moosmum

Why, oh why is every one so shocked and suprised?! This is inevitable while dog people chose to make welfare and irresponsible owners the priority with out with out teaching the value of DOGS. Of all types. And the value that a RESPONSIBLE breeder can bring to the community no matter the pedigree status. The K.Cs may have a huge influx of sub standard, no intention of following protocol breeders joining their ranks. That will re-inforce and increase any critism aimed at the K.Cs. Back yard breeders out, whos next in line? Do Wonders for the breeds! And another step closer to commercialized breeding.

Just want to repeat this, from me and my own gang. Best wishes to you and your gorgeous little man.

Congratulations to you, the owners, Dora and Elysia. :D Great work and lovely to see the Labs strutting their stuff once more.

Well done. The effort is appreciated :) Hope pressure will do more.

In the over arching biological definitions, exclusivity seems to come to come back to the environment. The only thing that can be excluded are parts of the environment. In shared environment, that space itself must be constantly re defined to be excluded, yet will always be felt as an antagonist force to struggle against. As long as its excluded. Proscribed, Cultural exclusion appears to set up a scenario of victimisation in the culture so proscribed, with resulting retaliation and counter attack. An endless battle. Space cant be shared in exclusion. Each MUST infringe on the other, while exclusion is proscribed. In exclusivity, there will always be an opposition, with no choice for either position. Neither can assume responsibility for the whole while parts refuse to recognise there IS a whole. Environmental diversity can be accepted and valued by its environment, only if its accepting OF its environment. An entity or group proscribed as distinct from its peers takes no responsibilty beyond that group. It damages its environment through disregard. Failure to recognise the costs of its own demands to the greater environment. The greater environmental expectations and demands will be seen as antagonistic to a proscribed group. Costs imposed ON the greater environment will also be seen as antagonistic, Since no responsibility is taken for the results by such an entity. In the end, its self destructive. It does not choose to occupy a given space in the environment, but instead reduces the environment to suit only that entity. Even in the space occupied only by that entity, there must be an environment. That that will be blamed for its unwelcomed influences so that the entity will be ruled by division. Where does the environment end and an entity begin if they are inseparable? Like the story of a demon called to appear within a pentagram drawn on its navel. Humanity as a species loose the power of, and responsibility for, our own destiny and the world we live in when its parts choose to recognise a group entity with proscribed and set boundaries in its stead. Antagonism is written. This is the world we've been given. Our responses to it are what shapes it and decides our purpose within it. "Hatred" and rejection of what it is (diversity) can only bring destructive reactions. Accepting the diversity in our world allows us to respond to it and shape it. To take responsibility for it instead of reacting and destroying it. It gives power to individuals to play a part in the shape and direction of the whole by demonstrating values and expectations shared, not imposed, on the whole of the environment. Demonstrating TO the environment effective responses to problems rather than promoting thoughtless reaction. A proscribed entity removes that once it claims "right of way"

Quick up date. This dog is a very big girl, but behaves like a service dog ( before this) Her owners tell me she was likely the most photographed dog in Penang and that every one falls in love with her. She is a dog who needs her owners approval and they say their reaction to her attack on the SWF ( stopped when they yelled ) has put her on her very best behaviour since. They were very appreciative of the information, links, and say it all makes sense to them. They are going to the more formal training to give this girl a 'Job', being responsible for her freedoms and setting their expectations higher, rather than lower. Given her need to be a valued member of her family group, and now the tools to handle her drive we are confident she will get back to being the safe and friendly girl she has been, with effective control instead of relying on her good nature alone. Thanks guys.

Yep. Thanks every one. This all helps me get my own head 'round how best to explain. It was a steep learning curve for me, but very worth it. The links will be a lot better than my own explanations. Doh! Should have thought of leerburg, but the link provided looks much more novice friendly than a few years back!

Thankyou, Thistle The Dog, Very helpful. I also think there are a lot of answers to this. It can depend on the dog, the trainers commitment, understanding of methods being used , situations, living conditions etc. And what you mean by aversive type training. I have a bitch with very high drives in general, truely evil on vermin with very complete hunting instinct. She is very dominant (for a bitch)but free runs with "farm' fencing on 2 acres with free range chooks, cats and mini horses and foals over the fence, brought in past her. She CAN sail over the fences, and often does when she hopes I'll let her follow me. She also lives with a SWF. She is not a dog I would like to rehome, but she has excellent recall, and heal off leash, won't leave the yard with out me, and will only chase the 'roos away from the fence while they are on the other side( ignoring them when they are keeping away from the fence by 20 ft) If they are IN the yard, she will give chase but again, recalls. She has free run mostly of house and yard while I'm home. That freedom is her reward for following the social rules I set for people and animals. Shes well aware that if I can't trust her with some thing, she will be confined until I can try again. Shes very keen to be my "2nd" so we used that. When we are not home, or sleeping, she is confined either to the house or a run with kennel. Fence training takes time, but we have a method thats worked very well with patience and not restricting freedom much. I think providing lots of other stimulation helps. I'm pretty sure this other girl will respond much easier than my Moo. But again, not likely to be rehomed and that wouldn't be easy, but doable for an experienced working home. P.S aversives are pretty much restricted freedom. Trained in ordinary check chain or flat collar. She has very strong desire to be a stable part of her pack/unit. I would not like to try running two females like this together tho'.

A bit of back ground- A 5 yo speyed bitch who has previously been neutral around other animals has killed a few rats in her owners back yard and discovered her prey drive. I am not the best teacher, so looking for some good, easily followed links I can give that help them to understand better , and cover more than I can do in emails. I doubt there will much assistance available in Penang. These are very responsible owners who will work hard to over come the problems, but do need help. She is getting very worked up with rats, iguanas, and monkeys in the back yard, but has also run out the door after a SWF (called off before any damage done, this time) Owners are naturaly very keen to get this under control before she does do any damage. She is on lead any time she is in public with owners watching body language for arousal, Interupting and removing her from those situations while they work on the problem. The dog is otherwise a very stable, calm and social dog. She lives with another much smaller speyed bitch, no probs, is very keen to please her owners and with the right advise and action, should respond very well. I think Impulse control training is part what we are looking at? Any assistance appreciated.

The welfare situation for domestic dogs is compromised by lack of responsibility. Because that need for greater responsibility is not being met, The environment is reduced- through legislation on additional environmental conditions to be met before dogs are permitted to thrive. A species that is unable to meet the demands and expectations of its broader environment will, over time, be mostly limmited to the specific environment its tailored and evolved to. Without responsibility TO the environment, there is no value or purpose for that environment to support. Without responsibility to the environment, the environment is damaged and reduced through lack of "care" and antagonism. A condition of life, is response. We are all born with an ability to respond. Some have a greater ability than others, and response can be learned. It seems its our response that gives the meaning to " Life ". That its our response to our environment that gives purpose. Our responsibility. To define "responsibility": Greatest responsibility can be said to be those who respond most effectively and beneficialy to the demands/expectations of of a changing environment. The K.Cs have ruled against their environment as unacceptable.(anything outside of their own self proscribed domaine of verified pedigree dogs) The K.Cs, by their nature, have among the greatest of abilities to respond to the challenges of their broader environment in ways that would give maximum benefit TO that environment. In return, They would achieve among the greatest rates of success in that broader environment. The K.Cs have among the greatest of response-abilities. The K.Cs claim as much by their ruling that what occurrs outside of their private domain is unacceptable. But that ruling also ensures that responsibility won't be excersised, that they will take no responsibility for the greater environment that supports their own proscribed boundaries. For that, they ARE responsible. For choosing to be seen as distinct and aloof from the common man. A group apart from its environment. They bear responsibility for that perception in the common man and any effects of that choice. The K.Cs HAVE responsibility. Its a choice of their exclusivity not to excersise it. And to deny it credible exsistence out side of their own boundaries. Edited to add: Canus Familiaris, Domestic Dogs, are in trouble. Not just pure breeds, or backyard breed, designer dog or even working dog. The SPECIES. Its natural habitat is alongside man, but thats being erroded. If individual groups can't recognise the environment for dogs is in trouble and take their share of the responsibility, instead of passing the blame and just eliminating "other" groups whos failures are the focus, the environment is just whittled away more, along with purpose and value in the community. Sooner or later, the focus has no where left to turn but to your own failings. Any support you may have had is gone if no one has been taught to value what you do. Its outside of their experience or interest. They WILL be taught your failings and the cost, because thats what we do now. With out accepting a responsibility to your environment, you have no purpose IN that environment.

I just found that tho' "pup" loves my grand daughter, she draws the line at me giving away her toys. I bought her a ball, not realising it had flashing lights when bounced and it is too small cos she CAN bit down hard enough to puncture it where the flashy bit sits so ended up putting it up. When G.D visited, D commented she wanted to get her a a toy with lights so I got it down, (washed well!) and gave it to her. Pup was NOT impressed! Gave us all a very dirty look as she tried to take it back. I have promised her a bigger one she can't puncture.

A ruling on what lies out side of the purpose or constitution as set out by the founding body will have a political effect on what occurs outside of that body. As long as it exsists to promote its influence. This is social engeneering. A ruling that affects the environment that body is supported by. The WHOLE community that gave rise to the single species domestic dog by their support and selection. All now affected by an antagonistic ruling against what occurs outside of that one specialist body. Not the place of a registry only, so brings an expectation to be more. The K.Cs are dependent on the whole community (their environment) for new membership ideas and even purpose. With no support you have no purpose unless you will forget sales and just swap among yourselves to fade away in a generation. Of those who contribute to our understanding of dogs or even own them, a small minority are K.C members. This ruling that no member will be breed outside of a K.Cs own protocols has an affect on the society that gave rise to the species. It splinters it into specialist factions rather than a cohesive society with common goals and expectation. A lot of "specialists" with no room for common purpose. Purpose is un-common and increasingly not for common man. Just "specialists" whos field can only become more specialised and marginalized as they distance themselves from the common man. Organised commercialism is the logical next step. In the end thats the only means of meeting the (erroded) expectations of the common, unafiliated man, if dogs will continue to hold a place in society. Anything else seeks to take them from common man. Heavily regulated Commercial breeders with stringent and uniform protocols will replace "family" breeders ( and/or back yard breeders ) if breeding dogs is not permitted to be "owned" by the communities in which they live. Finger pointing to percieved failings does nothing to teach or promote value in any other practice. It leads us straight to it. Those pointing out failings don't gain value by doing so. Value must be shown, demonstrated and recognised before it can be appreciated and sought. If dogs are to continue holding a place in whole communities, it must be whole community driven. Not driven by factions governed 1st by self interest. I have no doubts left. Please, show me some.

Sheridan, from me and my mob. A lucky little dog to have found her way to you.

And this! The stress of a puppy removed from its litter at 8 weeks when it isn't properly weaned and has been in the constant company of its Mum and litter mates until the minute it goes home is liable to be much more stressed about going to a new home than a 6 week old one. You win all puppies have to wait until they are 8 weeks to go home but based on what I have seen and what I know it is a stupid inclusion based on little more than assumption. All that is needed is to ensure all puppies are vaccinated before they go home and that there has been enough time between needle and home time for the vaccine to be activated. The main reason for this is that it is the only thing you can do to cme close to introdcing something that can be regulated and enforced. The breeder can then take into account the variables they are working with have the right to make informed decisions on what is best and puppies and families live happily ever after. You may be able to get close to all puppies being 8 weeks before they leave the property but you will never ever get near determining what a breeder does with those puppies between birth and 8 weeks .No amount of over regulation is going to make a breeder keep the pups with the litter for that long if it doesnt suit them. No amount of over regulation is going to make a breeder socialise a puppy with humans or other dogs if it doesnt suit them. If you dont want breeders to keep dogs in blocks of kennels like boarding kennels and pounds then we had better stop telling them that this is what is required for best management, easy cleaning blah blah blah. No person who loves dogs , no person who wants to breed puppies humanely would want to keep their animals like that but in some places because of over regulation the breeders have no choice. Take a good look at codes and development application requirements then reconsider who is to blame for breeding dog to be kept in this way. Legislation can be good in a lot of situations, but never when you are trying to legislate Responsibility. As soon as you try to legislate responsibility, you take it away. It removes responsibility to excersise informed judgements. The environment a pup will be born into is fluid. The evironment that will be provided in its new home is fluid. The expectations are fluid and every thing about the pups is. The 8 week rule as a "Recommendation" in the absense of responsible and informed judgement would be better. Instead of laws that remove a responsibility to excersise informed judgements. If breeders of all stripes, could be more accepting of the differing environments there are to work in and be more involved in teaching the value of what they do, Instead of focusing on what they won't, the expectations of buyers are lifted. What they understand of their own responsibility to acheive value increases. Better practices are valued and driven by the expectations of the environment . Theres room for adaptation to the changing environment/s the word presents. The public won't support puppy farms if they understand that practice does not deliver the value they will come to expect. You won't increase the communities expectations by sacrificing informed judgement. Its what should form those expectations adaptably into any new future.

I've got to agree with Steve on this one.The very best dogs I have owned have all come home at 6 weeks. They have been very focused on their humans and the social structure of humans, AND very good with other dogs. Much more socialy competent and easily trained. All have come to live inside, in a family environment with other dogs and animals. No crates though they do get used to sleeping in out door runs for rare times its needed. For your average home not so into dogs as we are, the 8 week rule is likely best. But then we are aiming a good fit for the average,currently poor common denominator as far as the dogs are concerned. A big part of the experience that helps people learn how to better that average is shut down if you accept that rule is gospel.Its only gospel for current, average conditions that we should hope can change. I've seen plenty of litters where it would be in the best interest of pups to get out of there fast for best development. Mostly in very large litters, but not uncommon in smaller litters either. Dam not coping, bullying, ill health. Lots can affect litter conditions so they are not ideal. Even with out the better results some have with younger pups.

Or too many systems and no community.Continuous rules and regs just shrinks the environment in which pets can be owned. It will end with us all needing a phd,lots of money, govt. fees and licences to keep pets. And no value recognised but privilige. Surely it should be about a desire to do the best you can for your situation, to ensure your actions bring value to dog/pet ownership.That takes a community.It gives one too.

Agree. We don't need need new rules and regs as much as we need to teach a value owning pets, and a value of the good practices that make pets the best they can be.

So sad, poor baby and family. I can understand people making the mistake of assuming their dog is fine with a baby and know many who have said the same to me. I point out that my dogs all adore babies to point of being very protective of them, but I won't leave the dogs with free access unless I'm right there to watch.Because how does a dog carry its own young? No matter how good they seem, they are dogs and think like dogs.

Try Huskis advise I think. If she hasn't yet caught one of your own small animals, thats a bonus. I also live with a bitch with prey drive like you've never seen. She can live with what I bring into the home and runs freely with my free range chooks. She can be called off mid chase with most things but I wouldn't like to test that on a rabbit at close range, or even one I had brought in. She regularly caches birds, rabbits, possums and rats or mice that find their way here and is a great vermin alert. She does distinguish. ( tho' thats out the window if the other animal shows any aggression) Its taken a lot of learning on my part, and management to get there. But its possible and she has learned that trust means freedom and the mental stimulation that comes with it. P.S. Shes not called our sweet psyhco bitch for nothing, but with concious management of what we know, she is a fantastic dog and the one who most impresses with her enthusiasm in obedience.And absolute attention to me.She just gets better :D :D Yesterday when I let her out the door there were 2 wallbies in the yard. she gave chase and stopped mid stride when I called. She won't jump the fence to get the ones outside our boundaries, tho' she could easily.

Hi Ricey, To you you, and your human and dog family. It sucks like a kick in the guts every time and takes so long long to get your breath back. The world as we knew it is gone and theres a whole new reality to come to terms with. Yup. It sucks. (I'm also coming to terms with the sudden loss of my hero boy) They lived, and died too soon for our senses, but a life well lived when they inspire humans like you to fight for their species.

May the days left be happy and content, for both of you.

I fear that in time, Puppy farms will be seen as the "solution" to poor practices. Easier to police licencing, inspections and accountability of a few big establishments than many smaller ones and it opens the way for a fully regulated and profitable "Industry" with its potential to develope employment. ie; Education as licencing requirements, inspectors, review pannels etc as well as employment at individual establishments. Easier to monitor and enforce compliance to exsisting or new laws and better tracking of dogs for research and statitistics. I don't see another alternative while the Govt. is continualy pressured to come up with effective legislation for all percieved breaches of responsibility by both dog owners and breeders, and no single body or group able to promote an ideal of expectation to aim for by the general population

really? Neither does dog fighting or cock fighting. Or pig shooting. But you don't need the general population to support it for it to exist. I think it's better to have it legal with animal welfare requirements than force it underground. Oh, I agree. I don't want to see the end of Greys, or racing. Poor practice will never be stopped while there are cruel idiots in the world. We will never stop all crime just by making it illegal. And marginalization of any group makes it harder to tackle or uncover. But separating groups according to practice marginalizes every one before you begin, making it easier to attack their purpose. Due to their practices? I just think its about time people woke up to this and start disscussing practices in terms of basic expectations common to domestic dogs. The problems are rarely caused by the purpose. So why elliminate purpose when its practices that need to be tackled? And no "group" is exempt from common expectation.But they will delay the inevitable by allowing or even encouraging those they feel are are worse offenders to be targeted now. Distance themselves from that sinking ship, in WIW words. The problem with that is, it shrinks the whole environment. Fewer left when its your own "group" none can relate to because you have watched them sink one by one. Till there are none left to care. It won't matter how good your practices are to you. Its down to how many of the general population get recognizable value in continuing support. We don't need A.R. WE allow this. We errode purpose, and wonder when the value people hold for dogs is also erroding.

Bottom line, its an industry exclusive to greyhounds. It simply doesn't doesn't hold enough relevence or purpose to the general population for them to support it. The purpose for the dogs will go, eventualy. Unless practices can be lifted by the communities expectations. Oh, I forgot. Good practices depend on what group you belong to, so there won't be agreement on whats expected.

Actually, I think it was an April Fool's prank :D . Good to see I wasn't the only one who fell for it :) I hope it is an april fools "joke".