Erny

I don't understand the thread title. "Dog Failed Vomiting Behaviour" :D . I think if the attempts to vomit have been continuing for 2-3 months, the situation deserves more investigation than what is indicated as having been given.

I couldn't agree with that at all. I think BB's point was well taken prior to that and I don't recall anyone disagreeing with his point about the need for training in order to truly rehabilitate a chronic leash puller. Fair enough, if you see it that way Aidan. I don't though - I think some of what he was trying to make a point of was fairly quickly dismissed/ignored. And if anyone has the right of response (ie :D) to BB, I think you have (and did). But others rounding in and/or talking about him making his own fan club of which he'll be the only fan is not only unproductive but unnecessary.

PPCollars (aka "pinch" or "prong" collars) are actually very fine training tools/aids. Can you point me to where the use of a PPCollar is illegal in WA? My understanding is that the only place it is banned (pretty much in the World) is here, in Victoria. I acknowledge that there might be some Club/Association policies that won't allow their use on their grounds, but that doesn't make the collar illegal. In the past I have seen and accomplished some very fine work with some very fine and astounding results with the use of the PPCollar and have regarded its use in many cases to have been more humane than the use of the other of the tools that people might have opted for beforehand.

What are the different nutritional needs of an adult wolf by comparison to the nutritional needs of an adult domesticated dog?

What template was that one, Kateshep? It might have been one that I sent out via NDTF, but I can't see it on the website you've linked me to. If it gets (polite) letters/emails to the Government and links to either the "GoodforDogs" response (copy/paste is ok if you prefer - depending on the forum rules there) or "LawyersforAnimals" response, then that's fine. I've done at least two templates, and certainly a few of my own letters, so now I'm getting a bit hazy on which one people are talking about. Perhaps you're referring to the one where I ask a list of questions? If so, that's ok too. :D The more the merrier. Numbers. That's what we need. Come on Victorians. I know we can do it. And if we don't, it shouldn't be for the lack of trying.

BB's response where it leant towards personal attack was not warranted, I agree, and it's not the way to converse. But it seemed to me that Aidan had that well enough in hand and others simply ganging up and being irrelevantly nasty isn't the way to deal with it, nor was needed for the sake of the thread conversation. I also think that BB's messages even before that were very quickly and totally discounted by some who were becoming very fast on the reactive rebound.

I so agree with this. There are so many people out there who, for whatever the reason (saving money by DIY attempts; or other reasons, perhaps) experiment through the range of available training tools. One doesn't work so they try the next and the next and the next. When frustration kicks in and the range of training tool options begin to diminish, they call in a trainer with the expectations and high hopes the trainer will have the dog responding to the (whatever) training tool that's been tried before. Often it is a matter of the training tool not having been used correctly and we can still achieve some really good results when it is. But also, often, the dog has been desensitised and learnt to resist, which dulls their responses beyond what they ordinarily should be. The dulled responses and resistance isn't the fault of the trainer and the mediocre results early in the piece can sometimes be somewhat disappointing. That's because we not only have to teach the dog new behaviours, but we have so much undoing of learnt behaviour to do and it's the latter that slows down progress. The same applies with training methods which aren't administered properly and/or consistently.

Thanks for the *bumps*. I'm only hoping that people just haven't become bored with seeing it and are therefore ignoring it. If we can get another two or three people to send in their (even very basic, two lined) letters/emails through to the MP's tomorrow, it would be great, as that will prove to Govt that the subject is still very much alive and in our minds, and that we are very much observing the Govt's responses and actions.

BB has his points to make. Some of them I think have been misunderstood. Some I agree with. Some I don't. But then I view many posts from different people in the same way. Everyone's entitled and I think the above is a bit nasty and that people are tending to gang and jump a bit too much and easily.

In my experience, I find there are less people who become subconsciously dependant upon correction collars (especially PPCollars) than they do head collars. I am only presuming this might be because they are more aware of the correction collars - maybe because of how they look (high example being the PPCollar) and that they are concerned about their dogs getting a correction. With the head collars, I have seen many more people apply corrections without a great deal of thought nor concern (other than, perhaps, that their dog isn't 'listening'). That's just my observation and assumption though. I don't rush up to every person I see round and about and ask them what they think they're doing (although there are times I am tempted, LOL). I don't see that many people using harnesses (other than standard car harness - and then wondering why their dog pulls), so I can't comment from observation on those, but I could imagine it being similar.

I have used the "stabilising collar" (aka "dominant dog collar") once or twice. It is VERY effective. But it is for different purposes than LLW and there is no way I would want, suggest or recommend it be used by anyone without instruction. It is very quick and only takes a small movement. It does work to alter the dog's focus from (say) wanting to eat the other dog to wanting to breathe. But it is not something I use a lot as I prefer to work other methods (distance; positive associations; etc) first. IMO it is more for the 'hard core' belief dogs. And as I said, it isn't something you 'toy' with just to 'try it out'. Steve (K9 Pro) has had more experience with these than I and I'm sure he would be able to more confidently support or contradict my opinion.

I agree - it doesn't occur very often. I've seen it (first hand) once. And I must say that when you see it, you don't forget it in a hurry. Being anthropomorphic just so I can create an image in the minds of those reading, it struck me that it would be as though in such a dark place of despair one might almost prefer not to be alive. It is vastly different to a dog who just protests to it by laying down and refusing to budge. Those dogs still have expression in their eyes and they are still 'of this world'.

I'm a bit more cynical than that - I don't have faith in what the abstract tells us. That's why I'd like to read the full study. I've got pictures of dogs wearing head collars - bucking; rearing; scraping; pawing (and the lead isn't attached to the head collar yet). Even now, re-looking at them - seeing the dogs' eyes; body postures - I cannot accept those dogs are not stressing. I'm afraid I can't put the pictures up here as much as I'd like to so that everyone could see, but I do not have the owner's permission to do so. Not arguing with you on that score so much, I am simply being a Doubting Thomas - only for the fact that the abstract conclusion might well be right in direct correlation to the circumstances of the study, but how would we know that unless the study could be read as a whole? I actually find many people would prefer not to use them. In part because the desensitisation/introduction process is too much mucking around for their liking and also because they don't like to see their dogs rolling around and being so distracted by the mere wearing of them.

Yes - it makes sense, SK. I think we're both on the same page there. Something might be "easier" for one of the combination (ie handler or dog) but not necessarily the best for both handler AND dog.

I'm not professing to be an expert either, but I can tell you that because of my work where I am predominantly working dogs to my left, it is influencing my skeletal structure and I have needed a bit more chiropractic care than I have in the past. So the head to one side might not cause an obvious neck injury, but constant walking to one way or the other can affect everything else and lead to skeletal imbalance. Maybe I should take up Rugby and cop a few knocks to put my body back where it ought to be! (or maybe you can trip on over and do your Bowen Therapy stuff! ) ETA: I have seen a couple of dogs (small sample size by comparison to the rest of dogs in head collars, I know) who, when walking with their owners (albeit VERY nicely on a loose lead) 'crabbing' (not tracking true from front to back). It was apparent to me visually that the crabbing stemmed from the dog's head placement, which was level but consistently angled in towards the owners. Well, it wasn't actually that the neck was so much turned in - it was (in each case) a little bit, but more that the dog's body was pointed in at a slight angle to the owner's left leg. Consequently the dogs were walking forward at an angle. It's the "until the dog learns" phase that bothers me, taking into account novice handler at the other end of the leash. Sample size and also prior experience of dogs to either or both of the collar types compared, as well as prior training experience and temperament type. Even though it is written in the abstract too much is missing from it and I'm finding it difficult to believe that even if a dog is struggling/pawing/scraping at the head collar, that there is no more physiological stress occurrence than if it wasn't. Can't argue it one way or the other unless the full study can be read. ETA: Don't get me wrong - there's a place for head-collars. But they aren't the be all and end all for every dog. They aren't the "best". The "best" is what suits the dog; the owner; the circumstance and the environment each are in on a day to day basis and what produces the results sought efficiently and with the over all least amount of stress and with the least amount of potential harm.

What's an "ECC" Nurse? Pardon my ignorance. I'm thinking "Emergency something or other". I'm sure it will be obvious once you tell me. I query literature and its source because sometimes one can find the info comes from the drug manufacturers who of course have vested interest. Regardless, I like to know that important information such as this (ie that would encourage the continual use of drug administration) IS backed with science. Unnecessary drug administration is not good for any animal.

Agree - although all things being equal, if there were another method/tool which the owner could use equally as well and which could produce less stress in that dog and have the dog gain the same, then that's what I'd go for. So the more important factor IMO would be about finding that tool/method. I think you'd agree with this anyway, Cosmolo. I believe I understand where you were coming from with the above.

Actually, in Melbourne, it can be for almost the full year. It's not that often we have temps 14C and above for at least 2 weeks or more (including night time temps) in one constant run. I think it did occur in March/April when we had that "Indian Summer" type weather. It would be good to see where the information you have chosen to rely on is actually coming from, and the studies that back it up. I know you said you don't have it but will try to source it out. Thanks .

I'd like to read the full text, Aidan. Is it available somewhere where I don't have to register/pay for it? Not enough info in the "abstract" for me.

Proving a negative can in some circumstances be impossible if not darn difficult and impractical. And personally, even if anyone wanted to try, I'd hate to see the experiments that would need to take place to prove this, because you would have to TRY to cause harm to see if it was possible.

There are reports on injuries from head collars, but they are anecdotal. Thing is, the neck injury might not be evident straight away, so the link to how the neck injury was caused can only be deduced. There are pictures of skin abrasion injury from fighting the head collar. And I know of self-injury cases (first hand) where dogs have scratched themselves; rubbed; etc to the point of skin trauma.

Let them come, though, SBT123. If something is the ultimate "right" then debate will always win out. And people reading will learn through that debate, even if some of the anti-breeder/anti-pedigree posters don't (although even some of those might change their minds or at least begin to recognise and understand points of view from 'the other side'. To clarify my point : As most of you are aware, I have campaigned against the current Victorian law which bans the use of PPCollars. Won't go into the 'why I think they shouldn't be banned' as that's not relevant here. BUT, as a result of the campaign and that I have publicly advocated PPCollars, I have been refused renewed membership by the APDT. That's their prerogative, but how is that going to help them work to convert me to their views? If their view was foolproof and the absolute "right" then they'd be able to very clearly and strongly debate against any of the 'argument' I put up in favour of the PPCollar. But instead, I was refused entry and invite to their various seminars by the very refusal of membership. That is hardly going to produce a convert. And even if it didn't - IF they are so "right", then they shouldn't be concerned about me .

I have always upheld that "banning" not only doesn't solve anything, it depletes an information source. DOL is a fantastic place for dog lovers and enthusiasts to come and learn. In the meantime, it is an opportunity to promote pure breeds and educate as to the reasons why. Nothing much gained if we can only speak to the already converted (and that relates to ANY topic).

The mosquito might survive, but it's whether the development of the heart worm can continue. And by all accounts, from what I've read, it is dependant upon 2 weeks straight to temps not below 14C. Yeah - it's the balance between risk of infection from outside source and risk of detrimental health affect by the certainty of regular drug administration. As an aside, I was informed that heart worm medication is based on Cockroach Bate. Obviously a watered down and altered version, if that is at all correct. But still. It would be a necessary evil for those areas with climates that most suit heartworm larvae development. But it is something I'd rather avoid if I could and as I mentioned, all my readings have shown it to be temperature dependant. Thank you - I'd like to read that.

That's interesting, BD. My understanding (from reading) has been that for the heartworm larvae to develop to an infectious stage, it needs to develop inside a mosquito for 14 days while the outside temp is above 14 degrees Celsius. Apparently once the temp falls below 14 degrees, the development is aborted and has to start over. What Veterinary research has shown differently? Are you able to supply a link?