Erny

By "float their teeth" (I've not heard that term) you mean file their teeth? As in, the normal and regular care maintenance thing that we do? I never knew that the horse was now meant to be sedated . I have a horse who stands patiently having sharp corners of his molar teeth filed smooth. He doesn't wear a gag for the job. No twitches. Nada. I'm now supposed to sedate him? WTF?

I've heard that from somewhere else, too. Really stokes you full of confidence, doesn't it?

If a snub lead would 'do it' (sounds to me the dog needs training more than a snub lead), you can make one from an old lead by cutting it short and knotting it.

That's why I often think it will take a Class Action to be able to stand up to them. But I don't know much about Class Action. I think that's where there is ONE wrong action by (eg) the RSPCA that affects many. I suppose that in their case, they nip one person off at a time and each event would have slightly if not wholly different circumstances, so I guess each one would need to be seen by the Courts on each individual merit, one by one. Does Statute of Limitations apply in cases where people allege they have been wronged by (eg) the RSPCA?

You could almost insert "RSPCA" in place of "SPCA" in this paragraph. The article you raise has rings of similarities to Judy's case too, does it not? Is that our Aussie law? IE That if commonwealth resources would be imperilled it means you can't sue? Or, conversely, that if Commonwealth resources would NOT be imperilled, it means you CAN sue?

If there are no warning labels to suggest otherwise, and as it says "non-toxic", I could only presume this would relate to pets as well. I used Scotts Lawn Builder, watered it in well over a couple of days and made sure that my dog was not obsessed about licking it up. It didn't seem to cause him any harm. For that matter, I'm not even sure that he ingested any, as he simply didn't seem that interested in it. But you could try emailing the company to ask if you would like more certainty.

Eeeewwweeeee !! That's tall !! You obviously ate your wheatbix when you were preggers with him LOL. Good thing he doesn't live in Victoria. Walking dogs on a 1 metre lead would do him skeletal harm.

Nope, Kitty. I think they are genuine concerns.

Hhhhhmmm ..... I spot an opening for a new invention. "EXTENDER ARMS !!!! " Will make a mint. Until they ban them. In Victoria, of course.

Found this link in the Health Forum : Scotts Lawn Builder Look at the label for "Precautionary statements". This is usually in a small rectangle that contains small graphical representations of both kids and pets. If you have product questions Scotts experts are available by email : Scotts Contact Us page

Yep. We need a dog lobby group.

I walk my dog on a 1.75m length lead. In more densely populated areas (eg. mainstream streets where people walk past) I fold my lead to the desired length suitable for that situation. But by the letter of this law, I could be nabbed. Restriction to a 1 metre length lead is not going to solve anything. BUT with that law, the ranger doesn't have to catch irresponsible dog owners with their unruly, ineffectively controlled dogs. All they have to do is ask to measure your lead and you can be done. I have always been opposed to extender leads. More for training reasons, than anything else. There are already laws in place which set a minimum distance at which you can bring your dog near playgrounds (I think it is 20m). So the 1metre dog lead rule is irrelevant in that instance. If I walked a swf (or sbf for that matter ) on a one metre length lead, I'd be part way stooped over and/or the lead would have a permanent tension on it (or I'd need to hold my arm uncomfortably outstretched). ETA: And Anniek, it's the whole thing about ban after ban after ban after .......

At least something about it made me laugh .... if even it was only your comment, Steve. (ETA Love that emoticon ) Even then, my laughter is tinged with the sad fact that the thought of evacuation has crossed my mind a few times due to the ridiculous regulations the politicians/councillors have seen fit to put through. What the heck is wrong with them? Too much sun on their heads? Dang this Global Warming. Hey Steve. Ya got a room for me and my dog? ETA: And my 1.75 metre length lead?

Dog Law a Little Short on Logic | Herald-Sun And, ummmm ..... yet another brainless Victorian regulation is voted in by those who are obviously NOT in the know. A one metre length lead law is supposedly going to solve dog behaviour issues. Right. Sure. Could someone please convince me? It's not April Fool's Day today, is it? We've already got an "effective control" law. Why don't they police that one? No - it is going to be easier to nab people for their more than one metre length lead regardless of their dog's behaviour, good as that behaviour may well be. Sheesh.

As PF says .... some will dominate because (a) they believe they can AND (b) because they think the other dog gives them a reason to (eg. because their own position might be questioned if they don't). Some other dogs pick on the more submissive dogs because they are the ones they know they can dominate, so they like to 'put their stamp', so to speak.

You soon might not need to bother. Because RSPCA (Victoria)'s "Priority Wishlist" includes banning the use of "aversion therapy" and "positive punishment" in dog training. Now, just have a think about what "aversion therapy" would and could include. The list would be endless.

It's nothing to do with sexuality. It is a dominance posturing by the other dogs. Some dogs particularly attract that.

Sorry - not a clue. Perhaps car dealers might be able to refer you?

I am heart heavy for you DBS, and very sorry for your loss of McGuinness. RIP McGuinness, and join all our heart and soul dogs who frolic on the otherside of the bridge, waiting for that time that eventually befalls us all when we are reunited once again. It is so, so hard to say goodbye, but if we wait patiently it will make that final and everlasting "hello" so overwhelmingly joyous.

I don't have that style of vehicle, but if I was opting for one I would prefer to have the canopy for the sense of security for my dog/s it would give me. You can get those hot air extractors (the ones that swirl around with the breeze/wind) which would help to cool the canopy area. But ventilation (windows) would be a necessity. I've been told of this type of vehicle arrangement but where the gap between canopy and cabin was sealed, with the rear cabin window converted to a sliding window. Allowed access (even if verbal only) to the dogs and some of the a/con from the cabin to the canopy. Don't know how effective the latter would be though. And I'd imagine it would be a tad expensive to have modified to this.

It perhaps wouldn't hurt to visit your local library (or google) and see if you can identify the mushroom/toadstool variety that you have. Not all of them are 'bad' but I admit that in the absence of knowing, I tend to treat them that way until I find out otherwise. Toadstools often pop up when the drainage in the soil isn't great (or sometimes when there's been fertiliser/top soil brought in, carrying the spores). If you have a clay base, that could be a part of the problem and adding some gypsum to the soil might help break down the clay and improve drainage. That's pretty much all I know on the topic, but if you visit "Off Topic" forum and seek out Horus (DOL Member/Garden Guru) you are likely to get a more informed answer from him. Or maybe google for some results.

Well done, Spottychick. You have and are going beyond the call of duty in your help for this woman (and obviously for the dog, being the main reason). You've handled the situation really well, by all accounts, and I do hope you've managed to be the catalyst for an improved lifestyle for this dog. Cheers and I wish you much good karma for all the good you are doing. Whether this lady ends up being true to her word or not (and of course for the dog's sake we would all hope she does), you've done your darndest and for all the right, good and heartfelt compassionate reasons. Good for you. You're a

Thank you 2tollers. I didn't want anyone feeling as thought their suggestions were being rejected out of hand. They very much aren't and the great thing is that I do have the Dermatologist route to travel down if it turns out that he has another flare up. I don't know how complex your son's allergies are, but I have had success through the Advanced Allergy Clinic (they have one in most States I think). Of all things, I had become allergic to dogs and my difficulty was that there were times when I couldn't see for the tears that would blur my vision. Not to mention that it was a dang sight interruptive having to stop every 15 seconds to blow your nose, when you were in the midst of training someone's dog for them and that the skin around my nose would end up red raw and sore (not to mention not a pretty sight). My allergy was considered, by the specialist, to not be servere enough to warrant desensitisation. The symptoms weren't so much taken into account as my skin test results were and for that, for some reason, it was not a huge reaction. I was given cortisone based nasal spray, but this resulted in giving me some pretty big nose bleeds, not to mention that it didn't help the allergy. I visited the Advanced Allergy Clinic and had their non-invasive treatment (which was actually quite pleasant, and I asked them to keep going ) and from that point on my allergy symptoms were no longer triggered by dogs.

Guys, I really appreciate your views and the fact that you're taking the time to try to help me. Please know that. There are some things I'd like to clear up and that I'm mentioning in response to a few different comments from a few different posts. You've obviously guessed I don't like using chemicals if I don't have to. Of course, none of us do. My hesitation is heightened because Mandela's brother had same symptoms - his owners went the AB's and Cortisone route and it didn't make any difference. In fact, I think with him the hives kept returning on a faster cycle than Mandela's do. Maybe that was just him. I don't know. Mandela is not an unhappy, miserable dog. Sure - at the worst of it, it is obviously not comfortable and I do have the issue with the putting on weight and him going off food. I'm not ignoring that and I hope no-one thinks that I am. But the cycle of hives and food issues would be roughly 4 weeks (in amongst that time there are days when appetite is good). Then he can go for 6 or 7 months looking and feeling fine, with no appetite or hive issues. What's happening now has occurred twice in total. It has not been his whole life. He larks around both at the parks we go to and also at home. I realise that I would not be forced by the Dermotologist to go onto medication. But I know that it would only give me something else to toss and turn about, wondering if I'm doing the right or wrong thing either way I decide. I am momentarily in avoidance of that. For the 'indecision' reason and also practicality. I am very much certain this bout of hives are on the way out. They appear smaller and I think a number have receded. He is more itchy with this latest batch of hives, but he is not incessantly itchy and he seems to be less itchy still over this last 24 hour period. (When he does get more itchy, the Calendula tea washes help to ease that.) If that's the case (as has been in the past) and they disappear altogether ........ and if they don't return (that's the hopeful side of things) then I'd have only spent the money on the Dermatologist for nothing. And if I did go ahead and follow through with whatever meds are suggested by the Dermatologist, I'd be doing that for nothing too. I am not turning my back on the idea of a Dermatologist consult. Nor am I turning my back on the idea that meds might be required. But given that I think this 'cycle' of him being symptomatic might have run its course (and hey, what if it is that the homeopathic and naturopathic meds have helped?) then what is the harm in waiting? It is still not all plain sailing just yet - that I know. But I've considered the suggestions here and I really do appreciate them. I'd like to give what I'm doing a chance because if this can right it (and the AB's and Cortisone for his bother did not) then I've done everything for his system to correct itself without me potentially upsetting the apple cart with the administration of chemicals. If what I'm doing does not right it, then the Dermatologist remains a route that I can address given that I would have tried much of most else (to my knowledge). If the only reason for going to see a Dermatologist right now was that Mandela's misery and quality of life needs addressing, then I don't think it is as urgent as some might be thinking, because he is happy and he is lively.

Me walking into the back yard. Very disappointing for him when it is only to pick up his poop. But he drops back out of drive once he sees that's exactly what I'm doing and all I'm there for.