelled to put things in perspective. The commission recommended that dogs participating in lure coursing be registered as coursing dogs, and this would mean laws put in place to prevent live baiting in the greyhound industry would apply to owners of lure coursing dogs (not all sighthounds, and not dogs that are not currently participating in lure coursing). It is understandable how they made that leap, but it is nowhere near a done deal. For starters, if greyhound racing is indeed banned, no such law would be necessary. The recommendation applies to the situation that the greyhound racing industry continues. If it does continue, the recommendation may be adopted or not. One would hope there would be some consultation if adopting it were being considered. I think that is even in the report. It's a stupid and ill-informed recommendation. I hope that if it comes to that, someone might bother to investigate further before killing the sport. It's important to note it is not a foregone conclusion, though. At the end of the day, I feel any industry that needs dramatic reform should be given a chance to do so with some clear guidance that tells them how far the bar needs to be raised and by when. Self-directed change is a joke in most cases. I have honestly been amazed how far GRNSW has come in such a short time all on their own, but some clear and measurable targets and deadlines may have been enough to get most of the industry participants in line. I have met quite a few over the last 6 months. There are lots of people involved that genuinely want reform or will toe the line wherever it is drawn because they always have. The greyhound racing industry in NSW is going to spend the next year fighting the ban, meaning if it does actually go through, no one is going to be properly prepared for it anyway. I'm not sure what Baird really expects. I don't think he cares much about the victims of his decision, though.

Incidentally, CCD actually impairs olfaction. Dogs with dementia can have difficulty locating a treat on the ground or buried in shallow sand. Problem solving exercises are known to improve symptoms, though. Just thought I'd flag that in case people do start it with a dog with dementia and are disappointed with the results. Dogs are individuals, and it's hard to tell how far along they are with CCD and what it affects.

I saw a Black and Tan Coonhound on the beach in Wollongong recently. While walking with a pile of Vallhunds, my Lapphund, and my Podengo, that is. It bayed! Baby Afghan at the park a couple of months ago. So adorable! She wanted to play chase with my baby Podengo. The beach in Cronulla often has some rare sights. There's a flattie that goes there sometimes. I'm pretty sure I saw a Curly-coated Retriever, once. Gordon Setters, PBGV (We totally eyed off each other's short, rare breeds), Leonberger, Samoyeds, Berner, and I've seen some non-ANKC breeds, as well. Mini American Shepherd and Alaskan Klee Kai. There was a Tibetan Mastiff in my classes recently. She liked me, which is to say she would lean on me casually and not look offended if I spoke to her. There are now about another 3 Lapphunds in my area that I know of. Someone once jammed on their brakes while driving past us on a busy road, wound down their window, and shouted "Is that a Finnish Lapphund??" They parked and came over for a chat. I ran into a Bergamasco several years ago, which was a memorable experience. Beautiful dog. Tactile wonderland! And we also came across a Tibetan terrier a few years ago.

I run classes for "volatile" dogs in southern Sydney. Not sure how my methods compare to K9 Pro's, but I do love working with reactive dogs. I kind of like the frustrated greeters, even though sometimes they can be tricky. I've had the odd one that was a bit dramatic. I teach LAT and my classes are kind of like a mixture of BAT and Control Unleashed things and lots of setups and practicing in controlled scenarios. Creature Teacher

Here is my take on training for optimism, persistence, resilience and confidence after researching optimism in dogs for 3 and a bit years. http://blog.creatureteacher.com.au/2014/01/risk-aversion-3-training-for.html

I still cannot quite believe this is an animal welfare decision. The majority of the reasons cited could apply to the horse racing industry and live exports just as well, including ample opportunity for reform that has not been embraced. Yet, I will be very surprised if either of those industries are dealt the same blow. Both have faced serious controversy in the past and have somehow weathered it. Although, I was surprised it happened to greyhound racing. Interesting that the AVA has suddenly felt it is acceptable to support the ban, but still tiptoe around horse racing and live exports. The inconsistencies irk me. But, what's new.

Ok first up I don't know near enough about them and they fit more in the small size as I don't think the bigger sizes are in Australia yet (they come in three sizes) but from what I know of them they fit the bits I've bolded above and the rest hopefully the two DOLers I know with them can come answer if they fit the rest or not! Podengo Pequeno They are little, so have to watch them with boisterous dogs. Kestrel is just over 5kg and is mostly muscle at 9 months old. She is extremely agile and light-footed, but tough enough that when she falls off something, she is not very bothered. She loves to wrestle with my big lapphund, but he is gentler with her than it looks. She is not keen on big dogs she doesn't know bouncing around her, but she will play with any sized dog if they slow up when she does. It will remain to be seen if she will run long distances with me, but I asked around and eventually someone found me a PPP owner overseas that does bikejoring with them. She said they can go 8km with the bike with training. Video evidence suggests they love it and run hard. That was enough to convince me it was a good bet. Kestrel gets itchy legs and definitely likes to run every day, but she is easy at home, and not a problem if she misses out for whatever reason. Once she's had her morning run she is happy to sleep (preferably in my lap or beside me) all day while I work. She likes strangers and dogs and kids in principle, but she likes to meet them on her terms. She will run to strangers and dance around all wriggly and tap her front paws on their hand, which is super cute, but sometimes people then try to reach for her or pat her and she doesn't really like that with people she doesn't know. She takes a little time (a minute if you have food) to fully trust someone, but she is very intimate and affectionate when she does. She is fine with new surroundings. She is still a baby and knows her place, but she will stand up for herself when appropriate to do so. I'm not keen on terrier temperaments, so a great choice for me looking for a small dog with plenty of get-go but without the things I don't like about terriers. There are only small ones in Australia at the moment, but a little bird told me that there might be medios soon. They are a better size for a boxer and running, but more of a hunting dog than the pequeno.

Do you have a solution? There are too many dogs. There were too many dogs before the ban was announced. That's a big part of the reason why the ban was announced, ostensibly. Most of them would have been killed, as has occurred every year. Now there are even more dogs' lives at stake as racers, breeders, and youngsters are also out of a job. Unless the government is committed to housing these dogs for perhaps years until every last one the owners can't or don't want to keep can be behaviourally assessed, rehabilitated if necessary/possible, and rehomed if they will make suitable pets, then healthy, sound animals will be euthanised. Is that a reason to perpetuate this cycle indefinitely? The numbers don't add up if we are considering the good of the dogs as a population. A gradual reduction in dog numbers over the next few years while the racing industry wound down and rescue caught up would probably have been a better way to go about it if it has to be done, and might preserve the most number of dogs overall. However, we don't get to dictate to the government how they should do this. It was obviously a political decision, and it is in Baird's best interests to make a splash. A gradual closure is not a splash. I live in hope that welfare organisations and GRNSW can negotiate a slower transition, but not holding my breath.

But slow doesn't automatically mean less of a prey drive. Just means they can't catch the bunny Slow is a measure of speed. Greys are Sighthounds. Sighthounds have prey drive. Is this news? Speed does not equal prey drive, though. That assumes that all greyhounds were born equally capable of running very fast and only their motivation to reach a moving stimulus regardless of what kind of moving stimulus differentiates performance. That is overly simplistic.

Evidently, yes, it is too little too late. It took them so long because people are people. Sometimes they will continue doing what they have always done until they are forced to change, and in some cases, they go so far down the garden path before they get found out that it's a long journey back into the light. Truly, though, I doubt this is about animal welfare. When has a government ever banned a questionable practice that makes money? This is a first, really. Maybe I'm cynical, but I've been in animal welfare for long enough to have realised that really, our society does not care about animal welfare. We tick boxes and flirt with moral outrage, but there's no money and little commitment for real change. In this case, there actually was money for real change. Unfortunately, it didn't come soon enough. Change is hard. Change that costs a lot of money is even harder. I don't really blame them for not moving fast enough. I would have liked to have seen an ultimatum like "Meet these targets by 2019 or you will be shut down." I think that is the clear message needed to mobilise for action. I hope this is how it will be done in future. I do not think it is foregone conclusion that fast dogs are poor pets. There are a lot of factors to be considered.

They commissioned a large research project on chase motivation in greyhounds. Since they banned the use of animal materials period in lures and training, there has been some dismay amongst trainers. Those that weren't live baiting were using animal hides. The research project was to give them a way forward within the new rules. I can't speak for the regulatory body on how they planned to enforce this as it's not in the public domain AFAIK. Obviously I do not know how successful they might have been. They were very aware of the stakes, though. Enforce or be shut down. These were not the people in charge when all the scandals came to light.

They have had a hundred years to sort it and done nothing. The complaints aren't new. Time's up. No, look, that is not true. They have done plenty. After the recent scandals, they realised that if they didn't clean greyhound racing in NSW up, there would be no more greyhound racing in NSW. They took this very seriously, and like I said, there are some exceptional people within the organisation that have been working hard towards these ends. They have only been there for a short time, but they have already made big changes and I know for a fact they were getting a framework in place for even bigger changes, and sinking serious money into research to back it up. It may have been that in the end, everything they were doing would have resulted in an unsustainable industry, and my suspicion is this is why Baird has made the decision he has. Clearly there are other racing codes and animal welfare issues that are similarly unbearable that have been conveniently ignored. Unfortunately, it's an enormous job that those that went before in GRNSW created through a plethora of deplorable decisions and corruption, and the current team have not had time to do everything they have been working towards, but to say they have done nothing is simply not true. At the end of the day, wastage is a huge problem in racing. It's cheaper to produce a lot of animals and pick out the best than it is to figure out how to breed the best. Until that is addressed, or there are incentives in place to keep animals racing for longer, wastage will continue to make racing a questionable practice.

RSPCA NSW has made dramatic changes in the last 12 months to their policies re: shelter dogs. They are now working with foster carers and rescues in an effort to rehome dogs that would in the past have been put to sleep. Their reluctance to do this earlier was based on distrust of rescues, which I honestly do not think is misplaced given some of the dogs I have seen that have come from rescues. Some rescues are untrustworthy. RSPCA was not sure which ones were and were not, and were worried about being indirectly responsible for dogs biting people. Last I spoke to them (late last year), they were very happy and relieved that things were working out with foster care and their kill rate had gone down by a lot. As far as the greyhound racing industry in NSW goes, I am a little sad that the people within GRNSW that were attempting to turn the industry around and enforce new regulations are not going to be able to see their efforts to fruition. There are some very good people in that organisation that have been valiantly tackling a mountainous task. I thought they might just do it.

It might make more sense to think in terms of goals rather than specific approaches. In general, the goal with treating over-reactive behaviour is one of two parts. Part 1) Get the dog's arousal DOWN. When arousal is lower, dogs can assess their situation better, they give more signals, and they can make decisions. This puts them in a place where they can learn new behaviours in spite of triggers being nearby. Lower arousal with more distance, massages, a Thundershirt or anxiety wrap, visual barriers, quiet behaviours that take some concentration. Part 2) The dog needs to be exposed to triggers at a level where they won't react overtly. This is so they can learn a calm, more neutral emotional response is a more relevant response to the trigger than high arousal and frustration or avoidance. We want them to know there are other animals nearby, but not close or intense enough to require action from the dog. In that way, you can slowly decrease the distance and the dog learns progressively that calmness and attending to you is an appropriate response to animals being nearby. There are lots of ways you can facilitate the dog being exposed to triggers without reacting, and they include things like LAT, BAT, and using targeting or redirection or u-turn cues to keep the dog in the right zone. The longer they stare at something, the more likely they are to suddenly explode at it, so interrupt staring quickly, which is why LAT is so useful and effective.

It's not super different between training leave food and leave chasing. And we see the same problems with recalls off live game as we do with degrading leave-its with food on the ground as well. It works until that time you cue poorly and the dog fails to respond even though they heard it. This is why people so often resort to e-collars for recalls off game in particular. It can be tricksy to train and takes a lot of work. It's easy to screw up with a misjudgement of what your dog can and will respond to, and not much in the way of a safety net if you do make a mistake. You can still train a strong leave-it or recall with food or with a chase reward like a flirt pole, you just have to sometimes stack a lot of easy reps in to keep that reliability high. As far as leaving small pets alone goes, the leave-it is the easy bit. The more challenging bit is to get the dog to continue to leave-it indefinitely. My approach is generally to make sure the dog is set up to succeed with this, which means get their arousal down, give them something they are supposed to do, and work on duration for that alternative behaviour. It's when the "something else to do" is really "anything other than harassing the other animals" that this gets messy. Sometimes dogs just figure it out with a mild punisher like a firm "No". My new dog is like this, which is novel to me! The spitz boys laugh in the face of "no". Other dogs are not motivated enough in the first place to come back to it and persist. But, for the dogs that do just keep coming back, you have to decide how much you are going to manage this and how to make it clear to the dog what you want from them.

The problem with leave-it is the time the dog actually doesn't leave it when told. They get reinforced. Sometimes big time. Both of my dogs had excellent leave-its as pups that lasted for a while, and for both of them, it inevitably degraded in the end, to the point where one in particular hears "leave it" and starts running in the opposite direction. They live in an interesting world brimming with things they might like to eat. All it takes is for me to use the cue as the dog is swallowing instead of as they are picking it up and they discover that not only are leave-its voluntary, but not leaving it is sometimes super smart. I find it much easier to recover and maintain a recall than a leave-it, mostly because I don't practice leave-its with low value things often enough. Why don't I? Because it's a hassle, and it's deceptively difficult. When you have opportunistic, non-risk-averse dogs that have been systematically reinforced for trying things, sooner or later leave-its start to fail. It's the price you pay.

Thank you all for your kind thoughts. The pup spent nearly 2 weeks on seizure watch while we waited to see if she might be epileptic before the other dog got sick with the same symptoms. As much as it was scary and I'm alarmed that if they'd eaten enough of them, they could have died, I am relieved that I probably do not have an epileptic pup, or an older dog with a brain tumour or something. Lots of things cause seizures, and you can spend a lot of money trying to get a diagnosis that you might never get. I showed a video of little Kestrel with her coughing and sneezing to the emergency vet at ARH when she was admitted, and the vet thought it was interesting, but not necessarily significant. Both dogs had pretty normal blood test results after the seizures. There was really nothing much to go on. I was just lucky to notice both dogs eating something that sounded unusually crunchy and managed to join the dots.

Here is a photo from the web of the fruit. The fruit smell quite nice, kind of vaguely like cocoa. They have several brown seeds inside and some white flesh. The plants are unremarkable when not flowering. Mine flowered in spring/summer, so it's been ages. I didn't make the connection between flowers back then and fruit 6 months or more later. I thought we had 2-3 plants, but the self-sow and also send up suckers. We ended up pulling out 9 parent plants and each one had at least 3 suckers or seedlings. Some of them were very well established (and about 4m tall!) and we couldn't get the root systems out, so had to poison.

Heads up for anyone not aware of this plant. I recently had two of my dogs with coughing and sneezing fits and both of them eventually had their first ever seizures within 2 weeks of each other. One is an 8 month old pup and the other a 7 year old dog, not remotely related. Hospitalisation, much anxiety, race against time figuring out what the heck is going on. The plants have been in my yard since we moved in 8.5 years ago, but the dogs have always ignored them. This year, they fruited, which they apparently do not typically do in Sydney. Perhaps the weather was favourable for them or something. Whatever the case, two of the dogs seem to enjoy the taste of the berries and actively go looking for them. It can kill dogs, so just be aware that it may suddenly fruit where it never has before. Both my guys made a full recovery and are back to normal. We spent most of the weekend pulling all the plants out of the garden, but with fruit all through the garden beds, it'll be a while before the dogs are allowed to use the yard much. https://ausemergencyvet.wordpress.com/2012/10/26/brunfelsia-pretty-but-deadly/ One of my pup's milder coughing fits. The coughs gave way to violent sneezing fits several hours before she seized.

Erik reacts poorly to BTs. By about the 4th one he met he managed to not explode in its face when it looked at him. He seems to hate the face shape and interpret their resting look as a threat. He's not great with bulldogs, either. Their short noses mean they have to get their whole face really close to him to sniff. It's uncomfortable for his personal space needs. He gives them more of a chance than the BTs were getting, though. I have a little pup at the moment. Dog parks are not really safe for her. She is fine with all kinds of dogs as long as they will back off when she asks them to, and dog park dogs are often too excited about being in the dog park to listen. She is doing well with walks around playing fields and the likes. There are often dogs, but not nearly as many and we meet them with plenty of space and often one or two at a time. Much more to her liking. Also, a lot of the dogs there are the ones that also don't like dog parks. :p

Some dogs are oddly sensitive. One of mine is okay with a collar, but hates getting a harness on. I have tried about 4 different types. So, he gets paid every time he gets his harness on. Every time. He will tolerate it, now, and will even come over to put his own head through, but he doesn't enjoy it, even if I give him super tasty treats every time. Doing it more in that case is not going to help him. Pairing it with every good thing is not going to help him. He just needs to cooperate to get it on, get his payment, and move on. If I ever stop paying him, he stops cooperating sooner or later.

Further explanation from GW: http://clickandtreat.com/wordpress/?p=370 Don't be sucked in by his language, though. It is my belief he hugely over-uses this tool and there are many cases he uses it where I would just work on arousal and impulse control and emotional state and still have success. There are many roads to dog training Rome.

Well... Gary Wilkes first started doing it with herding breeds in agility if I remember correctly. It's not the object that is important. It's the fact it's a startling stimulus and it comes at a time when the dog is focused wholly on something else. You don't wait for them to look at you and cry "Hup!" and toss them a pillow. If you've ever had someone toss a jumper or something at you while you're trying to do your homework, you might appreciate why it's punishing. You might have asked for the jumper 2 minutes ago, but that doesn't mean you want it rushing towards your face when you are busy with something else and have limited capacity to catch or avoid it. Man, I hate to post GW explaining this, but there you go: In the VAST MAJORITY OF CASES, I do not like this approach. I do not like suppressing behaviour, and I'd far rather work on building behaviours with positive reinforcement from the ground up. Even where behaviour may be dangerous to the dog or to others, I am still very reluctant to attempt to suppress it, because it's complicated and sometimes hard to predict the outcomes, and if the dog is behaving that way because they are already frightened or anxious, I find it very difficult to justify perpetuating that. GW seems to favour it a lot regardless of arousal and emotional state, to the point where it has made him very unpopular in some circles.

It didn't sound like actual predatory chasing. I've used this method once to stop a dog tearing up carpet, which had become a bit of an obsession. I could redirect the dog, but he just went back to pulling up carpet. I could reward him for alternative behaviours, but when I stopped, he was soon back at the carpet. I threw a pillow at him from behind the couch every time he approached the torn carpet one night. It took maybe 4 reps and he never touched the carpet again. A good punishment is one that takes less than 5 reps, doesn't hurt or frighten the dog, and can't be associated with you or other neutral stimuli. My dog carried a duck response for quite a while afterwards if someone raised a pillow over head height. Given how rarely that happened, it was a fair price to pay for a dog that maintained his freedom in the lounge room.