Jump to content

moosmum

Community Members
  • Content count

    1,588
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

About moosmum

  • Rank
    Forum Regular
  • Birthday 11/02/1960

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

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

Extra Info

  • Location
    NSW

Recent Profile Visitors

5,772 profile views
  1. As well, if you are going to rely on a single 'standard' of inheritance, you are only decreasing modes of inheritance- For that trait and others that were not considered by doing so.
  2. You don't see that there is no difference. This forum is not for the public only because this one eyed collective refuses to recognise all perspectives are valid, and representative. Its easier to dismiss people than work to give them a more complete perspective. Or take one away. This forum is for breeders and dog fanciers because thats all you are left with. The only ones who get any value from staying. This collective won't work with anything they see as less. Selecting the conditions of your environment, by cutting out the bits that don't match your ideology of what you think it should look like, and ignoring the reality of what it is. The Dol identity often struggles to believe they are some thing more, or 'other' than the public space they're given. Some thing distinct from it, isn't very public.. It doesn't hurt you to accept and wrap your head around other perspectives. You don't have to agree with them. Only try to understand where they come from because you have no hope of changing what they are until you understand them.. Dog breeders and fanciers are either a part of their human community/environment, taking responsibility to further their own particular perspectives of value there, or they are something other, with different responsibilities. Responsible to another identity.
  3. No, These forums are for Dog Fanciers. Who want to discuss dogs and learn. The 'Public' don't generally last long here. Breeders won't change the public, if thats your answer. These are some of the perceptions you do have to deal with. There are 3 choices. Surrender: and have no effect either way on the out come. Accept: and look for how you can change the perception. Because until you can, theres no communication happening. Or, Reject: as invalid, and not worth communicating with. Kinda how we got here. Perceptions are supposed to vary, its called diversity and it allows more effective responses..... In easy language, If humans or breeders (pick your identity) all have to see things from only one unified perspective to be accepted, they're all going to be looking at the same cloud as they step into the rabbit hole.
  4. Yeah, I should know better. People want dogs. its breed thing. Why would they expect more?
  5. You are right, irresponsible. Standards can only reduce a dogs ability to successfully 'respond' to its environment. Physically as well as mentally Its not a purpose, its a condition a pedigree tries to fix in time and space. Unchanging. A 'fixed' condition is in entropy. Trying to maintain a fixed condition against the demands placed on it, can only reduce it. Purpose gives a direction to move towards. A condition is the end result. Finished. We see the results in the overall decline in health, both physical and mental. And I'm feeling that loss now. Just back from the vets having lost my beautiful Coda to bloat. Rushed her in, but there there was already torsion and signs of damage by the time we could get a vet on Sunday and her to town. Not a pure bred, but the problems we are told are 'just a breed thing' transcend breed. Rip Coda. 6 years old..... The cost of that is almost too much now. How long will people support THAT!!? Bad luck? Yeah, being bred in as we speak. Tonight, I don't feel so optimistic. 50 years ago, to get a dog that didn't die of accident or old age was rare bad luck. Today it would be rare good luck to achieve that. Sounds like maybe you've got it too? We are doing it all backwards.
  6. @asal You got it! Scary alright. When anti fascism has become fascism, and anti hate promotes hatred. When bigotry is rightious, And racists the ones who don't want to see any difference.
  7. Nope. Thats not responsibility in my eyes. The opposite. Breeders offer value to their environment (community) in the form of the dogs they breed. The community (environment) supports breeders through the dogs they choose. The community (or environment) places high demand on good welfare outcomes. If breeders, are going to discredit the value of breeders, ( on welfare grounds) their value is null and void. The demands aren't being met. The welfare costs of supporting breeders is eventually going to be seen as too much for the dogs they get in return. Like the lady who clutches the pup you bred to her chest and asks how you can live with yourself. She wants a pup, For now she will take what you've provided. But shes not going to recognise a job well done for the privilege. Given enough time at the rate we are going, and eventually it won't be just worthless breeders but worthless dogs as well. We discredit Dogs too, depending on where they come from. You've never sounded dumb to me. I appreciate you have enough interest to ask for clarity when I haven't done better. Hope tomorrow is a better day.
  8. I agree. Much of the information we are getting is cherry picked to suit the agendas of self interest groups who have the means to promote any research that supports their narrative, or statistics with out context. Part of the reason I think only a more broadly representative and all inclusive organisation could counter act that. To be founded on a basis of purpose and responsibility, free flow of information and research would be an essential part of its mission. You can't take responsibility with out it.
  9. Absolutely! If environment is a space, then it has rules or laws that allow predictions. We learn those rules in school, but not how they apply to human behaviour, in a human environment. Some how believing human intelligence over rides them. No, it doesn't. Not if we ignore them. The problems in the U.S and around the world play into this too. We can't change the past, but we can start recognising we have the present conditions to work with for a better future with out making the same mistakes all over again, where some parts are seen to be not worth the space they occupy. Take away that space and the platforms they stand on, and you leave them no choice but to claim their own. Opposition brings only opposition. = and opposite reaction. You don't like some ones perspective? you can avoid sharing the same space, learn to accept thats their perspective and you don't have to share it, or give them a better one, because its all they have got. If breeders can't recognise their environment, they will be taken out of their environment. We have less time than you think to get it right, because its taken 150 years to shape the expectations we are left with today, that its too costly to support breeders for the value offered in return. We need to STOP promoting the failures and expecting that to result in improvement. I think it may be too late with out a registry specifically based on Purpose, and free flow of information to promote responsibility. I don't see any other way to counteract the effects of what was begun.
  10. Thanks Scratch, I know I haven't been able to express this well. That makes it very frustrating. I think the problem is that once you have grasped this concept, it alters the language you use. The meanings of words are not different, but take on new dimensions. Quite literally, The dimension of Space. Its not easy to shift perceptions to take that in. But If it can't be falsified, it has huge repercussions so is important to try. Your comments remind me its not useless until I give up..
  11. The conditions a breeder works with ARE the breeders environment. Responsibility is about responding to your environment, in ways that expand it. Deliver value/space. So more of the environment is open to you. If what you give is seen as some thing of value, That improves in some way the conditions around you (customers) and so your purpose is welcomed. You don't get to decide what that value will be. You are the organism, the breeders. The world as it is, is the environment. You don't get to make demands of the environment. It makes demands and you can either meet them or fail . Setting conditions or qualifications on the environment breeders accept before it has value to you, is rejecting your environment. Narrowing the sets of conditions accepted for valid membership as breeders doesn't allow evolution of breeder identity. The conditions set are all that will support you. Theres nothing left to evolve to. And breeders will only exist at all while they have environmental support.. So the product better be good. And appeal to wide range of people, for as many different purposes as they can find because their purpose is not qualified. It either finds acceptance or it doesn't. Not easy when the breeding stock selected from and for, is limited to 'qualifications" you set, mistaking that for responsibility. Responsibility is consistently meeting and exceeding expectations- And exceeding them will set higher expectations. Those who can't match them will fall. But there will always be some who can't. As breeders, responsibility means minimising the numbers who will fail and how badly. Not by eliminating those who possibly would. Minimise failure with information. Familiarity with the subject. The pitfalls of breeding, possible solutions, most of all, by teaching the benefits of doing it right by showing what can be had when it is. It doesn't have to hold appeal for everyone. The diverse values of any given dog should match the diverse values of its environment. Or its not evolving where it could, not expanding the available environment or contributing value where it could. The word value here is not only what you see in some thing you want, its also space or environment made available to dogs. Thats what marks a successful evolution to the environment we have got. You can't decide your own evolution without working with the conditions you've got. there. It just doesn't work to say you will reduce what you have, to what you want. because then you can work with nothing else. There is no responsibility to environment , if you can only be familiar/recognise or accept a narrow set of qualifying conditions for recognition as a breeder. With no room for evolution in any new or other direction. It does NOT mean we accept failure. It means we teach what success looks like, so people don't accept less .There will be mistakes. As long as their are dogs to make them with. We are not finished evolving as breeders. But there will less support given to failure when people have higher expectations, based on what success they've seen demonstrated. Not always to your own values. Its basic biology really. Its a matter of recognising the environment you have, and your subject, or identity, of dog breeders" within it. Not just limiting what you will accept. You will not be able to respond, as breeders, to anything you don't. You loose any control or influence you might have had. The community is your environment. Dog breeders are the subject. You don't get to demand what your environment will accept, without loosing environment!. You are not taking responsibility. You demonstrate, value given for that. To shape expectations. If you demonstrate failures, you shape expectation of failure. and reduce support given to the subject. Dog breeders. Not just the failures, because its a single subject. Failures aren't the environments. They are ours, as dog breeders.
  12. By a) Promoting those breeders who are doing good things, with explanations of why its a good thing. B) Discouraging those who would discredit those good things with 'Yeah, but its a puppy farmer', Or BYBer, Or Pedigree 'show' dog. . Because they are all breeders, and its possible to breed poorly in any of those categories. Its not quantity that proves a poor job, or a backyard pet, or a pedigree but people have come to equate each of those things with a poor or unethical job/product. Every man (and his dog) have been told, constantly, any category of breeder is is associated with poor practices. What do poor practices look like? A Puppy Farm! A BYBer! A pedigree breeder! Breeders in general, in other words. Because we all know theres only one way to breed a dog well, don't we? We are told that constantly, that its dependent on environment. Not the individuals purpose and goals. But what does a good breeder look like? Because nobody can accept a breeder might be able to do something right, unless its done the way we believe it should be done. We teach that success should be qualified, by our own standards and conditions regardless of the goals or purpose behind the success. By allowing and promoting demonstrations of value, as survival of the species demands, with out the need for some self righteous persons to discredit it, where ever its found.'Cos if you are looking to fault some one, finding fault is easy. But thats not what any of us should be promoting. But that is exactly what we have been doing and why heavily regulated and qualified ( to the standards we insist must be universal) commercial breeders will be favoured in this little valued, discredited environment we are left with. And who will be left to contest their values, methods or purpose when those are the only conditions a breeder may work with? Who will be left to claim or show better could be had? If we are going to demand qualification for the product of sale or trade, the only qualification that will be able to achieve universal recognition will be commercial qualification. Or you can promote responsibility of breeders to their product and their environment by demonstrating how and why things can be done to achieve results that will be best received.
  13. Inquiry into animal cruelty laws in New South Wales

    Neither can I. And thats IF the recommendations are enacted.
  14. Inquiry into animal cruelty laws in New South Wales

    Not sure yet. But i'm reading it as... A recommendation to put legislation and prosecution under independent public oversight- And let RSPCA go back to being a preventative charity. i hope so!
×