mita

I'm so glad it had a happy ending. So now I can agree....it's one of the funniest stories everywhere. Who says that goats are goats? Teddy followed by his dogs knew just where to go. The teachers will be dining out on this story for years!

Just out of interest....because this study about dogs' longevity & temperament/personality, seems to be paralleling humans. A study released last month of 190 Australians 100 yrs +, also showed that certain personality traits best predict a ripe old age, more than others (Prof Robyn Richmond, uni of nsw). Obviously personality can't be the single predictor....same as it can't be for dogs. So work continues looking for what elements contribute to the mix. And where are the links....like the underlying metabolism & energy output, which turned up in the dog study. Quote from the oldest lady in the study, born 1899: 'They tell me I'm the oldest Australian. How did I get here? Just quietly, living one day at a time.'

I pointed to the process....not the quality. The quality is decided on longevity & usefulness of what is published. Marked by numbers of citations. It also depends on the level of the journals. There's a gradation of journal types & prestige. Ranging from those with high international reputations thro' to some that are little more than in-house journals to get work 'published. So it will be interesting to read the actual article in the actual journal....& follow any citations. What was it about this journal that leads you to talk about an 'awful lot of crap' in this context? I'm interested why the general media report on this particular article....scarcely a few lines in length....raised your ire??? By the way.....it's not a question of my 'faith'.....it's a question of occupation. 'Faith' seems a strange word to use when talking about science.....where the default position is scepticism.

There's a funny section in that newspaper article. The CEO (a dog lover) said he did a survey to find out how the employees accepted the dogs at that workplace. He reported that 84% were in favour....& he sacked the other 16% (then, added....only joking )

A Sydney rescue just updated me about a good-natured tibbie boy they rescued from a pound. He's adopted by a great couple & he drives to work with them every day....in the BMW. They own a factory & he 'works' by greeting visitors. Our motor mechanic takes his lab girl to work every day & customers always bring in a dog biscuit for her. All the workshops in that strip have dogs which come to work. And they're a great bunch of pals....the lab, a cattle dog, a staffy & a shih-tzu.

I agree that it's not only dog parks. The biggest frights I've got (& I don't frighten easily) have been from uncontrolled dogs out on the footpath...with the owners not caring what they're doing. Even while watching them!

I thought it was only me, too, who could tell what the different barks of our tibs, meant. Then I found other people said the same about their dogs. And, not long ago, I read some research (but can't remember where!) that backed up people CAN tell what various barks mean. So clever Katy was sure saying something was urgent & needed attention.....fast! Years back, our tib girl Angel started making 'screaming' noises at the side gate (she was looking out onto the road). I'd never heard her make that sound before....it was a distinct 'scream' that said 'Danger'! I looked out & saw a small toddler (about 2 yrs old) standing, lost, in the middle of the road. I flew out & grabbed her. Just as we got to the footpath, a big white van came speeding around the corner. The little girl would have been dead, if Angel hadn't 'screamed'. I never, ever heard her make the same sound again.

Strangers often make guesses what my 2 golden p/b tibetan spaniels are. A few say,' Look like pekes, but not really'. Quite a few ask, 'Are they one of those 'designer' mixes?' And those who remark, 'Looks like someone shrunk a golden retriever!' An experienced vet remarked to me.....after singing the praises of the tibbie girls....'Why do people pay huge money for the designer mixes, when there's reliably gorgeous purebreds, like these?' He answered his own question by saying, 'It's because they don't know they exist & no one tells them about them!'

Agreed! Me, too. That post picked out the social & economic changes that've come about over recent years. That's not to say that some unwelcoming or nasty behaviour could also be in the mix. Trivial, as it sounds, I'd like to see children get more involved in the Junior Handlers' sections. Apart from introducing children early to the show world, it's an educationally & socially blooming brilliant learning experience.

Agree! By coincidence, I was just talking to the greyhound owner at the back, about how his grey girl, Princess (sister to a Qld sprint champ) is so good at reassuring small dogs she meets. When our new tibbie arrived some months back (unused to big dogs), she got a fright when Pirncess trotted up to the fence. Immediately, Princess went into a play bow & all was well. These 2 are now the closest of friends. The owner said Princess did the same thing when they came upon a small dog out walking. The little dog yelped with fright....& Princess went down into her play bow.

It was folllowing deaths of small dogs in some dog parks, that led the Brisbane City Council to fence off a section for small dogs only. Then, if there's any rumbles, it's between similar size dogs.

There's also supposed to be an opposite. Lhasa Apsos are said to sometimes have puppies in a litter which are shorter-haired & look for all the world like Tibetan Spaniels. Someone's given them the name Prapsos. I've not had first hand experience with Prapsos. Just heard about them & read info on the net. Like, here (& I don't know enough about genetics to comment on what's said to be the cause): http://lhasalove.tripod.com/prapso_puppies.htm

I'm with you Kissindra. Wonder how much moola they were paid to come up with these "results" based on sweeping generalisations? The study doesn't say that temperament/personality is the only variable linked with longevity in dogs. It seems to be paralleling the findings re human logevity. Temperament/personality is one variable significantly associated with longevity in humans, too. Nor does the study say that temperament/personality alone will decide the life span of each individual dog. For individual dogs, it'll be a mix. But the tendency across numbers of dogs will be for temperament/personality to have significance. However, for a variable to be statistically significant does not mean there'd be no exceptions. As to 'ignoring the big fat holes made by obvious variables'....science has to study influence of single variables. That's why they controlled for size/weight. Which is already known to be another variable. This is reducationism....by which science can gradually build up an overall picture of the reality via studies that test the contribution of each element. As to wondering how much 'moola' the researchers were paid...of course, research gets funded. This study has made it to the level where it'll be published in a peer-reviewed journal. That means its method & findings had to pass extensive independent scrutiny. Then the study gets even further exposure to critique from others in that field of study. Other researchers can set up testing to see if their results are the same. Which is how science works....not just that one research study came up with certain findings, but also if they can be replicated....or not...by others. Also helps to read what researchers actually wrote, too. Reports in the general media can suffer in translation. Like, this study was as much about metabolism & energy output, but they got dumbed out...

I'm pleased to see, tho', that they controlled for the variable of size (tho' that should also include 'lightness' of body frame.) I suspect that some of the studies that keep getting cited for crossbreed pets living longer that purebred pets, did not control for size. Many larger pure breeds are popular pets. Mr. Careau was careful to compare dogs of similar size, since it is known that large dogs tend to die younger than smaller on Slightly longer account which better reflects the science, here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/...00513112759.htm

You're not wrong... those square or diamond sections give some dogs perfect footholds. It's not so much a fence as a ladder. So I'm not surprised you've seen the bigger dogs do it, too. Human toddlers can also do it!

What were they crossed with? Pork Chops?

Excellent suggestion. I've seen the weedmatting used like that. Another possible problem with chain-wire fences is that some small dogs can climb them like a ladder!

Chi Chi is adorable. She looks like a tiny racehorse in that smart coat. Aren't Jed's beautiful Cavs a credit to her....as they always were.

There are lots of good guidelines for sorting dogs with separation anxiety. We've had 2 dogs that had it.....& the advice from a vet animal behaviorist proved to be brilliant. And not all that complicated. (Our sheltie used to rip the sunroom soft furnishings to pieces.) . set up a day bed in a spot which is where the dog will be left alone. But use that spot for him when you're home, too. And make all good things happen for him on that spot. Like getting his dinner, treats, cuddles ets. So he get to 'think' of it as a good spot. And gets used to being on in that 'good' place, happy & comfortable, even where you're at home. . always leave on his day bed, some old unwashed items of yours that strongly have your scent on them. The owner's smell is a good substitute for being there....to a dog's nose. Get the dog some soft toys from an Op shop (& cut off any plastic eyes/nose that he could choke on). Rub your hands & feet all over these toys to transfer your smell onto them. .leave a radio playing tuned to a talking station, up high above him (so he can't chew it). .when you leave him.....totally ignore him for 10 minutes before you go. And totally ignore for 10 minutes when you come home. If he jumps up & demands attention, ignore him during this time. Turn your back. When he's quiet & taking no notice of you, call him over to do the welcome home. This is taking all the high emotion out of your coming & going. .get on to obedience training....fast. The dog's tearing things apart when you're gone, is saying. 'I WANT you here!. So a dog has to learn to earn any attention. Teach him to obey 'Sit'.....to get anything good in life, like meal, treat, cuddle, walk etc. If he demands something, don't give it to him. He must first obey 'Sit'. This teaches him he can't demand anything. These were among the guidelines the behaviourist vet gave us to do with the shelter. She told us to be absolutely consistent. Within a week or so, the sheltie stopped tearing up the furniture.

I wondered about this, too. I notice that the Australian Veterinary Association said about debarking in the Fed Gov's Animal Welfare Strategy paper (July 2006): Debarking of Dogs (ventriculocordectomy) The AVA believes that debarking of dogs should be performed only for veterinary reasons or as alternative to euthanasia. It's a last stop alternative for an owner to be asking a vet to perform a bark lowering. So surely a Stat Dec can be given now, that that was the reason for going to the vet 4 years ago. A reason which had to meet veterinary ethics, too.

Good advice in this post. Qld law calls debarking a regulated procedure NOT a prohibited procedure. Which means the focus is on the vet's following the procedure that's laid down. Here it's a series of steps to be taken by the treating vet....checking that all avenues have been tried & that the dog's existence is at risk. Sounds like NSW has similarities in that the treating vet has some boxes to tick. So, in the OP's NSW case, wouldn't it be an issue of contacting the treating vet in that case? If the current NSW cruelty law was in place 4 years ago, then the treating vet's records should show what process was followed. In the Victorian situation, the law doesn't have the sense to call debarking a regulated procedure....which it actually is in that state. There's a clear procedure set out for when it can be done. So the offence lies in not following the procedure. For some odd reason, Victoria calls it a prohibited procedure thus saying 2 different things about the same procedure. And manages to thereby get it mixed up with tail-docking.

Yes, I'm sure back to them. I can see the difference as the dogs crunch the chicken necks into pieces in their mouths. More likely to be small enough not to cause a problem swallowing. But the rawhide finishes up in a piece that looks like a lump of plastic. And, as the vet said, all dogs gulp things down. So with a gulp, down it goes. Fingers crossed it makes it to the stomach.

But VicDogs say that VicDogs members are responsible dog-owners and therefore their dogs are trained and wouldn't be aggressive. Does anyone know what 'likely means? The dog doesn't have to be aggressive & could be trained down to its sock tops. This law allows an authorised person to form an opinion about what a dog is likely to do. Based on no other information than they've come face to face with the dog who's got out. No worries, tho', DogsVic could advise its members to train their dogs to say, 'Hello! I'm owned by a member of DogsVic. They are responsible dog-owners who train their dogs which aren't aggressive.' And the authorised person could say, 'All right, then. You may be a Rottie (or a GSD or a Dobe) who's a bit antsy from the stress of being lost & with a stranger staring at it. But I feel better now.' This is a Victorian issue. So end of my contribution.

Tibetan Spaniels can come in any colour or combination of colours. There's black & tan tibbies here in Australia. And my own girl is a yellowy/red colour.

What? The way that law is drafted, the 'likely' offence of attacking, biting, rushing, chasing leading to PTS would hold, whether the dog was identifiable or not. There's nothing that says but if the dog is identifiable then the authorised person will look the other way & won't have visions of it doing any of those things And nor is there any law of nature that says the dogs of Vic Dogs members can never accidentally escape. Vic dog people already have a cruelty law where one section basically allows any dog at all to be seized. It doesn't have to be disabled or distressed. Because there's one section of that law which says 'things can be taken for evidence'....& a 'thing' can be a dog. And that caught a registered breeder. Looks like, here we go again with this law.....if it gets thro'. This time we have psychic powers leading to a dog's being PTS.