mita

Conan's gorgeous. Bless all who changed his life around. I agree. This happy ending story is a welcome change from the cruelty tales that seem to dominate in what's posted as 'News'.

I'm in Brisbane, too. The bindis have taken over the lawn this season. We used to be able to keep them in control by just digging out any that dared pop up. But now they've come up like carpeting.

These weren't the type of people one would be civil to. They were nasty, bitter and cranky women. I would have picked another descriptor if it fitted them, but this was the only way to describe them. I had had the pleasure of (unintentionally) overhearing the conversation for a few blocks and can tell you they would complain about winning the lotto, they were bemoaning just about everything else. Sorry if I have offended you, but that's them apples. No, they're not apples. They're human beings. Two strangers behind you, & you put yourself in the position of coming up with an assessment of them as 'nasty & bitter'. So now you come up with the 'rider' that you listened to their conversation 'for a few blocks'. Your story rings of contrivance. Did it really happen? And, I repeat, it's uncivil to refer to older women as 'old crones'.

Couldn't agree more.

You could do with picking up some civility in how you refer to older people.

Friends' little tibbie girl, Ping, took matters in her own paws. She was at a session of dog training where some free socialisation was allowed. Ping was standing around innocently, when a border collie came up behind her & did the same....'Hello, I'm the boss!' thing, by putting the weight of his paws on her back. Little Ping bit the dust, winded....& the border collie, having made his point, trotted off. One whole week later, at the same dog training.... little Ping went searching around all the dogs at free socialisation time, to find that border collie. When she did, she stood in front of him & told him off at top note. The BC was totally puzzled why this little madwoman was screaming at him. She remembered, he didn't.

When we were kids, my brother had a BC called Peter & I had a Maltese called Pauline. They used to run alongside our bikes. Then my brother read somewhere it was bad for their hearts (wouldn't have been true, but we believed it). So he made 2 wooden carts (just like kid's pull-along carts) and fixed them up to the back of our bikes. Peter & Pauline used to ride like Romans in their chariots & loved it. Pauline used to scream abuse at any dog being walked past on a lead. It was a bit tough pedalling up hills.

I thought the same thing. What was written was positively phobic. Despite all the excrement deposited on the ground by farming & native animals and bird life... that person singled out pet dogs. Do some head-counting of the total for the former, and you'd be occupied for quite a few eternities. So, even statistically, dogs would hardly register on the person's feared scale of excrement spilling into water-courses. Which was going on long before dogs were kept as pets. I'm sure dinosaurs didn't wear nappies! I'd bet there's a tendency to be phobic at the bottom (apt word, there) of that 'case'. He is right in the chemicals etc that are now found in wormers, foods etc that have gradually increased as man has become more "civilised! I had a study on this somewhere, as I too did not understand how dog excretia could be harmful. So are modern-day chemicals found in many creatures who walk, slide, fly, swim...& also includes humans. This person is singling out pet dogs. Even if the last pet dog breathed its last, there's still a huge menu of man-made chemicals & other hazards being transferred via urine & faeces. No one is saying that the excrement of pet dogs shouldn't be disposed of responsibly. In fact, our parks are full of signs directing people to do the right thing. And general health advice is to do a daily poop patrol in our own backyards. That's become the bleeding obvious. Can hardly be said to be 'forgotten'. Nor should human fecal pollution of environmental waters be forgotten, as illustrated in this US study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1694258/ Here's also some reading that broadens out the picture of the effects of biowaste (with residues of pharmaceuticals & metabolites), via urine & faeces, from humans and animals (& birds). http://www.actavetscand.com/content/43/S1/S69

I thought the same thing. What was written was positively phobic. Despite all the excrement deposited on the ground by farming & native animals and bird life... that person singled out pet dogs. Do some head-counting of the total for the former, and you'd be occupied for quite a few eternities. So, even statistically, dogs would hardly register on the person's feared scale of excrement spilling into water-courses. Which was going on long before dogs were kept as pets. I'm sure dinosaurs didn't wear nappies! I'd bet there's a tendency to be phobic at the bottom (apt word, there) of that 'case'.

CHOICE (Australian Consumers Association) already sees buying a puppy/dog as a consumer issue. And one where the potential buyer needs to get as 'right' a puppy/dog as possible, while the welfare of the animal is also taken into consideration. CHOICE's guidelines to consumers, were put up on their website in 2008 & were jolly good, in gently steering people away from the DD hype of the time. And introducing some wise words from the Australian Kennel Association & the Australian Veterinary Association. CHOICE also warned against puppy farms. Consumers were pointed to good breeders (having already said that the AKC required certain standards, hint, hint) and to ethical rescue shelters. http://www.choice.com.au/Reviews-and-Tests...%20a%20dog.aspx But they didn't specifically mention buying puppies/dogs in petshops where it's a straight commercial transaction. And where there's nothing laid down that the petshop has to supply any in-depth information about the breed & its management and grooming requirements. It's just a case of hand over the money. It'd be good if CHOICE did some lobbying to make it mandatory that petstores supply that information. And be liable for consumer complaints, if they don't or if it proves inaccurate.. In the meantime, it'd also be good if CHOICE would update their webpage by adding on some info for consumers who are thinking of buying from a petstore. Like, the necessity to get some independent expert advice about dog breeds & their needs.

Pluto's luverly! A darling old grandpa plodder who'd be a delight to have around. Mighty handsome, too, for his age. Hope it all works out for him. Onya for helping.

Onya for bringing up the issue...for both these pups & pet-store pups in general. Just a thought, from left field. Buying 'stuff' commercially is a consumer issue, whether it's a car, a fridge or a pup. And there are consumer laws & also consumer watchdogs (now, that's apt! ). Consumers are entitled to, & expect, full disclosure about what they're buying. Who hasn't pored over the specifications for various new cars? Or the energy consumption of a new fridge? The behavioral traits & grooming/health needs of various breeds are the specifications for buying puppies. These should be required to be supplied, in full and accurate form, to prospective buyers in petshops. And could be the basis for later complaints. So I'd be having a word to the Consumer Affairs office in the State, on the topic of what's the position re current consumer laws & regulatory guidelines. (Not much re the sale of puppies, I suspect!) And I'd also be having a word to CHOICE (the Australian Consumers' Association) which is a watchdog/lobby group on behalf of consumers. CHOICE already has a not- bad- at- all list of suggestions for people buying puppies (with a v subtle message to avoid the DDs). But CHOICE could consider stepping up to the plate on insisting that there be accurate disclosure by petstores when selling puppies. So that consumers know the various breeds' requirements for managing a particular dog and its grooming/health needs. Also the source of the puppies should be told, too. And by making it too 'hard', like this, petstores might start to lose commercial interest in selling p/b puppies.

Rather than wasting time reading (or writing!) anonymous letters, there's interesting & useful information found by looking at the swag of latest research (2010 & around). Scroll a long way down on the site below to find Current Research listed, at length. It's also interesting to know that other small breeds can have heart valve problems with a genetic base. And that degeneration with age means that up to third of all dogs over the age of ten have some mitral valve insufficiency...that is, it's acquired. Rather than from a heritable predisposition, as found among Cavs & some other small breeds (I notice the little poodles & dachies tend to get mentioned). Apparently, the key is rapidity with which the condition progresses in these affected dogs. Looks like one flow-on from research about treatments for the heritable ailments is that it'll also bring out helpful info for dogs that acquire mitral valve insufficiency with age. Re breeding protocols, there's an entry at the start of the list, referring to protocols developed in Sweden in 2001 to limit the occurrence of mitral valve problems. But late research has shown it hasn't made a difference. It says stricter earlier protocols will be tried. http://www.cavalierhealth.com/mitral_valve_disease.htm In the meantime, I think Jed is spot on in her comments about keeping records of her dogs (with those breeders she deals with, also doing so). So much of the 'searchlight' gets put on seeking out suss dogs & lines. But it's just as critical to suss out dogs & lines with low-incidence. That's what the international tibbie health working party do, re liver shunt. They keep collecting in a data base the dogs where there's evidence of beng towards the clear. It's a reasonable goal to work towards continuance of the breed, in as healthy a form as possible, while at the same time working to manage a heritable problem. By the way, Buddy p/b Cavalier and long-time therapy dog at Everton Park State High in Brisbane, started 'work' at age 2 yrs & died recently at around 14 years. Still at his school job until recent months. He was the product of a registered breeder. Something worked well there re both health & temperament. Buddy's memorial plaque at the school, reads, 'Buddy, a friend to everyone.' His ashes are buried in the school garden.

Anonymous letters should be just tossed into the bin, as a general rule. No signature, no acknowledgement of source? Ignore the content. If there's threats against your person or property, then take it to the police. As to the issue at the centre of the emotional storm. Health matters relating to Cavaliers. I notice you're in Scotland. I can only give thumbs up to the Cav Clubs in Qld & Victoria, here in Australia, in facing up to the mitral valve problem, for example, by publishing an informative article by a staff member from the University of Melbourne, on their websites. He refers to studies in Scandanavia & the Netherlands, where problems re purebred dogs also seem to get more level-headed attention. (And northern Europe, generally). http://www.cavalierclubqld.net/MVD.htm Just out of interest, some Scandanavian good sense from combined efforts of Kennel Club & School of Vet Science. Even includes Mental Health (of the dogs, that is ) http://www.actavetscand.com/content/50/S1/S6

I wanted more information, so I looked at the publications of people involved. Dr McGreevy is not 'only' chairing this seminar. He has a book with a specific idea about dog training to push. Called 'A Modern Dog's Life'. In which it's said he sets out a 'radical' approach to dog training which is not based on the human- as -master in the dog-human relationship. But rather on the human acting like a 'life coach' to the dog. My own thought is that's an unusual parallel to be taking from human 'learning'. Acting as a 'life coach' in the human world, is based on human attibutes & how humans learn. So if DrMGr is going to argue something similar for dogs, he'd need to make a link with dogs' attributes & how dogs learn. Also there's the key element of motivation. A human asks for the services of a life-coach, based on self-reflection and perceived need. How does a dog do that? http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=ca...C-T6QBV3F2aiIxg You'll notice, his book gets the thumbs up from the science officer of RSPCA, Australia ( I once looked up her academic background & it was in the UK & related to primates, I think, She came from the UK RSPCA), Rob Zammitt (who's a good bloke, IMO) & Don Burke (no comment).

I'd like to see the full program, with names of other speakers listed. And follow that to what they've published on topics relating to animal behaviour...& where it's published. Isn't dog/animal behaviour the actual specialty of DrMcGr (who seems to pop up a lot)? If he's chairing the proceedings, it implies interest in the area & the kinds of questions being asked. In other words, I'd need more information before doing a leap into some specific agenda. I've got no problems with 'science' asking questions. It's the quality in the responses that counts.

Bit O/T but some time back an observant neighbour helped a Sydney owner of 2 show tibs to locate them. The 2 had got out of their yard, never clear if they'd gone thro' an open gate or been stolen. The owner swamped the area with posters with a pic, saying Information Welcome. She had a poster on her car. Nearly 3 weeks later, she was at a petrol station, & a bloke in the vehicle behind, came up & told her that his neighbours had recently acquired 2 dogs that looked the same. And gave the address. She went to the police & a couple of officers accompanied her to that house. The little dogs were confined under a deck. But as soon as they heard their owner's voice, they barked to high heaven! Yep, they were her dogs. The people claimed they'd 'found' the dogs & hadn't been able to 'find' the owners. They handed over the dogs, under the eye of the police. Another great 'spotter'!

Yes, I just saw it on the ABC News emails that I get. So pleased for Harry & his owner. Good spotting, somebody!

An informative & succinct handout plus a copy of the Application to Adopt form were given to us, when we went to adopt a cat. Most of the content wouldn't come as any surprise to an already responsible pet owner. To such a person, it would appear to be the bleeding obvious. Which may be why some complain about an adoption process being tedious. But much of it wouldn't be bleeding obvious to someone who's a bit shakey on being responsible....or on thinking ahead about what owning that pet would entail. By the way, I've already posted previously, that I'm prepared to jump thro' the required hoops to adopt, even tho' I regard myself as a responsible pet owner. Whether I'm applying to a rescue or to a breeder. And am far more likely to be impressed that those hoops are in place. Nor am I going to dissolve from grevious insult, if either a breeder or rescuer decides that a pet I'm interested in, is not a match...in their estimation (which is their right & responsibility). Or someone else has beaten me to the draw. I'm a grown-up, so am unlikely to then go off to a petshop, fired up with indignation.

Yes. The devil is in the details. Which is why in-depth questioning is required, in order to tease out those details. Now, those who object to in-depth questioning, seem unaware of this. You're right, it's not so much the fact of working full-time, it's what provisions you can make for looking after your dog. And a case of selecting a dog less prone to separation issues. In the case of students, there needs to be some certainty that they're in accommodation which accepts pets and that they're aware of the costs in maintaining a pet. And that they've looked beyond the next couple of years, in how their circumstances are likely to change. In some ways, this in-depth questioning can have a strong 'educational' component. On the other hand, the rescue or shelter bears the ultimate responsibility for making as good a call as possible on behalf of an animal being rehomed. If in their experience, they decide to make a blanket rule, then they have the right to do so. Like only dogs over a certain age for older retirees or no adoptions to overseas students. There's numbers of rescues in the 'marketplace', with variety in their policies, to apply to. That's something would-be adopters need to be aware of.

Re-reading your post, I'd question if the examples you've given match your description of some rescues' behaviour as being fanatical/obsessive. The RSPCA worker rightly commented that they don't believe in breeding...in the context of adopting out a dog as a pet. That comment wasn't referring to the entire world of dogs. Of course, the RSPCA would have the policy of adopting out only desexed dogs. They would obviously be aware of the larger problem in the dog world, where thousands of unwanted dogs are being put down in pounds & shelters for no other reason than that homes can't be found for them within a tight time frame. Go read the research that supports this, from UQ. Your second example involved a dog that you met only for a few seconds. And that later you found out, had to be PTS on an assessment that a unreliable temperament could likely prove unsafe. More time was spent with this dog by the people who made that decision, than you did at the fence. If your 'wish' to expose the dog to a chance with your own family was met & something serious occurred, you'd be crying to high heaven about rescues being irresponsible. The AWL Qld shelter which is a leader in the field towards Zero kill, bluntly states that this does not discount the fact that some dogs just can't be separated from an unreliable temperament that makes them either unsafe or painfully miserable. And a decision to PTS made. Frankly, I think that you've mistaken 'thoroughness' for 'obsessive behaviour'. And I'm still looking for an example you've given that would match your labels of 'bizarre' or 'fanatical' (both of which are not descriptive terms, but judgmental).

Yes, I specifically wondered about a Cardigan Corgi. My family owned one when we were kids & Biddy was a real all-round sensible & adaptable family dog.

It was a good debate to start. But, having said that, I disagree about responsible rescue being over the top in the screening it applies to people wanting to adopt. And I speak from the point of view of someone who's adopted a rescue animal. I got our puss from the UQ Adoption Program. Heaven help me, I worked at that uni. But I was more than happy to go thro' all the screening process, which included filling in one of the best Application to Adopt forms I've come across. More than happy, too, to offer the names of referees who know us as pet owners. And to be interviewed. In fact, I'd expect a responsible rescue to do this. In the best interest of all concerned. Me, the owner...in getting an appropriate match or being refused an animal that the rescue realises is not suitable for my circumstances/expectations. The animal...in making sure it gets a good home that 'sticks' this time & isn't abandoned again. The rescue...in fulfilling its obligations to the animal & the community. The funny thing is that all of this is exactly what I supplied to a registered breeder when we first went looking to adopt an ex-show dog of a breed new to us...a tibetan spaniel. I first sent the breeder a summary of our history as pet owners, descriptions of our lifestyle & how a tibbie would live, photos of your house & yard (showing fences). And referees. Yes, she approved of us to adopt one of her lovely tibs. And I only found out AFTER she delivered the little one to us....when she came bearing piles of ribbons. This little dog had been her best & had in fact won Best Puppy in the entire Brisbane Royal. She'd wanted to retire her to a good pet home & when she checked out all the info we'd voluntarily given, she'd decided we were it. When I asked why she hadn't told me about all the little one's prizes, she answered, 'You just loved her for herself when you met her.' She was right! So I'm not at all peeved by being screened down to my socks tops when applying to adopt a dog....from a rescue or from a breeder. I'm more likely to be impressed. I'll also tell that person, I won't be insulted if they turn me down for a particular dog or cat because they didn't think it was a good match. They KNOW the animal & it's their call and their responsibility. And I should add, our adopted rescue puss from UQ proved a perfect match for what we asked for. She's fantastic with our tibbies, might as well be another small dog. And a real loyal little pet.

She gets only a few things right for tibetan spaniels. Like, how cat-like they can be. Also how they like sitting on high places (well, they come from the land of the Himalayas!). But she goes on about how stand-offish they are. Well, I've never owned a tibbie that was aloof. Like, my present 2 girls are the opposite, they just love going out & socialising with people (so were the tibbie I owned before). The vet walks into the waiting room & my 2 tibbie girls throw themselves into his arms. He finishes up on the floor, having a group cuddle. And this is typical of them. I've found tibbies to be social charmers. She also says they have a high chance of having separation anxiety, when left alone. Well, tibbies certainly love company (& the company of fellow tibbies), but I haven't seen the breed have any greater chances of having separation anxiety. http://www.yourpurebredpuppy.com/reviews/t...anspaniels.html

Thanks for that, espinay. An interesting read. You're right to highlight the perils of jumping straight from genes to behaviour. Behaviour, in dogs as well as humans, is also influenced by the environment, such as training & socialisation. Re the relationship between the wolf & domestic dogs, there's an interesting paper about the genetic structure of domestic dogs. These researchers single out 9 dog breeds from 76 others in terms of statistical support for 'closeness' to the wolf. From highest, they are Chinese Shar Pei, Shiba Inu, Chow Chow, Akita, Basenji, Siberian Husky, Alaskan Malamute, Afghan Hound, Saluki. (Not the East Asian breeds topping the list...in their case it's 'closeness to the Chinese Wolf.) http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=ca..._6TUKVo2Amafnrw