Jump to content


Community Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About moosmum

  • Rank
    Forum Regular
  • Birthday 11/02/1960

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Anthropology,medical,natural sciences,animal behaviour,

Extra Info

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

5,302 profile views
  1. I agree with this too. I guess "surprisingly little" was a poor word choice. Better to say , The effects of closed stud books would be mitigated by a wide margin, If breed choices were influenced more by what is successful in environments beyond the show ring and the registries own rules and conditions. As they could be, if recognition of those were acceptable to membership identity. They are not, because of an unneeded statement that serves NO purpose, except to favour those who put faith and belief before science and logic. Believing that the singular perspective of their own position is the only legitimate position to hold. Because "We do not recognise"- another. Thats what makes it gnarly. And will affect how well the resulting dogs bred from open stud books will be accepted. No recognition of what takes place beyond your own conditions of membership means, no recognition of the environment that sustains you, or enabled your being. I believe country of origin for the Dalmation has recently refused to accept dogs that carry the pointer cross from some 40 years ago. Not recognised. Delivering the promise.
  2. What should be good news, is that closed stud books have surprisingly little to do with the problems facing breeders of Pedigree Dogs. The main problems are the closed minds tasked with interpreting the instructions laid out by the standards. .Because they are instructed to be closed to what they don't see already there. Conformation showing isn't even such a problem without that instruction. The show ring tells them what they should see best, in a good example of a breed standard. Its the faulty instruction that means the show winner is the only demonstration of a breed standard that quantifies its value.
  3. Yes. I agree thats true for most closed stud book registries due the wording of introduction to their mission statements . But I don't see ANKC or FCI have left themselves any other other options that can be utilised effectively by their membership. Health testing has become the expected solution to increasing incidence of disease because alternatives are beyond what is acceptable to the 'standards' that members will uphold to identify as an acceptable member breeder. Popular sire syndrome is not much a problem else where for dogs. And It seems to me this is no longer about just the survival of Pedigree Dogs, but about the benefits for dogs, in continuing to be bred as they are. From an engineering perspective, the design and its components are not to have any additions, and input from external sources that could add to the machines effectiveness is mostly rejected, because the results often don't match the standard as presented and expected in the show ring. There needs to be recognition: that dogs can't continue to be bred solely for how well they conform to a design, Once set, by its blueprint. (or internal standards of conditions) rather than influenced by the demands of its environment. The environment is demanding health, and transparency of choice in what it will favour. While breed registries bicker over the 'ethics' of choices that allow that without strictly conforming to verified design and components 1st. Nature just doesn't work that way. It doesn't allow evolution. Its not working that way. It can't. The fact that this would work elsewhere should prove the fault is in the system, not the solution. That the fault is in a disability to recognise anything 'different' to whats there. The fault is in an inability to quantify value that could possibly equal the K.Cs own show ring. Agree again, Testing though will improve as more make use of it, and its value becomes a recognised environmental expectation.Transparency too, when the benefits of including and utilising more information becomes obvious. Pedigrees as we know them have have a huge role to play in breeding better, but recognition of values beyond what is there right now, has to be recognised before thats possible.
  4. I think the simple transparency of comprehensive DNA test results, publicly accessible, puts responsibility solidly where it belongs. For all involved parties to make informed decisions on transparent information, and take full responsibility for the results of those choices once made.
  5. Then there are accusations of bias, and an assumption the vet has intimate knowledge of a breeders program, goals and health history of dogs not in front of them. Some dogs seldom see a vet, apart from vaccinations and chips. It gives the expectation of a duty beyond the purpose Vets train for. A healthy dog has no reason to be seen by a vet.(edited to say little reason to see a vet) I Could see a lot of potential problems, but Its easy to see why Vets would want to help promote breeders who they do see as doing every thing right for the health of the dogs they produce, when they deal with the opposite so much.
  6. Yes. But I can understand their reservations. I think my idea could overcome those drawbacks, and reinforce the idea that breeders and buyers share responsibility for the dogs that are being supported by their choices. It would also bring back the more obvious missing elements of the natural selection processes that gave us domestic dogs, and eventually breeds, enhanced by the available science and its communication. A better familiarity with whats being utilised, why and to what purpose.
  7. There are now comprehensive DNA tests available, improving all the time. The Embark tests for multiple factors across breeds that could easily become compulsory for dogs used for breeding and tied into the dogs microchip on a publicly accessed data base. I believe it also tests for inbreeding levels and funds ongoing research into genetics and behaviour. Registration fees for entire dogs could be reduced for inclusion as part of the breeders program and transparency of practices. It could also be tied to veterinary interventions . I would expect such a system would serve to train both breeders and buyers to research more effectively, and understand the risks and limitations of any breeding program, while illustrating the importance of having one with genuine goals that look beyond the breeders immediate purpose. (show ring wins, profit work or whatever) I think its most beneficial effect would be in educating the public, on how and what to look for getting a dog, and would result in more effective breeders. Because breeders are only as good as the public that supplies and supports them.
  8. I had a similar problem with my boy. Feet and belly were always worst affected, and nothing seemed to help. I began to suspect a grass allergy. I had people telling me No, it would not be that. But after trying everything I kept coming back to the Kikuyu lawn I had started. Got rid of my lawn and hey presto, never again!. It took awhile to get rid of. It was very obvious I had found the culprit though because he would find a small patch and it would flare again. I would get rid of that patch and it was all good til another managed to sprout. Might be worth a trial to keep him off Kikuyu for a while and see what happens.
  9. What are they rolling in?

    Brings back horrible memories!The sloppiest cow dug available used to be a rinse and repeat treat. Its also made me realise.... NONE of my dogs have done this that I can recall for the last 30 years!?!
  10. Man dies from severe injuries caused by his pet dog

    Agreed. I wouldn't say prey drive is widely used as a training tool, but much more accepted for the purpose in many breeds and sports for the very sharp and showy response that drive can give and the greater availability of people/video able to teach how to make use of it. especially in its more extreme forms, I do believe it was much more quickly 'culled' from dogs in the past, with sociability and impulse control expected more often as individual traits rather than specific to handler control. And strong prey being a drive I expect is quick to resurface without being actively selected against. No training at all....quite likely. Dog parks have their problems and I don't see that a dog beach would be much different.
  11. Man dies from severe injuries caused by his pet dog

    I would not risk riding on a dog beach these days. Not many dogs could be expected to be 'socialised' to horses, and prey drive/defence/pack drives could all easily come into play. 1st with a strange beast rushing towards then galloping away. Prey drives, I believe, are much more utilised and accepted today than in the past as a training tool. Not to excuse those attacks, but I do think high drives in dogs intended as pets are much more prevalent than say 50 years ago, when dogs were less confined and sociability/trustworthy was part of their 'environmental selection'. A higher degree of selection for response to unpredictable environments and triggers was at play. Even dogs used to horses will often want to run with those when they are having a good gallop, and take a mixed group of dogs unfamiliar with horses and throwing them together with horses at speed, IMO is not worth the risk. I don't think many owners could say they would be well prepared for that situation.
  12. Nah, not the same thing, but I watched my sisters Dingo X GSD do the same. Sister on the phone, Dog stands over the rubbish bin and waits till she looks before grabbing a mouth full and bolting. Sis tried to cure counter surfing with chilli in meat. Dog takes one and gives sister a 'look' then deliberately takes the rest. A hand full that girl, with brains I loved!
  13. Are we stressing our dogs out?

    I 'm pretty sure there is a genetic component as well. Other research I've read says storm phobias in particular generally occurr around 6 yrs. I think it can be genetic or environmental, both or neither. Not sure if gun shy would be the same but I do know I would avoid a dog if either parent had noise phobia, and especially a young dog showing signs. Behaviour isn't some thing I would be willing to compromise for type. You loose an ability for the dogs bred to respond to their purpose.
  14. Are we stressing our dogs out?

    I also think the study was too narrow with only 2 breeds. With my own dogs, (livestock and personal protection) We kept mostly females over a long period . The male was just as sensitive to emotion but handled it very differently. A female was provided with a dark box in the lounge during a thunderstorm. Her phobia stemmed from a lightning strike at home while we were away. Two other females in contact with her during storms also developed storm phobias. ( I keep storm phobic dogs away from others when distressed now) Our boy did not. This day he lay at the entrance to the box offering comfort and would get up now and again to go outside and watch the storm before going back to comfort and guard. We had a woman visiting who was terrified of dogs after an attack as a child. She was visibly cowering. I was about to put the boy away for her when he approached the woman with the most submissive and loose posture he had ever displayed and lifted her hand with his head. He was allowed to stay, the woman was not afraid of him though he was a huge boy. It was beautiful watching her smile, reach out to him and her tension just melt away.( shes since got a dog!) This was not a submissive dog ever. The same dog I watched sitting a burley near 7 ft man down after I'd told him to wait and he leaped up out of his seat to follow me, and who kept a hatchet carrying intruder from the yard.
  15. Words don't come easy

    So sorry Sandgrubber. The size of the hole they leave can be overwhelming. Run free Jarrah. A lovely name. Be kind to yourself.