Erny

That would do it. A move of home for any dog can have a big impact. Chances are your pup hasn't 'generalised' his training to the new home. Not to mention that it can upset the dynamics and the fact that your pup might again have become uncertain of his new environment (the 2nd one in his so far short life). Assuming the move was only recent? Hope everything is 'clear' at the Vet's.

I agree that it is always wise to get medical issue ruled out as a cause. Something I should have mentioned in my first post. Dancinbcs - Some breeders are excellent in "setting the scene" to help make house training easier for the pup's new owners when they are ready to leave the 'nest' so to speak. It does make a big difference. But not all do this. All the same, whilst I don't think it is impossible for a 16 week old pup to have been "house trained", to have that expectation is a bit unrealistic for many pups. But I'm glad you raised the "rule out health issue" as it does have the potential for being the cause for the pup's lapse in its toilet training. :D

As it is only a short time since he swallowed the bones, the feces he has passed would have been from digested food before he ingested the bones. I think the digestion process takes about 8 - 12 hours. Don't quote me on that though .

If they were uncooked it will most likely be ok. Dogs have very acidic gastric juices, which is why they are able to ingest bones in the first place. By the time it works its way through the system, there's a reasonable chance it will have been well broken down by then - at least sufficiently for it to safely be expelled the other end. Do watch for signs of discomfort/stress and/or difficulty with bowel movements, but otherwise if it were me I'd just wait it out.

I don't believe your pup is toilet trained. He might have been showing the right behaviour for it, but I doubt very much that he would have completely 'got it' at this early age. The problem when pups do seem to appear to have gotten the idea, humans tend to get a bit slack with their vigilance and that's often when things would appear to you to have "regressed". I don't know where you live, but in addition to the above it's quite possible that the cold weather is deterring your little one from feeling like going outside. Pups tend to need to toilet after play; after sleep; ..... and also after meals and also simply if they haven't been for a while. And then, when you finally have your pup 'getting' the idea and preference for 'going' outside, you need to work on the other additional element of teaching him that when the door is shut it doesn't mean that he should 'go' inside. Many tend to forget about this element of toilet training. Some pups are faster at toilet training than others. But even then, to claim "toilet trained" for a pup who's only been in our human world for a total of 16 weeks and of which probably only 8 weeks of which has been about not only training a behaviour but trying to get him to learn to control an immature bladder, I think is a little premature. So my advice would be to go back to the beginning of toilet training (you'll need to because he's 'learnt' to soil inside) and work up from there. Shouldn't take you quite as long to get to where your (ie his) last success was, because you've already made a start on it, but stay at that point and don't relax until he's proven himself with a bit more reliability. IMO "toilet trained" isn't something to be claimed until pup has had no accidents inside the house for a total period of 4 weeks in a row. Even when that is accomplished, you keep up the vigilance but you can begin to gradually relax over time.

Well done

That is actually looking miles better than I remember it looking in the last photo you put up. Glad the wound is on its way to healing.

Yes - it is somewhat "exxy" I agree. I have used it for the onset of Canine Cough which my boy had when he was younger. I didn't take him to the Vet and he did recover from the CC very quickly (symptoms disappeared completely within 2-3 days). This could have been because he only caught a mild strain, or it might have been because the AMH helped, or it could have been a combo of both reasons. But the cost of the AMH was no more than what it would have cost for a Vet consult (excluding any medications many Vets, I note, prescribe even in the absence of secondary complications). And it was a natural therapy . I keep AMH in the pantry. Lasts forever. It can be administered for a variety of applications and I can and do use it for myself as well .

I would think Sarcoma should be covered and would (dare to) assume that by "skin conditions" they mean things such as allergy reactions. Go ahead and claim. You'll find out then whether they'll honor the claim or not. Good luck. I would like to think the chances of a favourable outcome from your insurance should be high. And I hope your girl recovers well and that her ongoing treatment keeps and sees her in good health.

Or the fact that Canine Cough vaccine does not stop them from getting either of the two strains it vaccinates it for, nor the other numerous strains of cough it doesn't cover them for at all. Never heard of the "nine month" theory before.

The thought has crossed my mind too - more particularly for the improvement in the hives (less heat in his body). I think only time will tell on that one. One thing I have noticed is that he doesn't seem to feel the cold anywhere near as much as my previous RR girl (bless her cotton socks). Not that he doesn't feel it at all, but not half as much. But earlier in the piece, when it had first become quite cold, he seemed to reject any form of blanket covering. Now he seems to appreciate it a bit more. That could either be because his body heat was too high anyway (and maybe now less so) AND/OR because the blanket touching his skin irritated his hives (and not having them as bad now, it doesn't) AND/OR because the heat generated by the blanket irritated his hives. .... there remains question marks to numerous factors relating to his health and possibly will remain, given that none of the blood or other tests have revealed what the actual problem is. ETA: Giving this further thought though - Mandela's hive break-out began in May and worsened into June .... when the weather was cooling down/cold.

Anniek ..... thanks so much for thinking about us. I think we're coming up to our 8th week of this current diet (8 weeks being the minimum amount of time required to see if it was showing benefits). We've been through a few cases of hives (which started before this current diet) which got worse before they got better. He still has new flushes of hives following the last, but they seem to be becoming fewer in number and are smaller in size. If I do see any that are larger I've learnt now that they are probably infecting, and so I bath them with the Calendulum (Marigold flower) tea, and that seems to help immensely and quickly. Where at one point he had more lumps than flat/clean skin, I would be able to count the number of hives now. For the most part, his skin/coat is looking good, although he has a day here and there where he becomes oily and his skin is very flaky. Both those symptoms can disappear within 24 hours though. Don't know if it is coincidental to the brush I normally give him at the time, to rid his skin of much of the very excessive scurf. He's put on some condition, but not before I increased the amount of Allerblend. As an adult (1yo) dog the recommended feeding guide suggests 700g per day. He is receiving 2000g. Prior to me increasing it, he was getting 1600g and whilst he wasn't losing weight on it, he wasn't gaining. The extra 400g seems to have made the difference and 2 weeks after I increased the food I weighed him and he'd gained 400kg. That was I think almost 3 weeks ago and I plan to weigh him again tomorrow if I get the chance as I'm sure he's increased weight again. To describe his condition I would suggest "racey" but "fit". Perhaps "lean". But not skinny/rakey like he became at one point. He has a wound on his ear (from way back when his ears flared red, hot and itchy) and I've been trying for all these months for it to heal. Paw Paw Ointment helped to a degree - in a way it also helped to protect the wound from his ear flap shaking (which was caused by the extra weight of the tissue swelling) as I used to glop it on quite thickly. Although this provided protection and did help in reducing the swelling and so reduced/stopped the head shaking, it still wasn't healing. So I treated it with alovera gel and that did the trick for drying it up. The wound is still there and it became so bad that you can see where it has 'eaten' at the tip of his ear flap when you view from the front of it. The wound itself began as a very tiny erupted pimple on the inside of the ear flap tip. I don't treat it anymore and it does seem to be scabbing up more healthy than previously. It's taken a great while to get to this point but I'm fingers crossed that it won't be much longer before it is no longer a 'wound' at all. Fingers crossed. He is still eager for his meals and I am very thankful for that. He has also toned up in muscle considerably in more recent times, something I had trouble achieving earlier. This could in part be because he has reached 1yo and I would think that his growth spurts aren't as great - that his body is putting its energy into filling out rather than shooting up. Gosh I hope so ..... I don't need him taller than he is!! Touch wood - had no further issues with his back leg. Perhaps the cramp was associated to his system not absorbing properly. Or perhaps because I really haven't put him in a position where I require to crate him for the periods I did when we were at the seminar/workshop. His jaw still 'cracks/pops' sometimes when he yawns, but not nearly as much. I don't think I've heard his back leg 'pop' for some time now. Throughout all of this he has his back arched up more than not, but (again) touch wood, I'm not sure if that's not improving as well. If it is, then only marginally so. It is hard for me to tell as I am watching him every day. He is still a bit sensitive to touch around that part of the back above the abdomen. More so than what I would expect is normal. So this remains a 'trigger' area at the moment. So, I don't think he is completely 'right' just yet, but there is a definite improvement. I used to think his head looked too big for his thin body. I don't think that now, so obviously he is appearing more solid than he was. I still keep my fingers crossed that this isn't going to change over night, knowing by past history that it is possible. If all else continues well, then the only thing we need to get past is the flush of hives he keeps having but as I said, these aren't too bad now, so perhaps his system is working itself through them. Dr. Bruce has been fantastic in his 'minimalist' and 'natural' approach to helping Mandela help his own body to right itself. I have avoided washing Mandela with any shampoos etc. and looking back I really do think that we tend to reach for the shampoo/treatment bottle a little bit too quickly and too regularly sometimes. Although I had them on hand in the cupboard should the hives become so bad they were needed for his comfort, I have managed to avoid administering any anti-histamines. And of course no other drugs were given. Each of the things I have used (as suggested by Dr. Bruce for different things at different times) have been natural remedies : Calendulum; Active Manuka Honey; Paw Paw Ointment; and straight Alovera Gel (the plant for which was kindly donated by my local Health Food Shop - "Healthy Life, Berwick", whom I'm certain my dog helps to keep in business :D, but their service and interest in Mandela and their advice on the products they stock has been great ). For the most part, Mandela has been highly vibrant and energetic. There was one time that I recall in the last fortnight or 3 weeks where he was noticeably 'flat' (and I though "oh, oh") so I rested him. I fully expected him to begin going off his food, but that didn't happen and his energy reserves returned. His stool quality is somewhat irratic - sometimes good but too often they are too soft and sometimes runny. So as I mentioned, I think we have more to travel in the health department before I would suggest all is absolutely well. I guess that's it in not quite a nut-shell, but compared to the worried emails I have sent Dr Bruce over the past 8 weeks (more so in the beginning), this IS the short version, let me assure you . Thanks again for asking and being interested. Even if this is not the end of our woes (as much as I hope it is), I have learnt SO much by and through it, regardless of the fact that we do not have a solid diagnosis for the cause of Mandela's health problems.

I agree with Vicki. Maturity has much to do with it as well. My boy is improving compared to 6 months ago, which is when his rampant greeting behaviour really began to get over the top. So I just keep working on it whilst his mind is maturing.

Tess32 - I know what you mean and my 1 year old boy is similar. The only difference is that my boy has a lot more strength and weight behind him and no-one would enjoy what I call his "red-cordial" moments. My other concern is that he goes so wild with happiness that his fine tail whacks the corners of my walls, so much so that he has been making it bleed. I'm thinking of somehow wrapping cardboard at the wall and door corners until I can get his excitement under control, for his own safety. But in the meantime, I completely ignore (which is something that is hard to do when you're also trying to save a tail ). Even if he is sitting - until he becomes calm-submissive, there's no point in giving him attention as that part of his brain which is "red-cordial" boils over yet again. So - even if your dog is sitting at greeting, I'd ignore until the tension has dissipated and she is relaxed enough to even look at something else other than you. Then keep your attentions at very low key. IOW, teach your dog it is the "calm emotion" that will be rewarded, rather than just the "outward unreliable behaviour", if that makes sense.

Get the ACTIVE Manuka Honey - but not the stuff from supermarkets as they sell only the low "active" factor (+5). Get it from the Health Food Shop. Try to get the highest UMF (which I think is around +35) if you can. The more "active" it is, the better healing and immune support qualities it has. Expect it to be pricey. I swear by it for more than just this reason. Did the Vet give antibiotics because your dogs have got a secondary infection? If they don't, the antibiotics won't do anything as they can't treat a virus. Like for us if we have the flu - keep your dogs warm and draft free; keep them a bit quiet; make sure they keep hydrated. A bit of the AMH in a small amount of water every so often throughout their convalescence will help with this. Otherwise, feed it to them from a teaspoon. They'll love it.

I hate that. Reminds me of children harping. So - if it got squashed (presumably by member vote) and they are re-raising the proposal yet again despite that, they should be made to give very good reason why. In otherwords, what's different about the situation now to back then. Make them be accountable for their decisions/proposals. Rather than them being permitted to propose and re-propose things and make the members 'fight' each time to knock the same thing out of the arena (no pun intended) each time. If there is no difference now as to back then, they are simply wasting their members' time and effort. Make them PROVE they need to do something like this, AS WELL AS pointing out and objecting to the overt impact on the agility sector. Now - in this economically stressed time - is NOT the time to put up fees. Especially if it is that the Association is running to profit. Just my 2c's and opinion ;).

And the other thing I'd be interested in knowing (especially if I was a NSW member, but also for the purpose of this thread) is what profit margin is the Association already running on. And to break it down into increments, what profit margin is the agility sector bringing in by comparison to other DogsNSW activities. I mean, it's one thing that it doesn't seem fair to the agility crowd (is there more wear and tear to the grounds and equipment in the agility sport compared to other activities?) but it's another to wonder if the increase is necessary at all. Which is why I'm interested in knowing the information queried in my above post.

Vicki - what does DogsNSW already do with the funds it already skims from the Agility sector (pre-levy increase) and what does DogsNSW plan to do with the extra funds (for 1 dog in 10 runs, that's a, what ..... 1000% increase?!) it plans to rake in from the agility sport & other activities? ETA: From your explanation above, I can see where it is going to impact agility goers the most, for such a small amount of time in the arena. What's the comparison between (eg) showies to agility competitors in relation to the number of times each would be likely to have one dog in the ring/arena?

Question from me : What are the bones in a Roo Tail like? My boy is on a special diet for some health issues that I am hoping we are going to be able to completely overcome. Whilst he's been on this diet, I feed him nothing else. But in a short while I think it will be that I begin to experiment with food variety. As his current diet is predominantly roo meat, I thought I'd begin by introducing roo tails as his "RMB". This with the Vet's advice/blessing as well. So - are roo tail bones the sort of bone that a dog would gnaw on? Or are they smaller (due to the vertibrae) where a dog can too easily swallow whole? I have some roo tails sitting in the freezer, ready for the day coming where I can begin to expand on his current diet but due to the meat and the fact they are frozen, I can't tell much about the bone itself. I too get somewhat nervous about dogs and bones. My previous girl swallowed the knuckle end of a large bone and it resulted in a series of surgeries which of course in turn, knocked her around a lot. But dogs are dogs and just because it is a possibility doesn't mean I will deny my current dog the joy and benefits of gnawing and eating bones. So I continue to do so but I admit I feel the need to be around and I do try to feed the bones that are the least likely to cause trouble. ETA: I read that in the wild, dogs don't tend to have any problems with 'pointy' or fine bones causing damage, largely because they would have eaten the skin and fur of the animal in question. Apparently the fur tends to catch up in the fine bone in the gut (makes sense) and this protects the gut from damage. I wonder why they don't include fur in dogs meals? A "pre-bone" appetiser .

Thing is, I'm certain they don't approve of the use of check chains either. I remember a contribution was made to their newsletter by a trainer whom they heralded, and that person certainly decried the check chain. Yet in one of their newsletters (the same one, I think), they said (almost verbatum) "We invite anyone to NOT renew their membership if they advocate the use of and use the PPCollar or E-Collar.". But they didn't say anything in that respect for the Check Chain. Not sure why ...... would that have lost them too many members perhaps? With me, they actually rejected my membership renewal application (ie I didn't accept their invitation to not renew.). Sorry - I've gone off topic again. Stopping now.

We're on the 'same page' PF. I didn't know you were no longer a member. I'm no longer a member either - the APDT here refused to permit me to renew my membership because I publicly campaigned for a change in our current Victorian law to permit (with restriction) use of the PPCollar in training. At least I am honest and upfront about it. The APDT don't like check chains either. Yet they don't push away those who use or advocate them. Maybe too many of their members use them? . And the way I see it, IF their "positive only" methods subscribe to every dog in every circumstance, then why wouldn't they want to embrace me so they can convince me of that with evidence? They can't do that if they have refused me partaking in their affairs. Hypocrisy at its finest, IMO. :rolleyes: ..... Sorry - I think I've taken this thread off its original track. To Shellectra - from the discussions here, have you been assisted in your initial enquiry?

Hi Trishalouise. The difference is that training tools such as check chains are not promoted (by innuendo or otherwise) as a "positive" training tool. Yet the head collar often is. That in itself is VERY dangerous IMO. I agree that many do not introduce their dogs to the head collar the way they should be and that can make a difference to the dog's acceptance of it, or not. But on the other hand I have met dogs whom have been intro'd correctly yet continue to object to the feel of it on their face. But I agree with PF that whilst introduction to neck collars carries a similar introduction procedure, I have not witnessed as much objection to neck collars (whether they be flat; martingale; check chain; PPC; or whatever) as I have and do to head collars. Nor have I witnessed as much care and time required for the intro of head collars compared with other restraint/training tools. Surely that's gotta be saying something to us? In the course of my business I have instructed many people in the proper use of head collars. I have also on a small number of occasions, recommended their use for certain dog/human combo's. I've also used them myself on a couple of occasions to assist me in certain behaviour modification processes. But I have never promoted them as a positive training tool, or a kind/gentle training tool. I explain the dangers of their mis-use (accidental or otherwise) just as I explain the potential dangers of mis-use (accidental or otherwise) of the check chain. I always point(ed) out the necessity for the PPCollar and the E-collar to be used wisely as well. This should be common place with ANY training tool. Yet in the "positive only" arena, I hear much noise about check chains, PPCollars and E-collars, but not so the head-collar. Is that only because THEY promote and recommend it? There are obviously many "positive only" (I know you guys realise I use that term loosely) individuals who also recognise where the head collar is an aversive tool like any other training tool (whether that be to a greater or lesser degree - I'll leave that out of this 'argument'). What gets my goat is that there are VERY public organisations who scoff and scorn those who might use a correction tool - damning them as cruel etc. etc., yet promote by mere recommendation (which attaches by mere association the 'air' of the head collar being a positive training tool as well) the use of a head collar without so much of a hint of the things that can go wrong when used incorrectly. Hypocritical, if you ask me ..... especially when these groups promote themselves under the guise of having major consideration to animal welfare supposedly moreso than any other person who might make (good) use of any of the other training tools mentioned (or not mentioned) here. A brochure that I saw which was put out by the APDT (UK) showed pictures of unhappy dogs wearing check chains. I remember that one of those pictures was of an owner pulling up with tension on the chain via the lead (so obviously the dog wasn't happy). The brochure made a big deal of the 'bad' things about check chains. About two thirds or more of the brochure was on the check chains and how bad they were. In fact, the brochure was titled something like "Why we Don't Like Check Chains". The brochure included a small section on head-collars, showing a happy and relaxed dog wearing a head collar. No mention of any risk by improper use was mentioned about it. IMO that is VERY irresponsible ...... assuming the agenda was aimed at dog welfare. I don't mind the brochure pointing out the dangers of mis-use of training equipment. But to represent (by ommission) that the head collar doesn't have any such danger is abhorrently irresponsible in my books. ESPECIALLY when it is represented to the public who (a) wouldn't know any better and (b) would (or should) be able to trust an organisation that represents itself with hundreds of members as extolling dog welfare through "positive only" training.

Prices aside, isn't it better if the dogs are vaccinated at least one or two weeks prior to entering the kennel?

The "positive only" (so to speak) organisations/groups generally push/recommend the use of the head collars and they are often promoted as a "kinder, gentler" training tool. Or if not openly promoted that way, it is insinuated - merely by their expressions of disapproval of other collars for the 'danger' of mis-use, but omitting the mention of any danger of mis-use of the head collar. IMO, if you say to one you should say to the other. Otherwise it eludes (or do I mean 'alludes'?) the reader to thinking otherwise ...... I don't know if that's the desired goal or not.

Sorry. I missed that part of your post.