espinay2

'Cheap' may still cost a bit. And remember a fence is not cheap if it is going to need constant 'shoring up' if the dogs breach it. Note too that fencing will be a LOT cheaper if you install it yourself so worth it if you are able. What we have around our house yard on our property (about 2 acres) is a 1.5m high fence consisting of 1.8 m star pickets spaced 2.5m apart and every 4th post is a metal post concreted in. We used 1.8 metre fencing (waratah) mesh which gave us a 30cm 'apron' at the bottom of the fence. Our gates are normal 'farm gates' specially made to 1.5m height. This fence works very well for us and was economical compared to many other options we considered, though possibly a little 'over engineered'. It has stood up to wear well though and has proved a trustworthy boundary. On our orchard we did similar, though spaced the posts 3m apart and used larger/longer gal star pickets each fourth post instead of the concreted in metal posts. We had a little issue with it in one spot that was very very wet at the time with all the floods, but once dried out and 'set in' it too has proved very strong, so you could get away with the 3m post spacing no problems IMO (which means less cost as less posts).

Can't tell you where as it has been a little while since I bought one. I do like the Liberty tables though. Important thing when buying a table, particularly for larger breeds is that it is stable. Some tables may look fine on first inspection but the way the legs are designed means they are more prone to tipping (I have one here that I rarely use as a result). A tip is to make sure the bottom of each of the legs is low and wide. Basically the inverted U that is at the bottom of the legs should be wide and short to give more stability. This is an example of a better designed table: This one the legs would not be as stable for a large dog in particular:

On managing barking and Pyrs. As Brintey mentioned, having them inside at night and during the peak bark fest times of dawn and dusk can help a lot. I find too that the best way to manage a Pyrs barking is not to tell them to be quiet, but to praise them! Sounds backwards I know but they are hard wired to do their job. If you go and check what they are barking at, tell them they are good for alerting you, but you are now in control and have determined it is nothing and they need to be quiet now (ok not in those words, but that is the gist of it - I usually do - 'whats up' - 'good boy/girl' - 'ok enough, leave it', and move them away from where they were - of course if there IS a threat I let them keep barking ;)), it generally works a lot better than negatives to get them to be quiet (where they often get more stressed that they can't do their job). It is about leadership really and Pyrs do need an owner who will be a good leader.

Hi there Good on them for wanting to make sure they understand the downside as well as the good. Pyrs are wonderful creatures, but there are definitely things they should be aware of! The barking as mentioned is one. There are ways to manage it depending on the situation and the dog, but when all is said and done, Pyrs do bark more than many other breeds as that is what they are bred to do - to warn predators they are on duty. Having lived in suburbia with Pyrs before I can tell you it can be done, but it can be something that requires constant mangement. Other issues to be aware of is that they are escape artists and need good fences (they will go through or under as much as over so they need to be strong) and can not be trusted offlead outside of a fully fenced area. There is a saying - 'an offlead Pyr is a disapyr' So owners should not expect to take their dogs on walks offlead. They are an independent thinking breed - yes they can be trained, but they are bred to think for themselves so don't expect them to follow you around at your heels like a border collie or golden retriever etc asking you what you are going to do next! They are more like a giant cat in some ways (exaggeration, but you get the drift). The joke in our family is that my sisters cats (who will play fetch) are more like dogs than my dogs ;) They also love to dig holes to keep cool (we are talking major earthworks here) so for someone who loves their perfect garden they may not be the best option unless they have a separate area for the dog when it is not supervised. They also shed LOTs of hair. Doesnt matter how much you groom, you will have hair on everything at some point. There is more info on my website about the breed and also health issues the breed is subject to. Also links on my links page which will provide more info on the breed. They are welcome to contact me to discuss the breed and its suitability to their situation in more detail if they want.

Agree with SSM. Having lived with a fruitcake when it came to storms/fireworks etc I would not wish that on anyone. Not only stressful for the dog, but upsetting for the whole household. When it comes to a dogs capacity to function and work, I would not be breeding from a dog at that end of the scale. A dog with that kind of phobia can't do its job (just as important for a Livestock Guardian to not freak out in the paddock during a storm and leave the flock to its fate as it is for a gundog not to be gunshy). Seeking shelter during a storm though is not necessarily a sign of fear. It may simply be good sense. Big difference between a dog that does this and a dog that goes nuts to the point of possible self harm. Agree on considering the effect of thyroid issues too as this can definitely have an impact on behaviour (the fruitcake dog we had did have thyroid problems but behaviour continued even when thyroid was regulated with medication). The effect that a bitch with such a phobia could have on pups while raising them is also a thought? Would they also learn from her if there were storms while she was raising the pups? Would this help to tip pups 'over the edge' towards storm phobia if they were in any way predisposed to it genetically?

Unfortunately if ANKC says that is what they need, you wont get by without it Make sure you keep copies of anything you send! Did you send normal mail or express post? Express post is a little better because of the tracking number, but of course registered post is safest (or next best to hand delivering to the office yourself).

Not really. Can be good sometimes as they can indicate something is up before you would have noticed yourself. I pay attention to my boys nose for the good of my girls ;) .

Some males react to all sorts of smells - anything 'different'. I have one that reacts like this to any signs of a vaginal infection (though is only interested in the girls in season when they are right on! Go figure!) Agree, swab and see what you have. At least then you can target any treatment. But as mentioned it can be awfully hard to clear up and agree it may be a case of not fully resolving until the first season. Vit C may be worth adding to the diet if you don't already.

Fabulous!! Well done! It was a great piece

Thanks for the correction, you are right . (Perhaps I should have said the powers in general under the act are greater than in many other circumstances when it comes to things like search and seizure?) One of the important things I think will be to ensure that if the code comes up for review that we make sure we have input - individually as well as through organisations such as Dogs NSW. I have no problem with it being enacted where it is, as you say, reasonable to do so. We have to be careful though that we are not legislated more and more over time into a situation where the only way we can be a 'breeder' is to invest in expensive facilities and adopt practices which add no value to the production of healthy and well balanced dogs.

No, no mistakes. I have been outlining the differences between the Standards (law) and Guidance (policy) in the Code in my posts? I do agree with you totally on how it should be. In fact I try to make sure that is how it is in my job ;) Unfortunately I think I have become a bit jaded over the years and have seen how wide the gap can be between what the 'general public' considers natural justice and what the 'system' does . I think one of the problems is that under prevention of cruelty to animals legislation there are actually a lot more powers given to the 'enforcers' than there would be under 'normal' legislation (for example they actually in some cases have more powers than police when it comes to entry, search and seizure). It seems to stand on its own in this respect and the abiliy to redress isn't as robust as IMO it should be. These powers have been used and abused numerous times and there are multiple examples of how this has affected people in the dog community. Steves example and Judy's in Vic are just the tip of the iceberg. Another example I know of was a breed rescue (in our area) that ended up shutting down as it could not meet the requirement that all its runs be concreted with inbuilt drainage (this is under a separate code, but also covered by the Regs quoted here). The runs in question were clean, well kept and covered but had dirt floors so could not meet the legislated requirements for regular disinfection. No, I don't want to be doomsday about this. There is a lot of good in the code and if some people lift their game as a result then that can only be good. But it pays to make sure we know what is in it and think about how it affects us individually. If someone came to my gate today, what would they see and how might they interpret that? If I was asked for the documents I was supposed to have, could I produce them? (whether I WOULD produce them is another issue ;) ). Certainly I personally have a bit of work to do checking this stuff and seeing how many boxes I can reasonably tick - for my own peace of mind.

Let me explain it in simple terms.......... The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1979 applies to everyone who has anything to do with dogs (and other animals) The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (General) Regulation 2006 is additional to the above Act (made under the provisions of the Act) and provides further guidance on specific circumstances. In this case Part 3 sets out specific ADDITIONAL regulation for those involved in breeding). It applies NOT just when a person is undertaking the act of breeding a dog but THE WHOLE TIME A DOG IS KEPT WITH THE INTENT OF THAT PURPOSE The Code of Practice EXPANDS on the individual requirements set out in the above Regulations. It contains both Standards (which are legal requirements and shown in the shaded sections - these are the really important bits to take note of) and 'Guidelines' (which are policy, or things that are highly recommended but not enforced under law) The law is a TIERED SYSTEM with each additional document expanding on the specific requirements of the one above it. The code does NOT apply ONLY to the specific time of mating and whelping. What you expect, and what is fact in the legislation are two totally different things.

I make my own with vistaprint. In fact just placed my order for my new one for 2012. For a new calendar (with all my own choice of photos) - plus I just ordered 25 magnets and 140 address labels with my own photos on them - I just paid a grand total of $10.16 (mostly postage plus a little for photo upload). Yes, I wait until they offer things 'free' before I order them :D . At least this way I get to look at pictures of dogs I like rather than the ones on the breed calendars which often have me grating my teeth.

Not doomsday, but people should be aware and not dismiss it as 'this doesn't apply to me in my situation' without careful consideration of the provisions and what they each mean for them. Each individual is going to be different in what is simple for them to comply with and what isn't. We have been sent the document and can not plead ignorance to its content. As Steve has mentioned, some breeders have already had difficulties as a result of enforcement of the code and some have made the decision to no longer breed as a result. The same scruitiny may not be given to me or you, but there is also a chance that at some point it could be given too. None of us knows what is in the future. Each person needs to consider carefully their options and practices under the code and decide for themselves the cost/benefit of compliance and the risks of non compliance. Truly I doubt many breeders will ever be fully compliant, and that may be a risk we all have to take. But we can't say we weren't warned.

Red Dawg :D

Remembering of course that the test for 'unreasonableness' (as per Wednesbury) is that for grounds for review to be available the decision must be 'so unreasonable that no reasonable authority could ever have come of it'. It is also important to note that VERY few cases ever succeed on the grounds of unreasonableness alone so it is not something I would ever want to rely on. Having been involved in the use of this principle quite often I know that just because we may not think it is 'reasonable' does not necessarily mean those in power reviewing it will. Remember that many thought it 'reasonable' to show a dog that has been debarked. It is not within the realms of possibility for it to be considered reasonable for someone to disinfect a backyard dog run weekly, to wash bedding daily, to feed puppies solids at 3 weeks or to vaccinate for canine cough (this one is in the 'standards' section too). Certainly I would perhaps consider disinfecting a house to be 'something overwhelming' (in the words of the case mentioned above) enough to be considered unreasonable, but if that same person has a dog run, paved outdoor area or designated whelping room etc, where dogs are housed even for part of the time, I doubt the test for unreasonableness would apply to those areas. Also, if a person were to argue that their set-up does not easily permit these things designated in the standards to happen, I would also be wary of the counter argument that the set-up is therefore 'deficient'. Note that the Code of Practice is made under the provisions of Part 3, Clause 20 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (General) Regulation 2006 which is classified as subdelegated legislation. It is listed in Schedule 2 of that document. The 'standards' within the code are also subdelegated legislation (factors which must be considered by law), while the 'guidelines' can be classified as policy (still to be considered, but not compelled by law). Tralee, please note that as far as NSW state law is concerned, the DOGS NSW Code of ethics is irrelevant. That is a private body we sign up to as a private individual and has no standing whatsoever in law.

Sorry, but there is no escape clause there. If you keep a dog or dogs for the purpose of breeding, whether or not you happen to have a litter or bitch in whelp at the time, it will apply. No use trying to read something into it that is not there. There is no time limit specification in the wording which switches it on and off and the standards actually cover more than just the events that happen during that short time where a bitch is in whelp or has a litter (i.e. covers lifetime care). So if, for example, you have a breeders prefix, a website that says you are a breeder, a breeder listing on DOL, or even if you co-own a dog that is bred (note definition of owner includes 'each and all owners') you are subject to the code ALL THE TIME and not just if you happen to have a bitch in whelp or have a litter on the ground.

The document has replaced 'choice' with Standards. Certainly breeders will have a choice, but that choice will be to either comply, or to not comply with the clear understanding that that non-compliance may potentially mean a penalty or prosecution depending on the severity of the infringement. The document makes that very clear whether you choose to accept that or not. Beleive me, as someone whose day job has for many years involved writing, reviewing, amending and determining compliance with legislation written in similar language, there are no ifs ands or buts with this. The code makes it clear that those sections specified as 'standards' MUST be complied with by all those involved in breeding dogs: "Standards describe the mandatory specific actions needed to achieve acceptable animal welfare levels. These are the minimum standards that must be met under law."

Certainly there are some (lots of) things in it that I beleive all should be complying with. It will be up to individual breeders how much of the document they will comply with themselves. Be aware though that if a breeder in Vic can be put through hell and prosecuted for exhibiting debarked dogs, it is not so much of a stretch if someome decides to 'dob in' someone in NSW for not vaccinating for kennel cough or some other form of non compliance which - to most of us - seems reasonable, but under this 'law' is considered a punishable offence. As Steve said - it takes a hell of a lot of the fun and enjoyment out of it.

I have had a copy of this for quite a while so it wasn't much of a surprise. Though IMO I do not think there will be many breeders who will actually be fully compliant with this. It pays to read it in detail. Remember firstly that it applies to anyone who has a litter and will sell one or more of the pups.I have pulled out a few of the things from it that breeders will need to comply with: 4.2.1 Outlines the training required by 'staff employed to care for animals'. Who do you get to care for your dogs when you go away? If you give them money for the help, do you ensure that they have 'formal qualifications and experience in animal management' before you get them to do it? 5.1 Does your record keeping comply with all these requirements? 5.1.4 Do you have a DOCUMENTED program for the control of insects, extoparasites and invertebrate pests? 5.1.5 Do you have DOCUMENTED emergency evacuation procedures? Note the definitions: Then note that 6.1.1.5 states that 'where a facility houses both dogs and cats, cat housing must be a sufficient distance or otherwise isolated from dog housing to minimise the stress created by the sound, sight or smell of dogs'. Does this mean that people who keep dogs and cats together in the same house are automatically non-compliant?? 6.1.1.9 what if the dogs are livestock guardians that sleep in the paddock with the flock? 6.6.1.11 and 12 Ok, so most of the time we can count the vet clinic as an 'isolation facility' – note that a crate or separate run beside other runs would not fulfil these requirements ('biosecurity' etc). If you bring an injured animal home from the vets for care, it seems you may need a letter saying your facilities are adequate? 6.3.1.5 Do you have fire fighting equipment? 7.2.2.6 Do you feed all your weaned pups from separate bowls? 7.3.1.2 Do you disinfect every week? 7.3.1.3 do you change your dogs bedding EVERY DAY (i.e. a new bed or blanket every day) 7.3.3.2 do you get specialist advice before doing any pestcontrol? 7.4.1.4 do you disinfect your dog trailer, van or car each time after taking any of your dogs anywhere? 7.4.2.3 does your dog trailer have air conditioning? 8.1.1.3 have you ever let a bitch go more than two hours of labour without producing a pup before taking her to the vet? 8.2.1.6 Vaccinations are mandated, including for kennel cough – whicheven goes against the current AVA policy? 8.2.1.10 and 11 – heartworm and parasite control - you MUST do these things – whether you need to or not? 8.2.2.2 To comply with this your friends (or owners of your puppies) must never bring their dog over to play with yours. Do you have the facilities to isolate for 48 hours a new dog ordog that comes to stay? 9.1.1.7 something that MUST to be given in writing to all puppy purchasers 9.1.2.1 have you checked your puppy packs to make sure thisinformation is included and you can tick all these off the list? 9.1.2.3 Do your litter advertisements comply with this requirement? Including the ones here on DOL? 10.1.1.13 Do you always keep your bitches with the pups until 7 weeks of age? 10.1.1.14 Do you always start your pups on solid food at 3 weeks? (note as this is a 'must', if they don't need solid food until 4 weeks, and you don't start till then, you are non-compliant!!) So read it carefully folks and think about whether you can (or want to) comply with it all or not. Frankly, it is the big commercial kennels that are more likely to find it easier to comply with a lot of these than your average purebred dog breeder who keeps a few dogs in their home and yard. Some will be easier for the average breeder to comply with and some things a breeder may do more than what is required. There are things in there though which some breeders may also be philosophically opposed to, and IMO that opposition in some cases would not make them any less responsible (and in my eyes may in some cases make them MORE responsible). Some things may also be expensive for the average small breeder to comply with while not adding significant value to their animal management practices. Will be interesting to see how things go in relation to enforcing compliance. Whether we are going to see any crackdown or targetting of breeders. A serious business when you note that if you dont comply with ALL of the standards (things in the shaded areas which you MUST do), you may be facing prosecution - whether you think they are things that should or can be done in your situation or not. Start weaning those pups at 3 weeks everyone or you may be in trouble!!! FWIW

Great article! Yes, for me an 'easy keeper' is one that is 'low maintenance' to live with: - isn't fussy about food - is 'economical' in regards to food (in that the dog maintains good weight on a reasonable amount of food) - is not prone to reoccuring or regular health issues (e.g. skin, eyes, ears, or injury related - for example I personally don't believe a dog should need to be seen by the chiropractor as often as some seem to be) - is stable in temperament (e.g. handles change well) - is not prone to stress or other innate behavioural issues such as uncharacteristic shyness or aggression (I am not talking learned behaviour so much here - even dogs of the same breed raised the same way can react differently to the same situations) - whose coat is 'fit for purpose' for its breed (and as easy care as it can be for that breed in normal circumstances) From a specific breeding point of view I would also add: - doesnt need major intervention in normal circumstances to mate and reproduce (relevant to both dogs and bitches) - doesnt need major intervention in normal circumstances to whelp - is a 'good mother' FWIW

LOTS of local hospitals are looking for staff so I doubt you would have any trouble. As for the 'quiet life' in a small town - it may not be as 'quiet' as you think Definitely a different and great lifestyle though

http://dogblog.dogster.com/2011/12/22/town-forces-retired-cop-to-give-up-his-pit-bull-mix-service-dog/ Town Forces Retired Cop to Give up his Pit Bull Mix Service Dog Update 11 a.m. Dec 22: Press release w more very helpful details follows. Among other events, Sak has fallen once since having to send him to the kennel, and 911 had to be called.) A small Iowa town has forced a retired Chicago cop and Vietnam veteran to part with the service dog who was helping him cope with a profound stroke that left him with no feeling on the right half of his body. If Jim Sak hadn’t sent 5-year-old Snickers to a kennel just outside town, the leaders of Aurelia, Iowa, could have taken the dog away and destroyed him. The town fathers had reportedly threatened this, and Sak could not take the chance with this dog who is everything to him. The dog’s crime? He is a pit-bull mix. It seems Aurelia — a town whose motto is “savor the sweet life” — banned the breed in 2008 after a pit bull bit a meter reader. Sak wasn’t here then. He and his wife, Peggy, recently moved to her hometown of 1,100 people to be closer to his ailing mother-in-law. But Sak learned that there are no exceptions. He even brought his plea to keep his dog before the Aurelia town council, but they turned him down. “I was a policeman for 32 years. I understand there’s black and white, but there’s also a gray area where you have to use your head. They’re not using their heads. … I can’t believe they didn’t even try to talk to us. They just said, ‘No. You’re not having him. He’s outlawed in this town,’” Sak said in an article in the Chicago Sun-Times. Without the dog, Sak’s mother-in-law — the very person Sak moved here to help — has to help him out. Snickers has been invaluableto Sak since his stroke. “I have spasms on my right side where the leg gives out whenever I get upset or try to do too much,” he said. “When Snickers sees that my hand is moving, he sits down by me right away and waits for me to tell him what to do. Usually, he goes to get my wife so she can help me get back in the chair. Without him, I feel lost.” Peggy Sak said the demand to get rid of the dog was sudden, and that it has left them worried sick. “They called us to a city council meeting Dec. 14 and voted 3 to 2 to make no exceptions,” she said. “I had to get him out of the house by the next day. That dog has never been away from us a night in his life. He’s the sweetest, most good-natured dog you’d ever want to meet. “I left the meeting and threw up on the street outside the place. I can’t stop crying. Jim, being the Chicago cop, is stoic, but very depressed. It’s terrible. I’m afraid to leave him.” She said she is “appalled and embarrassed by the town I grew up in. … They have made our lives a living hell since we got here.” Wow. Is it just me, or if Snickers is a bona fide service dog, doesn’t this fly in the face of the Americans with Disabilities Act, big time? The ADA says service dogs can be of any breed, from what I know. The Animal Farm Foundation, whose goal is to secure equal treatment for bully breeds, has hired a lawyer to represent the Sakses. The group is also paying for Snickers’ board at the kennel. “It’s about the injustice of this man having his service dog taken away — this man who is a Vietnam War veteran and a retired Chicago Police officer who has always given back to the community,” said executive director Stacy Coleman. “This town has taken away this man’s independence, his peace of mind, and his freedom to move about his house, go out in public and keep from having to go to a nursing home with 24-hour care. He’s physically in danger without his dog.” The town’s website says, “Aurelia offers something for everyone!” Apparently everyone but war veterans and retired cops with strokes. Dogsters, what do you think? Do you have to investigate a town’s rules before moving in with a bully breed or bully mix? What would you do if this happened to you? If anyone knows about the ADA in relation to service dog breeds, please give us the facts. (Sources: Chicago Sun-Times, Animal Farm Foundation, town of Aurelia website) Update: From a press release by the Animal Farm Association Aurelia, Iowa – James Sak, 65, a disabled Vietnam Veteran and retired Chicago police officer, was forced to relinquish his service dog after the Aurelia Town Council voted December 14 to prohibit the dog, identified as a “pit bull,” from residing within Aurelia city limits. Although the City of Aurelia has breed-discriminatory laws prohibiting residents from owning “pit bulls,” the Council’s decision appears to violate 2010 guidance from the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) on breed limitations for service dogs (“Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Services”). Sak and his wife, Peggy Leifer, moved to Aurelia in November to live near Leifer’s ailing mother, an 87-year-old longtime resident of Aurelia. Sak was accompanied by his service dog, Snickers, who is certified with the National Service Animal Registry. In 2008 Sak suffered a debilitating stroke that left him permanently disabled, unable to use the right side of his body, and confined to a wheelchair. For two years Sak worked with Aileen Eviota, a physical therapist with the University of Illinois Medical Center in Chicago, to improve his functional capabilities and live more independently through the use of a service dog. “Snickers has been individually trained to assist James with tasks which mitigate his disability, including walking, balance, and retrieving items around the house,” said Eviota in a letter to the Aurelia Town Council dated December 2, 2011. Days after moving into their new home, Sak and Leifer were summoned to a Town Council meeting after a small group of citizens circulated a petition calling for the dog to be removed from city limits. Although the dog has no history of aggression or nuisance complaints, the petition urged the Council to “retain as written and without exception the existing City of Aurelia Ordinance, Chapter 58,” which prohibits ownership of “pit bull” dogs. However, because Snickers works as a service animal for a disabled person, the dog is protected by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and should not be subject to the breed ban, according to 2010 guidance issued by the DOJ. “The Department does not believe that it is either appropriate or consistent with the ADA to defer to local laws that prohibit certain breeds of dogs based on local concerns that these breeds may have a history of unprovoked aggression or attacks,” the DOJ stated in the regulation. “Such deference would have the effect of limiting the rights of persons with disabilities under the ADA who use certain service animals based on where they live rather than on whether the use of a particular animal poses a direct threat to the health and safety of others.” On December 14 the Aurelia Town Council told Sak that he must remove his dog from city limits by the end of the day. Snickers is currently being boarded at facility outside of Aurelia. “I lost my helper,” said Sak, who served more than 30 years in the Chicago Police Department and enlisted in the Army during the Vietnam War. “I’m not looking for special treatment, I just want to be safe, and I need my service dog for that.” “Without the service dog here to assist, I can’t leave Jim unattended,” said Leifer. “But the whole reason we moved to Aurelia was to care for my 87-year-old mother who is ill. I drive across town to care for her three times a day. Jim has already fallen once and we had to call 911. I live in fear that he will have another stroke, or worse. We need his service dog back.” Sak is a member of the Fraternal Order of Police – Chicago Lodge 7 (retired from the 12th District of the Chicago Police Department) and the American Legion – Post 390 of Aurelia (Vietnam Veteran, Army Signal Corps). Sak is pursuing legal action against the City of Aurelia so he can be reunited with his service dog. In accordance with our mission, Animal Farm Foundation is committed to assisting Sak with securing funding for this case. For more information, please contact Kim Wolf at (845) 418-0778 or [email protected] .

As someone who did rent a LOT with multiple large dogs (for about 12 years) and having a sister who currently has a dog and rents (and has had to move between three different cities for work in that last 12 months...and each time has found a place to rent with the dog), I understand some of the issues involved with renting. Having worked for many years until recently in a 'housing related' field (not real estate) too I understand a bit of the issues in the industry and some of the demographic of people who rent. This means I do not have an outright policy against renters, but I do consider the issue as it really can be a major consideration. It really comes down to the person and their situation though. Do they have permission (and what do they have permission for!), have they rented with dogs before, what is the property like, are they likely to move very often etc etc. It is also about the person themselves and whether I feel the needs of the dog in looking for a house will outweight their 'wants'. Sometimes a dog owner may need to compromise a lot on the house (location, standard and type of accommodation, amount of rent they pay etc etc) in order to accommodate the dog, so I need to feel comfortable they are going to do that. It really is a very individual thing to assess.

Thanks :D . We love them too ;) We like other breeds, but it is 'the breed' for us Someone was talking about grass seeds? Here grass seeds can be a problem for any dog and I have seen Labradors and other short coated dogs with acesses in their paws as a result of grass seeds. I find it can vary from coat to coat though, in my breed at least. Better 'working coats' have less issues with grass seeds and things in general getting stuck in them. Those with less of a harsher outer coat and a more wooly and softer (pouffy) coat in general tend to have more of a problem in my experience. To bring the discussion back to the Komondor - their coat has quite a wooly texture and things do from what I understand and have seen tend to stick and bury in reasonably easily. Seeds tend to 'migrate' and work their way in, so if they get down towards the skin it can be very hard to get them out in a corded coat.