Community Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About moosmum

  • Rank
    Forum Regular
  • Birthday 11/02/60

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

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

Extra Info

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

3,147 profile views

Display Name History

  1. Dementia is every bit as bad as the more physical deterioration. You have done whats right and he knows and loves you for that. take care of yourself now, you need it. The sacrifice you made for him hurts you, not him. Hugs
  2. I was about to make the same comment.
  3. There was a thread about this a while ago. I would remove loose and poorly attached dew claws on the hind legs, other wise no. Touch wood, But I have never had them removed, never had problems that a quick clip wouldn't fix. My dogs clearly use their dew claws much like thumbs to hold or grab.
  4. He is gorgeous! And yes, he does look like he is sturdy inbody and mind, like hes been here before.
  5. Agree L.G, But I think thats where a natural 'interface' comes in between Pedigree breeders and cross breeders, or the 'environment' they exist in. Better communication of what Pedigrees have to teach. Familiarity with what they have to offer those who 'don't want a show dog'.
  6. Recognition is not the same thing as acceptance. Nothing would change for pedigree dogs. The cross breeds would not be registered. Simple.They are still cross breeds, not pedigree. BUT- Breeders could cross breed using traceable and documented pure breeds without automatic censure from their registering body and its membership. The mere fact of doing so isn't what defines an unethical or back yard breeder. There are still records for both parents back ground info. and personal records for cross breeds would more likely be encouraged in breeding not strictly F1 cross. Encouraging better practice through demonstration of benefits among those who do cross breed. Weather or not they are members of .a registering body. Promoting the expectation that there is an understanding of background, history and some purpose.
  7. Or even rule to allow Reg. breeders to out cross using known dogs ( their own pedigrees ) with out fear of losing membership or opening themselves up to attack from other members. No need to chose then between 'cheating' the rules or risk losing membership. And might encourage use and better understanding of pedigrees among those who do deliberately cross breed, because it seems to me there are often valid reasons for doing so. Honesty doesn't get much encouragement if a breeder finds themselves in that position. Seems to me when its not allowed legitimacy buyers are more likely to be misinformed, pedigrees are more likely to be misinformed, and cross breeds are more likely to be misformed. I still believe its urgent for survival of the K.Cs and pedigree dogs themselves to formaly 'recognize' non pedigree dogs with out any need to accept them into a pedigree system.
  8. Dissapointing they weren't asked to address the problems instead. Too hard to promote expectations, easier to get rid of the problems altogether. No wonder thats what what people expect. Who needs PETA.
  9. I disagree. Ones purpose is cruel ( and Illegal ) practice. The seconds purpose is to race greyhounds. There is no reason it should be assumed that purpose must involve cruel or illegal practices on the grounds that some belonging to that culture use them. You mention earlier an industry or hobby is not like a religion. I think there are similarities in this case, in that both foster exclusive member cultures to support their purpose. Unlike most hobbies or industry. But I don't think just because its cultural, it should be considered O.K. either. As a human society, we work to change and improve our culture. That can only be done we accept it, as a human culture. Not by accepting arbitrary cultures as some how exclusive of others. Cultures are just Human Conditions with a degree of choice. You can be born into them, but you can also leave or improve on them. They are open to influence of the cultures and societies surrounding them. Once they are considered exclusive though, that culture has taken steps to ensure they will not be influenced by by the society or cultures around them. Isn't that the purpose of exclusivity? So they are built from within and not open to 'corrupting' influence from other cultures or society in general? Exclusive cultures by nature are not accepting of change or ideals not included on the beliefs it was founded on. Its Based in its own past, on what was accepted truth in its past. There are beliefs being protected by exclusivity.
  10. Again, I think this is a modern identity problem that will apply equally to pedigree breeders in the long run if we don't learn from it. Agree with your post Woof. Its as a Society we redraw lines as to what brings us benefits or what costs we will no longer bear. So its as a society that we promote and teach those benefits and the responsibilities that come with participation. The problems as I see it come when we accept that there are 'identities' within society that are exclusive. As has been the case within the grey hound racing industry, and is also the case with pedigree breeders. An exclusive 'identity' within a society is not open to to the expectations imposed by society as a whole. Only to those of their own. An identity by its nature is built from within. It takes nothing from without that doesn't re-inforce or nourish whats there to begin with. It built on experience, in response to experience. Of its past and what was proven to work at the time of its inception. So change can't be "recognized" as meeting societies or common expectations. Instead those expectations are perceived as demands on an exclusive society from a hostile environment intent on destroying an identity. That identity is gone if its changed. The internalized 'identity' of the industry must rebel against a societies expectation of it, when that society has no understanding or experience of the realities inherent to that environment. Exclusivity closes the avenues of communication our expectations must be based on. So I believe the solution is to find ways to recognize a broader and more inclusive society than is allowed under current rules and regs. Because Asal is also right, this IS all connected and will continue . Exclusivity creates an environment divorced from the expectations of any society out side its own. BY choice of exclusivity. Yet it can't police its own. Not effectively. It must accept expectations contrary to the responses its identity is based on to maintain any purpose to the broader society it exists in. Individual response has no place in an identity. It doesn't fit unless it conforms. Society polices its own, and promotes whats expected . If its exclusive, its not our own. We we have no part of it and can not affect it. Only reject. We can't even accept it, because it serves no purpose to us, it only imposes costs.
  11. What a sweet looking old girl, her name seems to fit that pic so well. Hugs, and thank you for what you gave her.
  12. Lovely to see. I know there are a lot of of people who haven't a clue, and always will be but looks like society is becoming a lot more aware of shelter dogs in general, and the benefits of adopting older dogs.
  13. Much harder with a pup, but definitely can be a heritable trait. So agree mostly, not so much the breed as the individual. Tho' it appears from this thread that Rotties are still a fairly reliable choice if breed is the selection criteria. If I couldn't be sure of parents having the traits, I would go an older dog known for the right stuff.
  14. Yeah, I'm missing a boy here and he reminds me so much of my beautiful Pids. Peppos Perros sounds great, I've often thought how much a dog could could give confidence to those suffering from the sort of PTSD suffered from victims of violence.
  15. Jewel and Finn both look lovely to me! Love Jewels gorgeous grin . Slow start Loba, but lots to consider now!