W T
-
Posts
46 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by W T
-
-
35 minutes ago, Powerlegs said:
Then you don't have to adopt that dog.
Thank you - I wasn't so sure about this.
People forget that most mortals and organisations - and I guess rescues too - have to work on a budget. Now as a rescue you can spend a lot of the available budget on a 9 year old sick dog, or you get him euthanized and spend the money saved on vet bills etc. on 10 other dogs that are in a better shape and have a better outlook.
This thread wouldn't have been opened if there wouldn't be some pressure from outside on rescues re this adoption fee, and I believe this pressure would be less if the quality of the dogs in question would justify the price. However, if people - count me in - get the feeling that a lot of money is spent on dogs that might be better euthanized (dare that I say this) those people will be likely less supportive. The odd saying "you get what you pay for" definitely doesn't match the pricing policy of some rescues.
-
1 hour ago, Thistle the dog said:
I think people making comments like that are basically saying they don’t think the dog is “worth” that much.
Personally I think getting a health checked desexed fed assessed dog for that price is a bargain!!! Thank you!!!
you are assuming - and believe it or not, paying $ 350 or more for a health?-checked 9 year old blind and deaf dog, that is also on drugs, isn't a bargain for everyone.
-
this is a pure breed forum?
now, pure breed is for many dog owners linked somehow to quality. And the term quality is often used by breeders to justify the price for the dog, and I guess there is nothing wrong with it.
However, if I see the quality of some dogs (age, blind, deaf, on medications etc.) advertised for adoption, IMO it is understandable that people interested in these kind of dogs might think that the adoption fee asked for is too high.
-
16 minutes ago, Boronia said:
That is a silly statement WT, this has nothing to do with any back yard breeder, Rural Pug is just talking about rescue so by extrapolating RP's statement to a dog being euthanased when surrendered from a BYB is stretching it.
silly? - maybe an inconvenient question. If rescues don't differentiate between dogs from "BYB" and "non-BYB", thus providing an convenient outlet / surrendering option for BYB: don't they support the system too like anyone who buys directly from a BYB?
Eta: or, in other words: what differences are there re someone having to pay an "adoption fee" compared to buying the dog - for perhaps less money - from a BYB? yes, the BYB will get the money, but on the other side there is also no work for the rescue involved. For the dog it might be better to find a new owner without much detours. And as long as BYB can conveniently get rid of unsellable stock by just surrendering the dog nothing will change anyway.
-
problem is that cuteness blinded owners like to think that if the airlines allow it (thanks god most airlines banned these breeds now or put heavy restrictions in place) it should be alright. Those owners just don't want to know and accept the flaws and limitations wrt be fit for life those breeds have.
-
1 hour ago, Boronia said:
If the dog suits and the new owner's love it they will pay the cost
is this also valid if this dog was surrendered by a BYB who couldn't sell it because people interested in buying it have been shot down in flames for attempting to buy from an unethical breeder? if the answer is NO: that means every surrendered dog with a BYB history has to be euthanized? if the answer is YES: why get people shot down in flames if they don't stick to the detour of surrendering and adoption?
-
On 3/04/2018 at 10:35 AM, Rebanne said:
Nup, all they are doing is making space for more and more dogs to be bred there. By buying from someone that even the OP thinks is dodgy they are supporting an unethical breeder, they are enabling them to keep breeding.
Well, you could buy the dog directly from the "BYB", or you could wait till the dog gets surrendered so you can "buy" it from the pound - what difference does it really make? If you use this benchmark, shelters shouldn't take dogs too, or only in cases where it is verified that the dog wasn't from a "BYB".
-
8 hours ago, Hyrevere said:
I have a 4 month old Kelpie who eats rocks. I found several in her poo and the vet booked her in to do some bloods. In the week between seeing the vet and the appointment, she started vomiting at least once per day, but did not show any other symptoms. The vet suggested an xray and found a large rock that she doubted would pass through her intestine and put her straight into surgery. Since the surgery, I have been watching her closely. She has picked up at least 5 decent sized rocks (which I managed to get out before she swallowed them). I am unable to remove all of the rocks from her environment and she is inside and when outside on a lead and watched closely.
She has no mineral deficiencies, but is a bit low on protein so that will be remedied, however, there is no reason for her to be eating the rocks. I have seen her pick up rocks after a long play in the park on the way to get a drink, immediately after getting out of the car as we go to work and whilst playing with my other dog, so I can't say that it is boredom. She is in the office with me during the day and sleeps most of the time. She plays with my other dog in the morning and after work we normally go to the dog park for an hour long play with other dogs. I also walk her for around 15-30 mins every second day. We have attended puppy preschool and were enrolled for classes at the obedience club (this has been put off due to the surgery). I do small training sessions with her 2-3 times a day. She is hopeless with recall and runs away from me particularly when she has something in her mouth.
So far my ideas are muzzle (preventing her picking up the rocks), halti (able to turn her away from the rock) and training. Obviously, I need a short term fix now, so suggestions on which muzzle (baskerville or jafco) to get would be appreciated. Also, any suggestions on long term solutions would be appreciated.
Thanks
There might well be a reason - do you feed your dog bones so he can use his first teeth and prepare his jaws for the next ones (he is just 1-2 month away getting his real ones)? With 4 month they normally chew everything they can get ... door frames, shoes, roots etc. The less access they have to bones the more they will chew other things - and that is normal, they have to train their jaws and associated muscles for their later life. Give him some briskets and very likely he will start preferring these instead of boring rocks.
-
University of Sydney biologist Rick Shine, who has studied snakes and their behaviour for more than 30 years, said he was “sceptical” of snake deterrents.
“The ones that have been investigated to my knowledge have been completely ineffective,” Prof Shine said.
“Of the products I’ve seen advertise, they mostly just generate entertainment for the scientists who study the biology of snakes.”
The team from the Curtin University Behavioural Ecology group in Perth have just kicked off the first-ever Australian study into the effectiveness of both vibrating and chemical snake repellents.
I tried to find the study this article refer to (article is from 2015, so should be done by now), but couldn't find it.
-
52 minutes ago, PossumCorner said:
WT - possibly in SA but and we are in Vic and whether it comes under local or federal legislation or falls down a crack like so many things, Councils in Vic do not do that, nor do their employed Rangers. Nor do vets. It is up to the catcher of the fox to arrange despatch. If the local Council are helpful that is a plus but not a given.
Thanks for the heads-up - makes you wonder for what we pay taxes; nevertheless found this: http://agriculture.vic.gov.au/agriculture/pests-diseases-and-weeds/pest-animals/fox-bounty
so with even a bounty for each fox it might be easier to find someone from a local shooting or hunting club? hm, maybe not for just $10; $ 10 for a fox, but $ 120 for a wild dog, looks like they don't rate the damage of a fox as very high.
-
17 hours ago, PossumCorner said:
On euthanasing a trapped fox, I'd be amazed if any vet would do it, best to check first. All I've known of have refused. How would they - it's not as if they can hold it for an injection even like a cranky cat. The usual thing is a local farmer with a gun, someone with a bit of experience. Could be something helpful on the backyard poultry forum, but I would not even mention it on any of the fb pages, it just incites the stupids to foam at the mouth and pass on tenth generation anecdotes.
re killing a trapped fox: they are a declared pest in Victoria, hence all you have to do - if you can't shoot it yourself - call the local ranger, by law they have to take care of it.
-
4 hours ago, gillybob said:
Sounds like a bit of an advertisement for repellers to me.
you know they must do a good job if they are sold in NZ https://www.trademe.co.nz/home-living/outdoor-garden-conservatory/gardening-landscaping-supplies/other/auction-1582966560.htm
-
4
-
-
a Justin Biber CD might give you the same results
https://thydzik.com/review-of-crow-away-it-doesnt-work/
-
26 minutes ago, PossumCorner said:
Oh cats and hot wires - same with your dogs and chooks, they'll generally only need the one hit to keep them off it, no harm done, just a helluva fright. Some egg producers with free range paddocks use them, just one wire at normal fence top. The chooks only try to fly over once and give the idea away.
it is not so easy: no earth no shock. That's also the problem with the foxes: if this one wire is too low, they just jump over it, to high and they try to sneak under it. When they jump and touch the wire, and have no contact with the ground, nothing happens. Hence the electric fence design for fox safe enclosures requires a special netting with more wires (multiple hot and multiple earth wires) and that is why they are pretty expensive, especially if you have to cover a wider area. And they can kill smaller birds that accidently touch hot and earth at the same time. They can happily sit on a hot wire as long as they don't touch the earth (which is pretty much impossible with a single hot wire design), but because of the narrow gap between hot and earth wires they might find themselves on an electrical chair.
-
modell 12 - 108 x 40 x 45 cm is a decent size, and even foldable.The bigger the better.
I would use a little bit bedding from the chicken coop, perhaps a broken egg, and something like a chicken neck, or a sardine. Always anchor the trap (e.g. with large tent pegs) so they can't push it around, and train to setup the trap before you place it.
-
evil bay, crazysales, farm markets - of course it is not a final solution, but the ones you catch won't kill your chicken. If you apply a fox trapping regime with 2 - 3 traps you move regularly along the circumferences of your premises you likely would get them before they get your chickens. Still cheaper and less work than buying, feeding and training a guard dog.
-
@OP: for a fraction of the costs of a good guard dog and without further running costs you could buy a live fox trap (approx. AU$ 100) - if you catch another animal by accident you can set it free, if it's a fox you can kill it humanely.
There also "crow" traps, but that's another animal (literally
) as "crows" are native (but not every black bigger bird is a crow) so legally you are not allowed to kill them.
-
14 hours ago, Ingrid and chips said:
https://eng.lsm.lv/article/society/health/toxic-substance-found-in-dog-food.a247068/
this has happened before... in Latvia
ah, urea - it is dosed to corn and soya in stockfood to increase the growth rate for herbivores, but it is toxic for cats and dogs. That could be a plausible cause: high corn ratio in Advance Dermocare combined with a cheap source for corn that was meant for stock food.
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, Bushriver said:
Thanks for the advice. Yes I would plan to only kill enough in one day to feed that day (if that makes sense?). I was thinking that the content of the guts and organs would make it a balanced meal.
yes, as long as it is the gut from a herbivore (gut from a carnivore has a much higher risk of germs / bugs / parasites that are infectious for dogs) and as long as it is really fresh. However, once the organism / animal is dead, the gut becomes septic in a very short time, and pending on the injury that caused the death and if you wait too long, matter from the gut might leak into offal and muscle tissue contaminating it.
-
1
-
-
there is a lot of corn in Advance Dermocare: http://www.petfoodreviews.com.au/dry-dog-food/advance-dermocare/ and then this: https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/05/20/glyphosate-roundup-levels.aspx, and then the video - there might be indeed more in it than just pre-caution.
-
I would expect any other health issue caused by kibble, but megaesophagus? How could this be linked to kibble? sounds weird.
Eta: just noticed that another thread re this recall popped up in General Discussions - so this post can be deleted.
-
2 hours ago, Dogsfevr said:
You would certainly want to watch Roo ,they are full of worms
it is actually not too bad, from all the roadkill (I only take wallabies and roos) I butchered, only one had hydatid cysts - I prepare portion with bones, tendons, meat and offal (I take the offal only if it is a fresh kill) and freeze it for at least a week and check that the temperature is lower than minus 20 deg C). I understand that this is not an option for the OP (no cold storage).
Re legality: You would also need a licence for hunting roos as they are natives conversely to ducks and rabbits.
Re hydatid: most of the basic de-wormers (the ones with praziquantel) work also for hydatid worms, and if you feed raw, a more stringent de-worming regime is advisable anyway.
Eta:
@Bushriver : if you only skin them without gutting, your really have to feed them immediately to your dogs! Otherwise the carcass starts rotting immediately.
-
hydatid worms shouldn't be a problem in ducks and rabbits, so freezing shouldn't be required (WHO states minus 20 deg C for 2 days - I do this for roadkill), however pending on how you hunt (bow, traps, birdshot) birdshot can be a problem and can cause lead poisoning.
-
1 hour ago, Kelpieboy said:
With all due respect to you gillybob but I can only go on the evidence I have seen in regards snake repellers. They are only described as repellers and not stoppers and should be treated as such. If used in conjuction with various other measures and as part of an overall scheme to repel snakes from a certain space then they can be effective. That is what my personal experience and visible evidence is showing me. We removed habitat and food/water sources , made the land as open as possible , grass is kept short , dogs food and water is inside the house..........we did it all and still snakes appeared although in greatly reduced numbers until we put the shakers in the ground. Maybe they were the tipping point for the snakes , on top of the rest of our measures , they decided to avoid the area. Who knows how a snake thinks about such things.
If you fail to remove the habitat and especially a food source then almost nothing will deter/repel a snake determined to get to a food/water source.
Now you may like snakes so good for you , me not so much. I guess with a 1/4 acre block you either live in a city or a town so snakes aren't all that common when compared to the bush so your attitude to them is understandable. I on the other hand live on a 25 acre setting in amongst thousands of acres of farm/ grazing land that is just cherry ripe for the brownie and they are here in large numbers. In the bush good luck to you snakey boy , go for your life but you come onto my land and be seen then your lifespan is measured in seconds and I make no apologies to anyone for that attitude. I have lost too much to them in the past to have a live and let live attitude , especially the brown.
You describe snakes as shy , yes to an extent most are but some like the brownie or the Taipan are certainly not shy especially when young. Fight or flight is the way of things and too many times have I seen these type of snakes , when young , take the first option almost immediately. Mature snakes are a different kettle of fish and will usually take the second option if possible.
It should also be remembered that at various times of the spring to autumn seasons snakes will react differently. Early on they are very hungry and will become aggressive easily , same in late summer/autumn where the dual function for snakes is to hunt for the winter hibernation coupled with breeding season. At these times even the lazy RBB can become quite feisty very quickly.
Now as for the vibrating snake repellers , do they work or not ? My evidence says that used as part of a defensive system then they are effective in the role they are designed for , others may find that not to be the case although I would suggest that some people might think merely by deploying these devices that they are safe from snakes. However I don't believe it is my place or yours gillybob to state categorically that they do or don't work. I f someone feels that deploying them as a part of a defensive system then who are you gillybob to say not to , same as its not my place to say to use them.
Sorry mate, but they don't work, and here is why:
they claim to send out vibration that would alarm the snake to move away. Now, it is somehow true that most snakes will try to get away if you stamp your feet on the ground thus generating some kind of vibration (like a little local earthquake); snakes are very sensible and can recognize from the energy that results in those vibration that you are just too big to be on their food list, and that it might be even dangerous for themselves to get too close to the center of this little "earthquake".
Now consider the energy that is required for you to walk (and stamping your food on the ground): you have to move and carry actually your own weight. Now I don't know how big you are, lets talk about a person that has 70 kg. To get some understanding how much energy is needed for moving a 70 kg body just imagine that you have to carry this body for a while on your shoulders and I guess we can agree that this is a very exhausting exercise. Now every tool / device that would have to simulate a person walking would require to deliver a similar amount of energy - and that is where these gadgets fail: just hold one in you hand and feel their vibrating energy and compare it with having a 70 kg heavy person sitting on your shoulder - the energy (in form of vibration) those device send out is by far not comparable with the energy required to carry / move a 70 kg body. Maybe it could simulate - if it is a bigger one - the energy of a small mouse, but mostly it will be something with the size of a cockroach, so the likelihood that they attract snakes is actually bigger as those vermin is actually on their food list.
If you still have your invoices you will get your money back as selling them is fraud. Maybe write to ACCC - snakes can be a serious problem and claiming that those gadget protect you and your family from snakes can be close to manslaughter.
-
1
-
Adoption fee "too expensive"
in Dog Rescue (General Rescue Discussion)
Posted
I'm not against rescue! But IMHO there shouldn't be a double quality standard re dogs offered from "BYB" and dogs offered from rescues! Offering - no matter from whom!!! - dogs with all kind of issues as described above doesn't do the dog world a favor.