Salukifan

It's depressing to chuck expensive food and drink isn't it. I haven't given feedback, but it seems across the board no matter which clubs are holding shows at those grounds. Maybe I should write to Dogs ACT and ask... It might be their decision and not the individual clubs? I can't believe I'm about advocate this... but Start a petition to Dogs Act - I'll sign it. I understand about them wanting to keep their guaranteed caterer sweet but frankly if that's the best we can be guaranteed, I'll take my chances on more casual arrangements or drive to Dickson!!

No biggie. I get that you are a committed parent and dog owner. :)

I didn't intend any comment on your actions ZF. But in my experience if you plan for "the worst" it never happens. All I will say is be careful with such a tiny baby. When she's a bit older (say over 6 months) then more interaction might be done under supervision. But right now? I'd be erring well on the side of caution.

Yes it does!!!! Dogs have been seized and destroyed for less. The best protection for your dog and visiting children is to keep them separate so that lapses in training don't occur. If you think that's being "negative" then I hope to God you don't ever have to deal with a parent on the warpath against your dog. How much do you know about Huskies, neonatal children and fatalities? Yes, disinterest is probably a good thing but your child is tiny, and all it takes is a temporary lapse of concentration and there could be heartbreak. She'd not be getting near enough to sniff my baby if it were me. One person's negativity is another's trying to warn you that the safest way to keep this dog, your child and visiting children safe is to separate them. If that sounds like a Chicken Little impression then I'm prepared to cop flack for it. My interest is in the safety of kids and the preservation of the life of your dog.

There's no way in God's green earth I'd give it to any collie breed for a start.

Nice back pedal. You CAN'T breed for some colours (notably blue) and eliminate all bad genetic traits (ie dilute colour alopecia). Level best or not, the two are genetically linked. So if you deliberately breed for blue, you are dicing with DCA. So you asked for the "so what" in aiming for a particular colour and I've provided one. You tell me if it's unethical to breed for pups with a one in four chance of the condition? Sorry for the negativity. ;)

And when the colour has genetic health issues linked to it, what then? How do you feel about folk who'd do an Overo to Overo mating to breed paint horses? If you've never heard of dilute colour alopecia, now would be a good time to look it up before you dig yourself in any deeper.

Easily fixed. No access to visiting kids. Safer for them, safer for her. How so? You won't be able to leave them unsupervised for years yet.

Just out of interest: What breed/s is the first dog? What breeds/s is the second dog. I KNOW I could not live with some dog breeds.

I look forward to the day when "caring" for a dog is considered to involve more than providing food, shelter and cleaning up after it. But while tens of thousands of dog owners think that's enough, pet shops and the places that supply them will continue to flourish.

My point entirely.

Who says its "evidence"? Someone's grabbed a shot in God knows what context and now its being used here to attempt to discredit Steve Austin. I'm not a fan but I don't agree that smiling for a camera with proof of the success of your latest feral animal eradication project is a cardinal sin. I'm not discrediting Steve Austin. I know nothing about the man. All I know is a photo that I'm looking at. And I don't like the behaviour expressed in that photo. It's a matter of taste and choices re behaviour. I'm find it distasteful & don't agree with the choice of behaviour. You do. Welcome to the world where people think differently. Where people have different values. 'God' and 'cardinal sins' have nothing to do with it. 'Nothing's either right or wrong, but thinking makes it so'. Which is why I read your position with interest, but I don't agree with it. And don't give a damn that you hold it. I give a damn that this photo is supposedly "evidence" that Steve Austin is somehow an unfit person to be on the Companion Animals Task Force. For all anyone knows, this is a staged photo, Steve was handed the dead cat and told to smile for the camera. Because that NEVER happens right? I see people leaping to conclusions about the man based on bugger all evidence.. but that was the aim of the thread from the beginning no doubt. How about this evidence: Yeah, totally unfit. :rolleyes:

Do they relish "the kill" or the fact that there's one less feral cat out there destroying native wildlife? Smiling in that context is entirely rational. I'm not a fan of trophy hunting in any sense but I fail to see what's so heinous about this photo.

Who says its "evidence"? Someone's grabbed a shot in God knows what context and now its being used here to attempt to discredit Steve Austin. I'm not a fan but I don't agree that smiling for a camera with proof of the success of your latest feral animal eradication project is a cardinal sin.

We don't want it to happen, we need it to happen, that feral animals be culled. When presented with 'seeing' it, I don't like the person brandishing a dead body and relishing what they've done. That is not a necessary part of the culling to personalise it, in such a distasteful way. God forbid people involved in programs to eliminate feral pests should take pride in their work.

If you are a lover of native marsupials, my guess is you'd be grinning too. That photo is evidence that the use of dogs to track and assist with the elimination of feral cats WORKS. I'd find that something to celebrate.

WTF!, who are you people? and what are you doing on a "animal rescue site:?? Anyone who enjoys killing animals has NO PLACE in ANY business associated with other animals!! How would you deal with the feral animal problem Pandypam? Give me humane destruction via bullet over baits or traps any day! God know what you think of purebred dog owners who use their dogs for hunting but frankly, I don't really care. Build a bridge. No one's forcing you to hunt. Oh and in case you haven't noticed this ISN'T an animal rescue site. It's a site for the promotion of purebred dogs whose owner allows rescue to operate from here.

It will be interesting to see if PIAA bites the bullet on compulsory health testing. I don't think that will impress the President of the AAPDB. ;)

Yep but inspected for what? They still have loads [100's of dogs] and couldn't tell by one visit as to what they do on a daily basis only what they see on the day. Its still the breeder passing the buck even if it is onto PIAA - its still not them being contactable by the buyer or being held responsible after the sale. Nice for PIAA to offer to do but it means the breeder is rewarded and out of gaol if they sell to a pet shop. Remember that ANKC registered breeders can also sell to PIAA pet stores. Some can Steve but not all. See my post above.

I would remove the clamshell for a few days and see if that makes a difference. The bacteria levels in such pools can build very quickly and if your dogs drink from it.....

Sorry but that's simply not true. From the Dogs ACT Code of Ethics: Some states may allow sales to PIAA accredited shops (and those only) iaw with the ANKC Code of Ethics but NO state allows pups to leave breeders before the age of 8 weeks and that's about 3 weeks too old for a lot of petshops.

So would I - hence giving a heartworm tablet monthly, not a needle annually. The heart worm jab isn't a "vaccination" by the way - it does not trigger an immune response to a disease. The options aren't as drastic as jab or your dog could get heartworm. There are both daily and monthly tablets as an alternative to the annual jab.

How often do you change their water? Is their water bowl in the sun?

Me too. Loved that coffee van Ditto. And they sold the Byron Bay cookies.