espinay2

You mean like this? (BTW, the Dalmatian in the picture is my dog who hates being approached rudely by strange dogs as she was attacked as a pup. But these dogs were introduced to her when the owners asked permission for them to meet) It is a sad day when people give up and do nothing because they think they can't change anything. Unfortunately that is why dog ownership is becoming harder and harder and playing right into the hands of those who want to regulate it out of existence. For the sake of the future of dog ownership everywhere, that type of 'why bother' approach is not an attitude I am willing to take.

I suggest people go back and read what has been said in context. Here are the actual posts where people say what they have done to protect their dogs from dogs which are loose and approaching them. They are acting to protect their dogs from another dog whose owners are acting against the law and allowing their dog not to be under effective control. They are only acting when they are put in a situation that they feel calls for it to protect their dogs and their family and the way I read it, only when other action to prevent it has not worked. Bottom line and the whole point of this thread, lilli, who is the OP sums it up well: Thus anyone allowing their dog to run up to another dog is opening themselves up to misunderstanding and potentially putting their dogs at risk. IMO any owner who has a dog run up to their dog on lead, and acts to protect their own dog as necessary, is in the right and I will support them. As I have said earlier, a little courtesy goes a long way.....but in the absence of courtesy I am going to act to protect me and mine as it seems no one else is going to do it for me (or themselves). As leader of my dog pack, that is my job.

I havent seen any one here talking about hitting ANY dog within striking distance. No one here it is saying it is a preferred approach. Everyone who has said they would do it has said it is a last resort when nothing else works or when quick action is necessary to protect dogs or children etc From my point of view anyway, the referred to thread demonstrates very well the type of situation where I would act in the same manner to protect the dogs. But once again the mob seems to be going off on a tangent against the 'nasty people who hit dogs when on walks' without actually reading what is being said. The thing is, if a person keeps their dog under control, asks permission for a dog to approach, and doesnt let their dog run up to a strange dog, then their dog will NEVER be put in this situation. Which makes me wonder therefore if those who are protesting so much about how they would act if anyone did that to their dogs (i.e. took measures to keep them away from their own dog), are actually placing their dogs in the type of situation where it potentially could happen?

Knew it wouldn't take long for a scenario to come up. Here it is. It seems that many on this thread would consider the owner of the GSD to be totally in the wrong for protecting her pup......

EXACTLY the type of situation I was talking about in the other thread. Well done you for doing what you could to protect your pup (and the other dog really) from its stupid and rude owner (who theoretically could potentially be charged with assault if he was as threatening as you say). I would be calling the council to relate the incident. Tell them time of day, type of dog and what happened. They may not be able to do anything about this incident, but may increase their drive by's of the area for a little while. You may also want to ask them for clarification of what 'on lead' means and whether there are any specifications on the length of the lead 'so you know what you can use in this area' (without saying what you use at first). As far as I know, a long line is still classified as a lead and you were 100% in the right but it may pay to check

I would personally have someone look at me as a loony (but then maybe think about why I am asking and learn from it if they hear it often enough - after all we always tell children to ask the owner first before patting a strange dog - to me this is a very similar situation). BTW, I am curious about the bit I have bolded - why did you ask permission when you saw the dog was probably not a good one for your dog to interact with? The point of asking is to approach and ask the ones you have chosen as being suitable for your dog to interact with, yes? Just because it is reality does not make it right. People with 'friendly dogs' also have to share. It works both ways. I work damn hard to educate and help dog owners, mostly your average dog owner with one or two pet dogs to whom 'training' is about simply getting enough control to have a dog they are happy to live with. I deal with people who do not view dog ownership in the same way as I do every day and I don't expect them to view it the same way as I do. On the other hand, the more ordinary everyday dog owners I can educate on basic common courtesy when it comes to their dog then the better it is for everyone - both them AND other dog owners. 99.99% of my interactions with other dog owners and dogs are polite ones and very positive ones. But if I am put in a situation where being 'rude' protects both my dog and theirs, IMO I would rather take their ear bashing than their vet bills (or mine) and a possible dangerous dog classification for my dog.

Two scenario's, same players: PErson is walking their dog along a pthway at the local park. The dog is onlead, walking nicely and the two are not bothering anyone. Another person is in the middle of the park with their dog offlead. Dog sees other dog and runs over to greet it. Owner of on lead dog sees the dog approaching, attempts to get between them, but 'friendly dog' is persistent and circling around and around in order to 'say hello'. On lead dog is being kept on a short lead. Owner calls out to 'friendly dog owner' to call their dog who as they are walking casually across calls out 'don't worry, he is friendly!' A.........at which time the friendly dog gets a bit too close and is grabbed by the onlead dog, ripping its ear and leaving a puncture wound in its face. B.........Owner gives the circling dog a swift swipe with a stick and growls at it to 'get away' at which time the dog backs off. Which scenario would you prefer as owner of the 'friendly dog'? Note I have seen both happen.

The thing is, good behavour starts here. If every dog owner who has read this thread made sure they exercised common courtesy by asking another owners permission before allowing their dog to approach another dog, then it would be a start. If every person who reads this thread also taught one other person (friend or family for example) this basic behaviour and they did it too, it would be even better. If every dog trainer who reads this thread also taught their students this simple rule we are on our way. Asking permission for your dog to interact with another alows owners a choice. They can say no or they can say yes. Many will likely say yes and your dogs can then play happily together. Some owners who may not like a dog approaching seemingly not under control may be very happy and say yes, if you ask permission first! Some owners may say no and may have a very good reason for that - it is courteous to respect those reasons. Frankly, it is not about 'thats the way it is so suck it up' - it is about each individual taking responsibility and right here with the people reading this thread, is a good place to start. Remember too that those people using every means available to keep your dog away from theirs when it approaches in an uncontrolled fashion may be doing YOU a favour by preventing a fight and damage to YOUR dog. I will admit that at times I have thought - oh bugger it - let them come and get bitten by my dog - I am tired of having to protect their dog when they have no intention of doing it themselves. But I have too much respect for BOTH dogs to allow that to happen - so in the end I just get cast as the bad guy by the other unthinking dog owner (and the mob here it seems). Maybe next time I will say bugger it ... (And if it is a DOLers dog, lets see how long it takes for the thread on 'my dog was attacked while out walking by a vicious dog today' to be posted....) Remembr the law states that a dog MUST BE UNDER effective control - which means that not only must the dog be capable of being under control but that the owner MUST also exercise that control. A failure to exercise control is as much breaking the law as having none in the first place.

So true. The body language of a head on flat out approach is confrontational. It is understandable that a person or dog may view it as such, whatever the owner may think of the dogs intentions. As you say, in law it may also be considered 'rushing' which can be considered to be dog agression if the person it approaches percieves it as such. Given the current climate, it is just another way for owners to put their dogs at risk.

This is it exactly. How dare someone potentially put not only their own dog but also mine at risk Don't people get it? There are TOO MANY UNKNOWNS when you allow a dog to approach another unknown dog in this fashion. For the safety of BOTH dogs, greeting strange dogs need to be MANAGED and have the AGREEMENT OF BOTH OWNERS. You may be lucky and get away with it, but who will be screaming the loudest if something DOES happen? Yes, I am shouting.

How to approach another dog, basic dog law (such as what 'effective control' means) and ettiquette needs to be taught in these classes. I certainly teach them in the beginner classes I teach. I do not think anyone is 'denying them the opportunity' - but allowing a dog or pup to rush up to any dog they like is not only showing no respect for the other dog and owner, but no care or respect for their own dog, who may be faced with a situation that results not just in physical scars but behavioural ones too. CONTROLLED play with dogs they are introduced to is always a good thing. How hard is it for owners to ask another dog owner 'can my dog say hello?' before allowing their dog or pup to interact? This gives the other owner the opportunity to allow their dog to engage or not based on their knowledge of how their dog may react and will ensure that the puppy gets good experiences when playing. All it takes is common courtesy.

Lilli, I have had a similar problem in the past when I lived in town. We had a large area backing our suburb which was classed as an 'offlead' area by council. Huge area - basically a long wide strip (about two or three good sized house blocks wide) backing the length of the suburb. Most people were good and if their dogs were offlead would call their dogs to them when passing another dog (lots of room to pass). Some people, however, took the 'offlead' rule to be as you describe it and let their dogs have a free for all and barrel up to other dogs, even if they moved to the side to give them plenty of room. I had particular problems with two ladies who walked a border collie and a standard poodle. My Pyrs werent the issue - I had at the time as well a Dalmatian who had been attacked by a Border Collie as a pup and could be reactive if black dogs in particular rushed up to her. Introduced properly she was generally ok, but in the situation of a loose dog such as this running up to her (as happened when she was attacked), she was far from happy and prone to act first and ask questions later. I would ALWAYS do the same thing as you - call out to the owners to 'call your dog please!' Some were good and would comply (they got a 'thank you!' and often we would then stop to chat - and if the dogs were comfortable they would sometimes then get to say hello and possibly play), but not these two ladies in particular who would give those same arguments 'this is an offlead area', 'my dog is friendly'. In the end I did call council to discuss the situation. Their take is that I was completely in the right, had acted appropriately by reqesting the owner call their dog, my dog was under effective control and the other owner was at fault. Still didnt make the situation easier or more pleasant and I still have concerns that even though I would be in the 'right', the situation still puts my dog at risk. There may be a grey area to 'effective control' if the dog actually bites as the act may mean it was not being effectively controlled even though it was on lead (an extreme example would be an on lead dog dragging an owner towards an offlead dog and biting it would likely be seen as the dog on lead not being under effective control) though the argument would still be fairly well in your favour (according to my discussion with council) if, for example, your dog was the one on lead, the other dog approached your dog, the owner had been asked clearly and loudly to call their dog away and had either not done so or had done so and the dog had not responded, and the dog had approached right up in your dogs face, at which point your dog bit the other dog. An 'offlead area' simply means a dog may be offlead if the owner has (and actually exercises!) effective control. It does not mean the dog must or should be offlead or excuse the behaviour of the dog when offlead. It means the owner has the option to do so if the dog is well enough behaved and will not interfere with other dogs. There are a LOT of people out there that simply dont get this and unfortunately they make it very unpleasant for everyone else. I will admit though that I am just as angry at owners such as this for putting their OWN dog at risk. They have no knowledge of the other dog. They do not know whether it is ok with dogs approaching it or not. They are as a result putting their own dog in danger. Very irresponsible IMO. As suggested I recommend you call the council and discuss how they view this type of situation where you are. In the context of your dog though I would choose words carefully as you dont want to leave yourself open to liability because you are aware your do 'could' act (who knows what way opinions go these days). Simply say it 'upsets' your dog when they approach like that. I will be interested to hear what they say.

No tails up for Pyreneans. They are left to hang down naturally in the stack (but that way the judge can see the 'shepherds crook'). On the move the tail may either be down/flowing behind or 'making the wheel' (arronderra) which they do when alert. Of course a show ring is boring so they don't always make the wheel With Dalmatians the tail is held out to help create a nice outline when stacked. If the dog is wagging its tail however, I have always just left it as it is holding it out naturally. Don't get me started on ears. I hate it when judges try and bait a Pyr to get their ears up!! It totally ruins expression and tells them nothing (though tells a Pyr exhibitor a LOT about what the judge doesn't know ;) ). Ears are meant to be low set, level with the eyes and held close to the head.

I grew up with a three legged dog (Border CollieX). She had one of her front legs amputated after being hit by a car (no fences in those days and she was being looked after by someone while we were away). They adapt quite well. She could outrun our other dogs with no trouble! She developed very good shoulder muscles to compensate. Main thing is to keep them lean and feed a good healthy diet (as you would for any dog). Fish oil and Vit C if you really want to add something. She lived to a ripe old age with never any mobility issues (apart from the fact that she was missing a leg - but don't tell her that ) On a side note, I used to groom an old GSD with one rear leg amputated. It also didn't hold him up too much and he had no more issues than many GSD his age (and a lot less than some). Funniest thing was to watch him cock his leg to go to the toilet. Yes, that is right, he would cock his ONE rear leg so he was going standing on his front legs only!

Affair to Remember Just a Gigolo Dangerous Liaison Secret Liaison Milkman's Daughter Daddy Wasa Cad Whose ya Daddy Sweet Affaire Gypsy Lover Gypsy Rover (for anyone who knows that old song it is very relevant ;) )

Have had it done at Monash with frozen, but with no luck that time around unfortunately . Would do it again though. If you want to see the procedure, Dr Robert Hutchison's video "Maximising Conception in the Bitch" walks you through it (along with other types of AI, semen collection and storage etc etc - a very worthwhile video to own!!)

Link doesnt work

Earth Choice and vinegar are pretty much all we use here. We use vinegar for almost everything

Remember to take into account other sources of essential fatty acids in the diet - for example chicken and lamb fat is high in omega 6 ;)

Livamol and omega 3's in the diet. Best addressed from the inside out for the best results.

This above. Agreed that if you have more than one dog in particular, social play with all and sundry other dogs is not necessary and not really 'natural' for a dog which in a more natural setting would stick to it's own pack. That said, 'socialisation' to me is not necessarily about play and more about how to act when another dog is around. To not react crazily, to ignore the other dog, to not bark at them, to not be 100% focussed on them, to not pull towards them ot drag their owners towards them etc etc. 'Socialisation' is not just about 'playing nice' but also about 'neutralisation' (as someone mentioned) and making sure your dog looks to you as the pack leader first before interacting with another dog. 'Controlled' contact with other dogs rather than the uncontrolled free for all of your average dog park is also a much better way to let your dog interact with other dogs IMO.

Basically a similar type of thing to a lamb or calf feeding station used for feeding poddy lambs/calves. Certainly saves time when feeding multiples of them! This is the first time I have seen them for pups though.

There are many views on diet and you will find many threads here with information. Some people believe in a raw diet (such as myself), others feed a mixed diet and others feed just commercial foods. You will need to do your own research to decide what you personally feel is best for your dogs. At the moment though I would probably be consulting with your breeder on what you are feeding your puppy. Whereabouts on the male are the hotspots forming. Is it always in the same place? What are you feeding him? Diet can sometimes have an influence. Stress can come in many forms too and yes, in a dog prone to them aften a change such as you going away can sometimes help to bring them on. There will always be an underlying cause though. Hot spots tend to form on a 'place of weakness' and if they are recurring in the one spot can sometimes indicate that there is some kind of 'weakness' at that point. Sometimes a bone or joint problem for instance or some other underlying condition. Sometimes treatments such as Chiro or addressing joint issues can help in the long term for not only the underlying issue but the hot spots as well. I note that you say there are little patches of hair missing on both of the dogs. Without a picture can't say what it is but if concerned get it checked in case it is demodex.

Yes, VERY easy to teach a pup not to pull on a collar from the get go. Simply teach it that it does not go forward (or anywhere) when the lead is tight by stopping and standing still when it does. The pup then never actually learns to pull in the first place. It learns that to walk the lead stays loose. Much easier to do this from the beginning than have to later teach the pup NOT to pull (or rather un-teach the bad habit of pulling) once it has learnt to do it. Anyway - back on topic. Another recommendation for callicoma, though agree too that often you will find smaller un-stretchy collars in some of the cheaper places like the $2 shops or k-mart etc.

Has she checked out the breed page for GSD on DOL? A pretty good starting point ;) There should also be links there to GSD breed club websites I would think which is another good place to look for contacts.