mita

Our Tibbie girl, Annie, was imported from Sweden by the Australian breeder who showed her. The breeder gave me some of the papers associated with that....like there's something called an export pedigree from the Swedish Kennel Cub. Interesting read....of course, it's in Swedish.

Good spotting, pixe. I went to a doggie thing in the north-western suburbs this morning....& also only saw mostly purebreds. St Bernard, Dobie, Springer Spaniel, Fox Terrier, Poodle, Maltese, Cocker Spaniel etc. And of course our Tibetan Spaniels. I wonder if owners of purebreds are more likely to take part in doggie social events than owners of oodles???? Would love to do a survey! The American Kennel Club has a Purebred Pride Day each year, when owners of purebreds meet up all over the country to show & mingle. I'd love to see a similar event here in Oz.

Actually, I think the police should have recruited Winston. There's got to be a role he could play in law- enforcement. Most police dogs are trained to take down the perps....Winston could take down their cars. Could be a warning to drunk drivers. 'Next time we catch you over the limit, we'll let Winston loose on your car!'

I was chuffed to see a large advertisement for a new type of retirement/nursing home that opened in the Brisbane region. (And is expanding.) They list all the things that can't be done at similar nursing homes.....like bring pets. Then put a big YES next to how they'll be OK here. One item....'Pets most welcome.' There's a pic of a current, retired elderly gentleman, playing ball with his best mate...a kelpie-sized dog, Prince. Both named so it's not a generic photo. Also a pic of an elderly lady with her sweet shih-tzu girl. Enlightened places like this are going to mean more pets will be able to go into retirement/nursing homes, with their owners. OK, doesn't cover what happens if the owner dies. But it's a step in the direction of keeping pets & people together longer. (By the way, they even have a big shed on site.....so the old fellas can still do their Aussie male bonding. With their dogs at their feet, I guess. )

I've seen this before, where young boys' behaviour turns feral, when their dad's away. But just knowing that, won't solve the very real dangers to your family....& the boys themselves. As everyone else has said, the first step is to bring home the seriousness of the situation to both the mum & the dad. Sounds like they'd have no problem in agreeing with you. It's not your job to sort the problem they have with their boys....but someone else sure needs to help them. I'd be wishing for a kindly police officer who's a dad himself! Dad's presence needs to be felt.....even when he's away. By a system where the boys have to report in to Dad by phone....or maybe there's an uncle who can visit to keep them to the good behaviour. I'm only guessing but maybe Dad does 'male things' with the boys when he's home....like going to the footy or making things or whatever. If I were helping to solve this problem, I'd be looking at activities for the boys when Dad's away. Busy boys, interested in doing other things, don't have time for knives. Best wishes it all comes out well for you...I think others have given you great advice.

We're in love with Cadbury, too, at our place. Wouldn't miss the program & sadly next Tuesday night is the final. Don't you love the way Cadbury sits up the front of the canoe, wearing his lifejacket. And sleeping in the tent with his boss who comments how much Cadbury snores. The screen fades to black with only the sound of his lovely rumbly doggie snore. I'm also with Lab_Rat. Griff Rys Jones does wonders revealing the waterways & surrounds of the UK.....with loads of painless history & great characters. Makes you want to go there....& hire a canoe and borrow Cadbury.

Some time back, there was a privately run retirement home for cats....in a rural area, somewhere near Childers in Qld. They used to advertise in magazines etc. I can't recall the environment exactly, but the accommodation was based on replicating many of the aspects of living in a home. I haven't seen the ads for a long time, so maybe it doesn't operate any more, as in taking in new 'guests'.

SG, I now realise why some of the top Australian tibbie breeders import Scandanavian dogs. And, tellingly, why Australian tibbies have been exported there. My adopted Swedish tibbie girl had a dad who gained his Championships in Norway, Sweden & Finland....& there were a couple of Australian tibs in his background. Most of all, I appreciated the cool-headedness in the Norwegian paper. Issues covered without any witch-hunting ideology. Great meeting of science with practical experience & commonsense. But that's what I've encountered with the good Australian breeders.

Oh! Wow. I think science just died a little. Indeed. Science is the first casualty when an ideology is being pushed. Good thing is that science doesn't Rest in Peace. But comes back to haunt. Lovely blend of science with actual breeding practices here. And not one word used to frighten the punters witless: http://www.actavetscand.com/content/50/S1/S6

From the Norwegian paper: Basic rules and recommendations for breeding healthy dogs 1. Only functionally, clinically healthy dogs should be used for breeding; dogs with chronic diseases should never be bred unless we know for sure that heritability plays no role in causing the disease. If a dog suffers clinically from a disease that is suspected, but not proven, to be inherited, the dog should not be bred. If close relatives of such a dog are used for breeding, they should be mated to dogs from bloodlines with low or no occurrence of the same disease. 2. The breeding program should not exclude more than 50% of the breed; the breeding stock should be selected from the best half of the population. 3. Avoid matador breeding. A basic recommendation should be that no dog should have more offspring than equivalent to 5% of the number of puppies registered in the breed population during a five-year period. 4. A bitch that is unable to give birth normally, due to anatomy or inherited inertia, should be excluded from further breeding – irrespective of the breed. 5. A bitch that is unable to take care of the newborn puppies, due to its mentality or inherited agalactia, should be excluded from further breeding. 6. Dogs with a mentality atypical for the breed, and aggressive dogs, should be excluded from breeding. 7. Screening results for polygenetic diseases should be used for preparation of an individual breeding value, based on both national and international screening results. The average breeding value for the combination should be better than the average for the breed. Screening should only be recommended for diseases and breeds where the disease has a major impact on the dogs' functional health. 8. Results from DNA tests should be used to avoid breeding diseased dogs, not necessarily to eradicate the disease. 9. Breed specific health issues that cannot be diagnosed by DNA-tests or screening programs must still be included in a breeding program. 10. The raising of puppies, with correct feeding, environmental exposure, stimulation by their mother, breeder and others to develop social sense and response, must be basic in all breeding. If these simple basic recommendations were implied in a breeding program, we would attain a considerable improvement in the dogs' functional health.

If I were a Canine Council with $30,000 to spare, I'd be asking an Australian university to research & produce an independent report on the current situation & issues. (Which is what the national RSPCA should have done.) It's been done in Qld....with great results. First UQ produced a report on dog management issues for the Dpt of Primary Industries...with solid information from research, which challenged common beliefs about a number of dog-related matters. The CCAH at UQ also produced, for that Dpt, a report on early desexing of kittens & puppies. And RSPCA Qld commissioned a study from UQ on their pilot program of setting up adoption centres in some petstores. One guess, which university I'd ask to prepare an independent report on the pedigree dogs issues, so clumsily covered by the national RSPCA. A search of the literature needs to go far beyond the bandwagon pushers. For example, there's a great 2008 paper from Scandanavia about breeding healthy dogs.....from someone associated with the Norwegian Kennel Club & the School of Veterinary Sciences. Interesting to look at their guidelines set out for breeding healthy dogs. Checking off the items, I'd guess that the experienced, knowledgeable, responsible Australian breeders would score a lot of ticks. http://www.actavetscand.com/content/50/S1/S6 Good stuff being done in the northern European countries (& Denmark, too) re pedigree dogs. Without the need for a TV program pitched only at an extreme level in problems, but suggesting they are widespread. By contrast, the Norwegian paper has a cool-headed summary: Knowledge, education, honesty and cooperation are keys in succeeding in breeding healthy dogs. Breeding regulations and restrictions should be based on scientific and practical knowledge as well as common sense. Strict breeding regulations do not necessarily result in healthy dogs, but may in fact have the opposite effect.... The conscientious breeders want to cooperate with scientists to the benefit of the dogs – and to the benefit of science. Don't eliminate these breeders by making impossible demands!

I've found a great way to get the best of temperaments, is to adopt a retired showdog. From a good breeder who balances all aspects of the dogs' lives... with knowledge & experience. All my ex-show dog pets have been judged Aus Chs. In the course of which, they learned to travel in a car, attend a show surrounded by lots of strange people & dogs....& then get man (woman?)-handled while standing still up on a table. Only a dog bred & raised with a good, non-excitable, non-aggressive temperament.....can go thro' these hoops. My present ex-show girl made the long trip from Sweden to finally end up with me. How do I describe her? A temperament like a feisty, biddable angel. And who has no worries walking on the cold wet grass, unlike my Australian dogs (boy, she says, you should've seen the snow back in Sweden ) OK... a piece of paper isn't handed out by the judges which says, 'Great temperament!'. But the fact that the dog made it thro' to a show judge peering at him/her, so many times, without anyone (including the dog) losing an arm or a leg, is the greatest test of temperament. :D

Good thoughts, sandgrubber. I'm noticing that the RSPCA is not a monolith. There's major differences in policies & activities in the various states (OK, one reason would be differences in state legislation, but that's not the full story). It's a bit like the curate's egg.....good in parts. Like, RSPCA Qld recommended in their February campaigns' report, that people seeking particular dog breeds should go to responsible breeders. Because there's knowledge, in this State, about positive research & positive field conditions re a fair swag of the registered breeders. However, there's something distinctly 'off-shore' about the national RSPCA's campaign re purebred dog breeding. It's as if it's been written by someone in the UK....& tacked onto the Australian scene. With gobsmacking reasoning that pleads no evidence...so it must be all the same here as in the UK's, 'Pedigree Dogs Exposed'. As for pedigree dogs costing more to insure, some trawling uncovered that's also more a feature in the UK & Europe...rather than Australia. I looked up the personnel with the national Australian RSPCA. And noted that their chief scientist here, came from working in the UK RSPCA. So my answer woud be to locate Australian dog world issues within Australian research (as the U of Q did in looking at early breeding practices....& gave the bouquet to the registered breeders ) & using voices that are experienced in the Australian scene.

...actually, I keep popping into this thread hoping that people have posted more pics of big boofers.

That RSPCA statement about purebred dogs in Australia is not evidence-based. There's no one shred of Australian evidence presented in making their case. It's repetition of ideas from the UK. Ideas that are over-generalised to claim application to the majority world of purebred dog breeding in Australia. Which is an ideology, not science. It says little for the education system in Australia, if statements such as that are believed to be indisputable.

It's a straight 'take' on the ideology that's arisen in the UK. (An ideology is a mindset of ideas that automatically become the answer to any question). There's scant reference to any Australian conditions in this statement. Except that 'the show circuit is active in Australia (they make it sound like termites)...and is taken very seriously (would they prefer 'frivolously'?) by the pedigree dog breeders that frequent them' ("frequent' them? Sounds like places of ill-repute). Who would have thunk it! There are purebred dog breeders in Australia who go to shows & who take what they do seriously. And no reference to any field- tested Australian conditions.

With pics like Andy, James & Digby, no wonder people love the big boofies.

All my tibbies have been older dogs adopted from their breeders. One at 3 yrs, one at 7 yrs, one at 8 yrs & one at 4 yrs. They've been wonderful, wonderful dogs. And a friend adopted an 11 yr old tib....& another a 13 yr old tib. My problem isn't about adopting older tibbies....but to put a brake on adopting them. They're fantastic & a credit to their breeders & all the work that goes into producing purebreds.

I think you put your finger on it. He wants to have a dog that he doesn't really want. Onya, for getting your friend on board to do the right thing.

Onya, KK, for trying to help. It's a perfect example of why so many dogs get dumped. Someone buys it, with the dreamy idea that the dog will turn into the ideal pet (no trouble at all!). Then they do nothing to bond with the dog (which makes it anxious & not confident), nothing to train it (yes, dogs do doggie things if not trained to do likewise). And, yes, this particular dog is a cross between 2 toy breeds that thrive on being in a home environment. Best of luck in trying to give a reality check to this pair (especially the husband). Make it clear that owners produce the dog they get. And this dog is not getting anything it needs to become socialised within their family. If they can't/won't step up to the plate, the poor little dog should be rehomed. And hope to heaven that chronic anxiety hasn't been set up

Contact the folk at PAWS rescue, where you adopted Coco from. It;s an awful predicament. So wrong that what you signed on for, was not honoured! Interesting to see what the Tenants Tribunal have to say about it.

You're not wrong on both counts, SG. Quote from the first: "The following are Select breeds, whether pure breed or part breed, and cost an extra $5.00 per month." In googling around, I found a few quotes that setting higher insurance premiums for purebreeds, is more common in the UK & Europe. Another reason why I think that RSPCA OP statement was put together from roots in the UK. And all the stuff just projected onto Australian conditions, with no local evidence. One UK pet insurance company I found said they had a 'sophisticated' rating system for premiums, based on breed, age & post code.

Mighty interesting, Amanda! Looks like the pet insurance business doesn't reflect anything about purebred dogs generally being riddled with health conditions. Insurance companies base their premiums on risk assessment.

Seems the article has produced another overgeneralisation. This time it's dearer to insure purebreds. I looked up the website of the Australian Vets Own Pet Insurance company. Figuring they'd have the sense to look for evidence. They say there's only a small number of pure breeds, which they claim are brought for vet attention more than the average. List is here: http://www.vetsown.com.au/faq1.asp (Actually that throws cold water on the overgeneralisation that the purebred group of dogs is extensively riddled with problems. If that were so, a hard-headed pet insurance business, would have higher premiums on them all.) By the way, the RSPCA runs a pet insurance plan....so there's some clash of interest in their making that statement.

Robbi, just join the club of all the dog owners who've gone head over turkey, in public, tangled in their dog or the dog's lead. A friend was saying lately that he wished dogs came with stoplights because his dog, when out walking is either going full-bore with enthusiasm or stops suddenly in high alert mode. And he's catapulted over the top....trying to fly so as not to land on top of his dog. Erny, thanks for that heads-up about leads & their snap hooks.