jacqui835

Thanks guys, I think I'll recommend the comfortis to them. I just googled it and I'm a little bit worried about the potential side-effects but I guess they're rare and for these dogs the fleas are beyond a nuisance, they are really hurting them.

I will buy them some lavender scented candles and we'll look into the lime. I will also tell them to step up the vacuuming lol.

Corvus if you do still have those tablets and they're still good, that would be really generous. Are you in Sydney?

Hmm I thought it was possible to wash a dog with stuff that didn't strip their natural oils? He has a very shiny coat and the stuff I was him with has no soap, just an oatmeal mix. But I'd prefer a dirtier dog to causing him harm, does anyone know if it is safe to wash him twice a week?

This is actually for a friend's dogs. I don't understand it, but they have terrible fleas all year round. Their dogs are tiny, under 3kg but they use the frontline dose for a dog that's 10kg and administer a dose at least every 2 weeks (on the advice of their vet). They also bathe them with an anti-flea medicated shampoo, though the instructions say this can not be used often so they are only washed about once a month. They recently used a flea bomb in their house but the vet reckons they were re-infected by soil in the backyard. The poor dogs never stop scratching, and now their fur is actually starting to fall out, not to mention the condition of their skin. One has red and brown patches and even bleeds a bit. I can't stand to see dogs like this, but I can not fault what the owners have done because I can't think of what I would be doing differently. I wash my dog about twice a week (because he likes to come in bed with us lol) but I use an oatmeal all natural gentle wash thing that says it can be used more often than twice a week, but I don't really use much in the way of flea protection because he doesn't seem to have any. I'm about to go and stay with these guys though for about 1-2 weeks so would be great if there was some way to try and help them eliminate the flea problem.

What are we doing wrong and what should we be doing? Any help and advice appreciated

Health testing is certainly advisable, but when you elect to buy a pure breed, it seems to become essentially mandatory because the dogs seem to have a much higher inbreeding coefficient and so genetic problems are more likely to arise. That said, you breed two breeds together that both have the same problems, well, 1+1 is never going to equal 0. Hybrid vigour is certainly not guaranteed, but it does exist and there are dog breeds that carry separate conditions that can hence potentially benefit from out crossing.

The bolded bit above is totally wrong.

All dogs can suffer from hereditary problems and registered purebreds as a whole are no more likely than mutts to have problems. The purebreds that are far more likely to suffer genetic problems are the ones from backyard breeders that breed for profit with no regard for health issues and unfortunately these are highly represented in the veterinary statistics of "purebred dogs".

The reason we health test registered purebreds is because we can. The dedicated breeders work very hard to trace problems in their breed and have genetic tests developed to manage these problems. The tests can only be developed when there are are good pedigree records for the geneticists to work with and breeders willing to work with them. We collected blood samples from 600 Border Collies when we started the research into CL. This is simply not possible with crossbred dogs and most people producing them are only in it for profit. They have no interest in improving what they breed in any way.

Purebred dogs are the perfect research candidates for genetic disorders because the generations are short and the pedigree records are extensive. Line breeding and inbreeding actually makes it easier to track and eliminate problems. Having said that, some breeders do take inbreeding way too far and in some breeds, tight inbreeding is so common, it absolutely astounds me. Inbreeding does not actually create defective genes but it does concentrate them in a breed, leading to a sudden increase in dogs affected by those defective genes. This is when dedicated breeders work to get tests developed to counteract the problem thay now know exists.

All dogs can suffer from hereditary problems and registered purebreds as a whole are no more likely than mutts to have problems. I wasn't saying that they were. What I was saying is that if you are going to breed from two very closely related individuals (and all members of a particular breed are very closely related - that's how the breed was initially created and maintained) it is absolutely essential to carry out health testing to ensure that you are eliminating the bad stuff rather than concentrating it as the genes the individuals share are going to be almost all the same. However, if your intention is to breed a husky with a poodle just as a random example, well the offspring are less likely to carry 2 copies of the same gene of a breed specific feature, good or bad for that matter (ie your husky/poodle will probably shed etc). Less likely is the key here - I am not saying that mutts are guaranteed to be more healthy just saying that without health testing you run some very high risks with pure bred dogs.

But my initial point was more concerned with the fact that detrimental features of a breed can be exasperated further by breeding programs and used the examples of the pug, the GSD, the dogs that can't breed or give birth naturally because they're too small, or their skeleton no longer supports it etc. And I wondered that no-one else viewed some of these practices as cruel as stated in the OP. I do not believe though that cross breeding is the answer, or that puppy farms are in any way justifiable and have said my piece on Burke.

Agree with nekhbet on this advice...

I think you need professional help with your pack structure in general and to have Elvis assessed. It may even be Ziggy instigating the fights and Elvis simply finishes them! Sometimes we're quick to assume one dog is the problem.

Dont make a decision yet until you have had your home situation checked by a professional, and dont make any rash decisions until you're ready to deal with them

Cesar Millan's techniques are meant to be used after consulting a professional, I think.... they are certainly not a 'one size fits all' easy fix solution.

And they only have a chance of working if you are able to read all the signs, understand exactly what is going on and know who instigates what. You also need to be completely calm when you're doing it, and I find this the hardest aspect to achieve because if my dog is ever in any kind of fight I'm the polar opposite of calm. It is much easier when the dogs aren't yours - ie get a professional to come in and start the process - then once you've seen it and you can calm down a bit, you can continue it.

So lemme get this straight...

Responsible breeders that breed say, pugs, are cruel because they're continuing those unhealthy characteristics.

And Responsible breeders who breed, maybe cavaliers, are also cruel, because of the problems that breed has.

But if you breed a cavalier and a pug together, you're magically healing all these issues and deserve a gold medal?

Got it in one

Well I certainly don't agree with that. I tried to make it clear that I did think that pure breeds deserve to be preserved and I certainly don't condone puppy farmers for several reasons which I've already stated. I was instead concerned more with the deliberate trend if you like to accentuate and exaggerate certain characteristics in breeds - such as breeding to make the faces shorter, backs more er slopey etc and the fact that although the breed standards have existed for many years, some breeds have continued to change quite dramatically and there seem to be many cases where this has unfortunately been predominantly to their detriment. This forum presents an opportunity for me (as merely someone who is curious and a dog adorer) to learn more about the attitudes of the pure breed community to these sorts of issues and trends. My current view is that it is cruel to breed to maintain or increase what would appear to be detrimental features in dogs, and again, I want to state that I don't think everyone is doing this or that it takes place intentionally in all breeds. I am always interested to learn more and hear other opinions - I'm only 23 and I've owned only a handful of breeds - the bucket is hardly full.

Health testing is certainly advisable, but when you elect to buy a pure breed, it seems to become essentially mandatory because the dogs seem to have a much higher inbreeding coefficient and so genetic problems are more likely to arise. That said, you breed two breeds together that both have the same problems, well, 1+1 is never going to equal 0. Hybrid vigour is certainly not guaranteed, but it does exist and there are dog breeds that carry separate conditions that can hence potentially benefit from out crossing.

Don Burke has probably led to more dogs ending up in shelters in Australia than, well, just about anyone else for the simple reason that if you watch his road tests, he offers guarantees about certain breeds and crosses. He presents himself as a knowledgeable authority and then basically describes dogs as though they are inorganic, non-reactive organisms - that if you buy a particular breed, you will have this, or buy a cross breed and the only option is the best of both. And he doesn't say it's a possibility, just says it is. How many dogs end up in pounds every year because people say they didn't know the dog would be like it is? Because they didn't know that in order to be the dog they wanted, it needed more than food and water?

I am probably going to get absolutely annihilated for saying this, but whilst his delivery could have been better, does no-one think that perhaps he has even a slight point? I am not against pedigree breeders, and I agree that the majority of breeds need to be preserved as they are and the health tests they carry out do better the breed. I don't like puppy farmers because they do not always display adequate concern for matching their puppies to the right people and more importantly, when it comes to deciding which dogs should be bred in the first place. But, I can't believe that no-one here would be just a little bit worried about the direction some breeds are heading. Pugs with ever shorter faces (see pictures of pugs from a few decades ago), curlier tails and shorter legs. We deliberately breed for features that will prevent these dogs from having a proper sense of smell, being able to breathe properly - people think the snoring is cute, but that is a symptom of an animal that can't breathe. German shepherds with their terrible sloping backs and the resulting weaker looking hind legs - none of the GSD from the war photos have these silly backs. Such an amazing breed with a working history - but people who want to use them for their original purpose can't buy from the breeders who breed to show for eg consider the police. Breeds that can't give birth naturally. Overbites, mental problems, skeletal problems, sensory problems - all deliberately bred for. I think pugs are cute, I do, but, I would be lying if I said I didn't think that people who were deliberately breeding to retain or worse, exaggerate these characteristics were being cruel - and the same goes for any breed that has characteristics that are to its detriment.

Or what about within my own chosen breed, the doberman, where one of the breeders I visited when I was looking to acquire one had a male who had achieved grand champion status, had several litters with other breeders all over the country but was almost immobile by 6 years of age due to wobblers - and the breeder then told me I would be lucky to have a doberman for 6-7 years! He admitted that he had first seen the signs of wobblers when the dog was merely 3 years old, but had continued to breed from him with bitches he claimed had no family history of the condition and so it would be fine... It was true that as a registered breeder, he knew about the conditions afflicting his breed and had carried out all the tests, but that hadn't affected his plans or his ability to win prizes in the show ring.

Not trying to say that everyone is doing the wrong thing, and again I want to restate that I do believe in the importance and value of preserving most of the breeds we have as they are. But is everyone here honestly going to say that the system as it stands is really not cruel in anyway? I am interested to know what the pure breed community of Australia has to say.

Well my dog started out quite hyper, always keen to get up as early as possible and followed me everywhere. Now, well, he will quite happily sleep in until late, like right now, he's sprawled out on top of my bed even though he didn't get a proper walk yesterday because I was out all day. I don't think it's genetics because his parents both work, and he's a youngish male entire doberman who has plenty of energy when we go to the park. It's like he can go as long as I want him to, but he can also do the couch potato thing. I think I got very lucky with him

My elkhound is stubborn - if I ask him to do something or more often to not do something if he is doing something naughty he will turn around and give me an earful

yes - that's right he argues back - barking loudly Woof! Woof! Woof Woof! Woof!

It is so hard not to laugh at him - my husband tells everyone he has a potty mouth and when he is barking at us like this he is telling us in very colourful language where we can stick it

I have to turn and walk away - it is the only thing that works - once he realises he is not getting a reaction he stops

Then the next time I ask him to do the same thing he will do it perfectly on first command...

Okay, that sounds exactly like Erik. He tells you off. We say he has a potty mouth as well. He swears like a sailor. I always picture one of those obnoxious children that swear at you and kick your shins.

Sometimes my dog does that sort of thing. I will be trying to tell him to do something he doesn't want to do, like maybe go upstairs for a bath or go to bed etc. He really doesn't want to hear it, so he starts half moaning over me. Stops making noise every time I do, but starts up again the second I try to get a word in edge ways. He doesn't do this often, and only when I sort of indulge him on it - like if I say bath, now, he runs, tail between his legs kinda thing. But if I'm like, oh please won't you go and have a bath? You know you have to and easier just to get it out of the way etc etc he just keeps on howling over me, with an extremely pained expression on his face. Don't know if I'd call that stubborn, he just likes to protest sometimes lol.

The Act defines whether or not a dog is dangerous on the basis of its deed, which, according to the Department of Primary Industries recognises that ‘not all members of a breed of dogs behave in exactly the same way’.17 But then: The Act states that a person must not keep a restricted breed dog unless the person acquired the dog before the commencement of section 15 of the Primary Industries Act (Further Amendment) Act 2005. The penalty for an offence is 10 penalty units. This prevents people acquiring restricted breed dogs. This legislation also gave Councils the power to seize and destroy restricted breed dogs if they have not been previously registered, declared and living in Victoria prior to 2 November 2005. Doesn't sound like individuals are receiving much recognition at all.

Proposed section 84TC empowers Councils to destroy a seized dog on the basis that it is at large or in a place not permitted by Council order and where the dog is a declared dangerous dog. The dog may be destroyed no earlier than 24 hours after a record is made confirming the preconditions to destruction, including that the dog is a declared dangerous dog. However, if there is information that leads to a ‘reasonable belief’ by the authorised officer that the dog was at large because of an act or omission by a person other than the owner the Council may not destroy the dog.

Clause 15 requires Councils to provide details of dogs destroyed in the above circumstances and include information such as the time and date of destruction of the dog and certain information relating to the dog and its owner. The Council must also provide information relating to the reasons for the dog being destroyed such as the basis upon which an authorised officer formed the reasonable belief that was likely to commit an offence under section 29 (in the case of new section 84TA).

So they can kill someone's dog after only 24 hours even if it has no prior convictions to its name, for so much as running towards people? Doesn't look these laws are making it very hard for them at all. To kill someone's pet, I think you should have a bloody good reason not to mention something more than the belief of the council guy that the dog was perhaps only likely to commit an offense. And additionally, to kill a dog, this offense should have to be something more than merely running towards people. They claim that one of the aims of this bill is to somehow better educate people on dog ownership, but I really don't see how it would have any hope of achieving that. This just looks like the sort of thing that will lead to a lot of people's pets being killed without having actually done anything wrong. Gosh I am so glad I don't live in Victoria right now, this is one of the worst modern pieces of legislation I have seen, and that is saying something these days!

That makes me mad. We are slowly losing our only native dog due to trapping and cross breeding. They're native for godsake and we don't have many left, we should be protecting them not killing them!

Well, no, they are not. But have been here long enough to form its own unique "breed" that sets it apart from other asian "dingos" (meaning they look similar but you can usually tell where it has come from)

This leaves us with a dilema. Preserve a non native? Or preserve a distinct breed of dog that has been here long enough to fill the niche of our missing large land based carnivores. Australia has this problem in a few areas. We have the only wild dromedaries in the world, We have a stable population of Bali banteng, which like the dingo is a primative "domestic" breed yet is endangered in it's home country. Where do we draw the line? They say our sparrows are genetically changing from their european ancestors. Will we one day treat them as a new native species?

Well haven't dingoes been here for thousands of years? They were here way before any white people were. From what I have read, it is thought that when the Aboriginals came to Australia they bought the dingoes with them. I don't see why they can't be classified as native, they don't really impact on the rest of the native wildlife as the introduced species do.

To me I can see dingoes going the same way as the thylacine. By the time the jerkwads in power realise something needs to be done, it will be too late.

They have undoubtedly impacted on the native wildlife, but that was long ago and they are unlikely to have any new, surprising impacts. Our camels are supposedly some of the best in the world, but all of our hoofed introduced species are doing damage. Dingoes on the other hand are a minimal threat only to domesticated livestock.

The situation on Fraser Island is terrible. There are no dingoes left to see, and tourism is actually suffering as a result. There is nothing else there for them to eat, and their populations only so just large in the first place because humans fed them. We are now leaving them to die slowly of starvation - it is beyond cruel.

Cool snake and cool pic

Totally OT (although I did think it was a very cool photo and a beautiful snake), crestie, what kind of cat is that in your signature? He/she is beautiful!

So, I am in the elevator, waiting to go down to the basement carpark, when it stops at another floor. The doors open, revealing two dripping wet kids (like puddles of water at their feet!) and their parents. The kids start screaming and shrieking (one was close to tears) because I have a Chihuahua in the lift, on a leash, AND carried in my arms. This is a 2kg dog. The parents proceed to hug and shield their children and calm their fears about this scary dog, looked at me incredulously as I just scared their kids half to death, and told me stiffly that they'd wait for the next lift.

Deep breath. Om.

How to instill a phobia into your kids.

Lucky you didn't have a Great Dane or other Giant breed with you!!! (not sure you'd all fit in the lift though iunless it was quite big )

Or a scary Rotty, Dobe or GSD

Was going to say, you should see the sorts of reactions I get with a huge male doberman. On the other hand, there was a young girl like, maybe 10 max at the park yesterday who quite literally jumped onto the back of my dog and hugged him. Luckily he loves kids and was fine with it but damn, I could see she had given him a fright and it's just lucky he's an 'ask questions first then bite' kinda dog (probably because I often jump on him and hug him lol). I still mentioned to the dad who was laughing at her that she ought to be a bit more careful with strange dogs because not all may appreciate such antics...

The part I don't understand is why are other dog owners even keen to risk it? I take my boy to off-leash parks all the time, and he's very good, staying close and doing as he's told. But each time we come across another dog, I watch the owner carefully. If they seem fine, I'm fine and I just the dogs introduce themselves. But if upon seeing another dog they quickly leash up their own, whether it's because their dogs are aggressive or they're scared of my dog because he's big and a doberman doesn't matter to me, I call him to me and put his leash on. I don't really see the need to challenge them on it or find out first hand why they don't want their dog near mine. And if someone yelled at me to get my dog away, well, why wouldn't you :s Just doesn't make any sense to me...

I have the exact opposite; if he sees anything going on, involving people, dogs, the cats whatever doesn't matter to him, but like me lol he needs to be involved...

I currently own a very sensitive breed, a doberman, but the terrier mixes I owned prior to that were very different and much less sensitive. I do not think there could be a one size fits all type approach, different dogs are going to have different responses... I use a mix, mostly positive re-reinforcement but I also believe it's important to be able to tell your dog that they have done something wrong. There is still a level of trust there, my dog knows that although I'm displeased with what he has done, I am not going to hurt him and for that reason he doesn't run away from me. But he looks so very sad when he knows he has upset me, and anything more than a stern word would be excessive because he does not challenge me. So I can leave my dinner on the table and go and get a drink in the other room and come back to find it still there. I think like everything else, it's just about taking the time to really get to know your dog so that you are then able to better communicate with them.

Just the other day I saw a family in the supermarket with a young child. The child wanted something, but the trolley was already full of everything he wanted, so the parents displayed reluctance. The mum got physically attacked by the young child, and his desired item was added to the trolley. Without any discipline, dogs and humans are also likely to attack so there has to be a balance somewhere.

Ummm because " aloof" does not mean aggressive. The word "aloof" is found in the breed standard of dogs such as the Afghan, Basenji and the RR, none of which are currently "restricted" or look like being added to the list, as they are ANKC recognised breeds.

and the point of your post was ?

It doesn't mean friendly either. Do we have some objection to friendly dogs in some breeds?

I'm sorry but I hope the standard isn't changed. I own an aloof doberman. There is a huge difference between aggressive or dangerous and aloof. He is not aggressive, and will tolerate strangers patting him if we're walking down the street. But he is not a labrador who is desperate for everyone to pat him. He barely demonstrates any response at all if anyone pats him other than his family and friends. But when we pat him, he is overjoyed. I don't particularly enjoy it when other dogs are all over me with affection, as I am not someone who is affectionate with people I have just met either. Polite is good enough for me and I don't want all of the breeds to be the same. If you find that aspect of your breed unacceptable, well there are plenty of breeds who respond quite differently in social situations...

I'm so sorry for your dog, please report this inccident to the Council.

Vet told me the same thing whilst we were there so that's done. I was initially scared to do it because I am worried our council will take it out on all dogs, but the attitude of this guy was just something else. Thanks guys, my boy seems to have forgotten about the whole thing and I'm just trying my best to stop comforting and hugging him lol.

Well just got home from the park, and my dog has been attacked by a known DA dog. My dog has to have stitches above his eye but thankfully I guess the eye itself is fine. He has other bite marks on the side of his face and lip but although they are bleeding they don't require stitches. My heart on the other hand still won't calm down and I'm on the verge of tears because I feel like I have failed him. Dog that attacked was a purebred entire male Am staff with papers, which he pulled out to show someone when they called his dog a pitbull after the attack and told him to keep his illegal breed away from the park. My dog is an entire male doberman who weighs over 40kg, the Am staff is supposedly just over 35 but it didn't look like my dog had much of a chance, and additionally, he just didn't even try.

Didn't know the dog was DA when we got there though, though I thought it wasn't a good sign when the owner was unable to get a ball off his own dog. The dog almost always had a ball in its mouth, and kept bringing it over to my dog (and all the other dogs in the park) to try and tease them, like almost looking like it was trying to put the ball into the mouth of another dog. Well my dog was right at my feet, and this other dog was doing just that but I guess because he was already on me, he didn't run away like he had all of the other times. The dog suddenly growled dropped his ball and attacked my dog. My dog just cried and I didn't know what to do because this attacking dog was on top of him and so strong. I was trying to grab my dog but the other dog wouldn't let go of him and finally the dog's owner was able to hold his neck and make him let go.

Guy then admitted that his dog doesn't like males who are younger than him, but is usually ok so long as he has a ball in his mouth. What kind of control strategy is that?!

I know that all dogs need exercise, and all dogs should be allowed to run off-leash, but damn it, if your dog wants to kill other dogs or badly maim them it is not fair to the other dogs and their owners to put them at even minimal risk because losing a dog is just not something I or I'm sure many owners would deal well with (if we could at all). The dogs are often faster than we are, so I don't know if you can ever really say that you have 100% control and what are you supposed to do when another dog is biting yours? Hope that it's paying enough attention and isn't also HA so that you can remove it without getting injured yourself?

I don't know what the poll is asking exactly, because if he had been on the other side of the park, that probably would have been fine. But the guy actually brought him over to stand with the rest of us.

OMG I must be in sooky la la mode because that made me cry

Those brave dogs and what a beautiful tribute.

I didn't think I was in sooky la la mode but I'm crying too, it was a beautiful tribute.

Truly beautiful story and I have no trouble believing it - you should see my doberman protect our cats from the vicious huge one who always comes into our backyard. Before we got the dog, our cats were always being attacked in their own backyard but now they get the dog to back them up lol.

Only thing is, I'm not sure if I have this right but it looks like the pitbulls were just loose on the streets? "While Robinette was in pursuit, a pair of pit bulls were on neighborhood watch and ran toward the coyote, on a mission to rescue the poor dog from the vicious abductor." I wouldn't care if they were pitbulls or chihuahuas, I don't think having them loose is a good idea... Lucky in this case though I guess...

I would love to be able to put up a sign next to their, "we buy puppies and kittens" one featuring statistics for how many animals are pst every year + some of the potential/likely problems one might encounter from buying from a pet shop, perhaps even some info about the current breeds they stock which happened to be husky crossed with belgian shepherd and kelpie crosses as I don't think either of these breeds would make good dogs for an impulse first time buyer :s However, since they were both marked as breeds that only needed moderate exercise I doubt they'll have any trouble finding homes for them.

But I'm pretty sure that would be illegal, since the sign is actually posted on the window of their store, right in front of the puppy display...

Oh well, went in there again yesterday and all of those puppies have since been sold, got a whole new bunch so I guess it's working. If anyone wants a husky/belgian shepherd or mixed kelpie crosses you will probably be able to find some in the pound in the next oh, 6 months or so

It is wrong to take and sell things that don't belong to you. Regardless of how caring you think you are.

Wow. Yeah sure you should not intentionally steal from someone, which is what you seem to be trying to accuse these people of. But this is not just a 'thing' like a piece of furniture that could just wait to be found by its owner, this a pregnant young dog. It makes a huge difference to both mum and pups if they have a good home and start in life - time is of the essence. No-one is trying to steal this dog, and I have no idea how you came to that conclusion, but I do think you owe a few people an apology because reading this thread, it would appear you have effectively accused them of stealing and I think that given the circumstances and the nature of the 'things' we are dealing with, that is entirely unfair.

Given that they don't know whether or not the dog has an owner, what sort of person that owner is, the fact that they have made no effort to make sure she could be recovered in such an event as this (ie through having a collar or microchip) and especially the delicate situation the lab finds herself in, surely you must agree that finding a home with a responsible and experienced dog owner is potentially the best outcome for this dog. You can't just wait around on the off chance the owner shows up and reclaims their dog, because during that time the dog is likely to require medical and emotional care and her pups will need a home to grow up in.

Gosh sometimes people on these forums just astound me.

My experience has been that each pet will love everyone in the house that is there when they arrive but not necessarily the new additions after they're established. This has been with large terrier and guarding breeds. So when we got 2 cats, they loved the dog we currently had, would actively try to be affectionate with him, cuddle him etc but he basically tolerated and ignored them - much to their dismay. Dogs that came after the cats love the cats and actively try to be affectionate with them, but the cats at best tolerate them and at worst, actually attack them. All of our dogs have chased strange cats (should they enter our property) and all of our cats have run from strange dogs. Our cats don't like other cats either and they seem quite willing to take advantage of our large dog. My dog ignores strange cats when on walks, so I'm not sure if he chases the strange cats on our property because he wants to hunt them, because he's territorial or if it's because he thinks he's protecting the cats or a mix of everything.

The terriers were strong hunters and actually caught rabbits and birds on occasion but never hurt the cats, or even defended their beds etc. One did overturn a mouse cage we had and killed several mice, but interestingly, he never attacked any of the rats. Just used to follow them around, intrigued. My dad always thought it was because he could somehow tell the rat was more intelligent lol. The doberman we have now isn't really interested in chasing animals, so I would probably recommend the non-hunting breeds if tolerance of other animals is a priority.

Went to get the groceries today, and although I shouldn't, I can never resist going past the pet stores and looking at all the puppies. Anyway, today I noticed a sign posted on the puppy window, saying something along the lines of, "has your four legged friend recently had babies? We buy puppies and kittens and find them great new homes".

Just made me really mad, because I can think of several people I see down at the park who would see that sign and decide on that basis to breed, people who have been considering it for a while but now that would just make it so much easier as they would feel like the finding homes for the puppies has been taken care of... It's bad enough that pet shops sell any breed to anyone without properly informing them, but now they seem to be condoning and even encouraging random pet owners to breed their pets for money :s

If you're interested and have a bit of time, this is an article I found helpful when making the same decision as you.

Incidentally, I have chosen to leave my male undesexed as he does not have any sexual/hormone related issues that desexing would be likely to impact upon.

http://users.lavalink.com.au/theos/Spay-neuter.htm