asal

I totally agree. It doesn't matter who let the dogs out. Unless the owners can guarantee that they will be enclosed 27/4 in the house or in a fully enclosed dog-run and only allowed off the property wearing muzzles, they should be PTS. With this one incident they have proven that they are a danger to other animals and are not suited to an urban environment (and indeed a rural environment where a neighbour would be entitled to shoot the dogs if they threatened livestock). I think every situation has to be dealt with individually and sadly there is no clear cut way to address these incidents. The owners may well be very responsible people and to have their dogs let out by someone else is NOT their fault. We live in an area of lots of roaming dogs and dingoes, and if many of the dogs in the area were let out of their yards could pose a threat to other dogs, especially if their is 2 of them. My friends dogs were let out by school kids walking by!! "Such acts of aggression" are sadly what all dogs are capable of even nice family pets, when people understand that every one will be safer. A very sad situation. If you have a large dog with a high prey drive, then they need to be kept securely - that means high, high fences with locked gates. If that isn't enough, then secure dog runs with concrete floors etc. If school kids could let your friends dogs out, then they weren't very secure in the first place. I own a dog with issues. That means that I need to be 10000% more responsible than the average dog owner. All walks need to be planned ahead. My dog gets securely crated before anyone comes into the house. I have a two-gated front door so she can't accidentally get out etc. And she is a mini schnauzer who couldn't do much damage if she tried. If people want to own dogs that can do a lot of damage then the need to step up to the plate. People seem to think that PTS is all about fault and punishment. Sorry to say it but some dogs just aren't cut out to live in suburbia with many people, dogs, cats etc living in close proximity. It isn't always about fault but the safety of the community. A kid could have been hurt if they had been walking their JRT and tried to save it. I agrew Wineterpaws - if an offleash dog ever attacks mine then I will make sure that the owners spend a lot of money and time on lawyers - even though I have a low chance of getting any $ out of it. regardless of how they got out. they are killers. i have had dogs come onto my place and they did not even go near my animals let alone kill, others have killed every chook i had. one of my dogs only survived because being tiny he crawed under a cupboard in our shed and the labrador intent on killing him coudlnt get hold of him although he almost died of shock anyway. it had to climb a 3 foot fence to get to mine. one of mine got into the chook yard the other day and very proudly removed some feathers and brough them to me.. she didnt kill the bird. so dogs dont automatically kill when the opportunaity presents, it is not an automatic response in a loose dog.. others certainly do. ever since i was kid the rules were , once a dog has killed it is a killer. and round where i grew up it meant the bullet.

and the resource guarding began at about 7 months.. he was fine till then.

He may not be a bad breeder at all, but there is a question mark. It is possible to identify resource guarding in pups when they are very young. Was it a well-bred litter? Did the breeder miss the signs of strong resource guarding in the pup and place it with an unsuspecting family? Or was the dog only ever a mild resource guarder, and its behaviour escalated because of family management? Did the dog have a brain tumour? We just don't have the information. And nobody apart from people like us here would probably care to investigate it properly anyway. GUESS WHAT he had to be put down at age 6 with a brain tumur

incidently my resource guarder border collie came from a very famous kennel.. and not one other i saw from there had his behaviour.. so i fail to see how the breeder is the bad guy at all?

What an awful comment, I would never describe any child as a "feral". considering my aunts brother is dead because a group decided to kick him to death when he went to his car to get home... what else would you describe the likes of such visually members anyway of the homo sapien species? my neighbour is only alive because. a) his dad a copper had warned himif he was ever attacked and knocked down stay in a ball and dont let go of your knees if you can. he did so that B) by the time his mates had ran to the nearest cop shop and help arrived he was still alive, he did survive although he was in icu for 3 days. my own brother had to wait 3 days before he knew if he would lose his eyes after a total stranger decided to king hit him at a race meeting. all he knew was a tap on the shoulder, turned. and BANG. never seen the sicko in his life before.. so what would you call these types???????????

what many of you seem to forget is how many times have you seen families where the parents were lovely people and their kid or kids were ferals? same can happen with dogs too

and its certainly crops up in all breeds. dont think ive ever heard anyone warning about golden retrivers. our neighbours big bear was everyones best friend. but go near anything he was eating and he would have you. learned that when my neighbour phoned me and asked me to please come down and put a 'goats head' in her wheelie bin for her. said her dog had brought it home from goodness knows where. and the sight of it was grossing her out so bad she couldnt bring herself to leave the house. she didnt tell me i would be attacked by her confounded dog when i picked it up. not at all impressed. luckily the tap and hose were near me and i flipped it on and half drowned him until he backed off enough for me to chuck it in the bin and he switched off the attack once it was out of sight. gee was i agry with her for not warning me

some dogs are born with that attitude, we had a border collie pup that went skitso if you didnt stay minimum of 3 feet from his food while eating. we tried to get him used to eating without guarding it.. hopeless he got worse instead of better. left alone he was fine. consider how fast he ate anyway 60 seconds and it was gone anyway

LOL, never thought of it that way. was thinking of the so often times ive heard people being accused of being unethical when a bad gene is found in a pup they bred. nature hates sameness and continually strives for diversity. be it good results or disasters. but put a breeder into the equation and they cop the flack even when they didnt have anything to do with it as exemplified by the pair above. breeding just isnt black and white. thanks for the good wishes. we all need them. n HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL.

forget how often ive pointed out lines totaly clear of a problem can still turn one up due to mutations. ok these articles refer to horfies but the implications are interesting to say the least Genetic Mutation Caused Nonhereditary White Coat Color Pattern by: Stacey Oke, DVM, MSc December 26 2010, Article # 17433 Researchers recently discovered a new genetic mutation in a Thoroughbred foal that was born with large portions of nonpigmented skin. Whether another horse with the same rare mutation will be born is unknown, but the discovery has fueled researchers' pursuit of knowledge about coat color-related genetics and its potential relationship to serious health problems or death. Essential to skin pigment is the function of a particular multipurpose gene, called KIT (an acronym for the actual genes involved), which the researchers examined in the current study. The KIT gene specifies the genetic code for a special protein called a tyrosine kinase receptor, expression of which is essential for the proper development of a variety of cell types, including red blood cells, mast cells of the immune system, and melanocytes (pigment-producing cells located in the bottom layer of the skin). "KIT mutations cause abnormal melanocytes that do not produce pigment in the skin," explained Heather Holl, BSc, a PhD student in the Department of Animal Science at Cornell University. "The result is horses with pink skin and white hair. The amount of affected skin varies and ranges from small patches of depigmentation to white over the entire body." To date, researchers have identified 14 different mutations involving the equine KIT gene, including the Sabino-1 and Tobiano color patterns. Holl explained, "We suspected a new mutation after the birth of a Thoroughbred colt with extensive white markings. Both the parents had only small white markings and the sire had over 400 registered offspring without a single recorded dominant white foal." Holl, together with Samantha A. Brooks, PhD, an assistant professor in the same department at Cornell, and Ernest Bailey, PhD, from the University of Kentucky's Gluck Equine Research Center, subsequently analyzed the DNA sequence of parts of the foal's KIT gene and found a novel deletion in the gene that involved just five base pairs of DNA out of the 2.7 million base pairs present in the equine genome. "Neither parent had the mutation," Holl added. The colt died unexpectedly at five weeks of age. It remains to be determined if the KIT mutation played a role in his death. "Unfortunately, there is not much else we can do with this (case)," concluded Holl. "From the data we have, we cannot confirm the mutation was involved in the foal's death, and it is unlikely that another will be born like him; however, we (continue to) work with other white patterns in the horse, including other suspected dominant white cases." Dominant white cases are uncommon. When a horse has one dominant white gene, the result will be a pure white horse that lacks pigment in the skin from birth, so they are easy to detect. However, a previous study of dominant white horses showed that breeding white horses to white horses can cause embryonic losses. The study, "De novo mutation of KIT discovered as a result of a non-hereditary white coat colour pattern," was published in a special edition of Animal Genetics. The entire journal supplement, funded by the Dorothy Russell Havemeyer Foundation is available for free online. this one can explain some mysteries why some females just never reproduce. if it can happen in the neddies i expect it can happen in canines and homo sapiens too. although obviously it cant be bred on... XY Sex Reversal in Horses: The Genes Behind the Switch by: Stacey Oke, DVM, MSc December 27 2010, Article # 17448 Veterinary researchers have taken a leap forward in explaining XY sex reversal, the most common equine sex chromosome abnormality. A team of scientists from the University of Kentucky's Gluck Equine Research Center and the College of Veterinary Science at Texas A&M University have been examining the Y chromosome to determine what prompts a genetic mutation that causes seemingly healthy mares to be infertile. XY sex reversal is the development of female genitalia in a horse possessing the male Y chromosome; i.e., the horse should have displayed male genitalia. When an abnormality affects sex differentiation, the developing equine fetus "defaults" to the female developmental pathway. "The majority of affected horses have normal female genitalia and no stallionlike behaviors," said Teri L. Lear, PhD, an immunogenetics researcher in the molecular cytogenetics laboratory at the Gluck Center. "The sex reversal is often not noted unless there is a problem with infertility." Some "XY mares," as they are called, however, show various degrees of masculinization, visible as abnormally developed reproductive tracts. Little is known about the underlying cause of XY sex reversal. To shed light on this condition, Lear and her colleagues used state-of-the-art molecular techniques to map the Y chromosomes of XY mares. "We looked at the Y chromosome from 18 XY mares (of various breeds) and found that there are actually two different forms of the condition," Lear explained. "The first form is a Y chromosome-linked form in which large sections of the DNA on the Y chromosome are missing. In the second form, the non-Y-linked form, the Y chromosome is the same as in normal males." A closer look at the Y-linked form revealed that different regions of the DNA are missing, but in all mares with the Y-linked form, the gene called SRY, which is a sex-determining gene on the Y chromosome, was either partially or completely deleted. "Horses which lack either some or all of the SRY gene will not develop into the 'right' sex, resulting in genetically male horses that look like mares," Lear continued. Why horses possessing the entire SRY gene (the mares with non-Y linked sex reversal) become "sex reversed" is still unknown, however. Lear said that this research provides a better understanding of a condition that translates to infertility in outwardly normal mares. She added that despite the fact that these horses are genetically male, XY mares race against other mares, posing the question of whether they have an unfair advantage in competition. "We do not know if the rest of the Y chromosome confers a physical advantage for racing or not," she added. The study, "Molecular heterogeneity of XY sex reversal in horses," was published in a special edition of the journal Animal Genetics. The entire journal supplement, funded by the Dorothy Russell Havemeyer Foundation is available for free online.

without going back through all 16 pages, wasnt it this thread that mentioned its now banned to breed from any dog tested as a pra carrier? was told recently that in victoria it is or will be a 2 yr jail sentance for knowlingly breeding from a carrier. this week received a newsletter from the arabin horse society how its recommending all registrations include testing for SCIDS, LFS, forget the other one. all non affecting carrier genes but unlike PRA fatal to any homozoygous born. yet unlike the dog world the idea to to prevent any homozygotes being bred. not totaly eliminat every carrier from the gene pool. odd they realise the dangers of wholesale shedding of a significant proportion of the gene pool. odd, a group of breeders who realise this? and dont want to go galloping to the governement to regulate them and instead are educating their members, pity our canine councils cant be as smart

I wasted years of writing to the minister for agriculture for at least he make it that instead of "being willing to undergo and animal care course" that they actually had to have proven passes so they at least had like the two police offices sufficient knowledge to base their so powerful opinion on. but no joy there. all they have to do is attend, they dont even have to listen or pass they are still only recruiting "ex police with prosection experience, willing to undergo animal care course". notice no mention of needing to have passed one? the suggestion of actually employing someone with animal care knowledge willing to undergo prosecution training, didnt get a look in. so surely that proves where the real interest lies. income. not the welfare of the critters great or small. as for can an animal die after being subjected to unnecessary op? it cost over 600 for my vet to save that dog after he was returned by the rspca, from the damge caused by the operation the rscpa vet did without my knowledge or consent.

When an RSPCA inspector can enter your home if you are there or not without a warrant simply because he "believes" something is happening or is "about to" happen. Yet a police officer must have reasonable suspicion and further has to convince a court magistrate to issue a warrant to allow entry. That alone is enough to tell me that the RSPCA inspectors have more power than the Police and yet still no accountability. Even police can not arrest you until you have committed a crime. RSPCA can enter your home and sieze your property simply because they think you might be about to do something in the near future. In regards to who to "kick up about it" that is half of the problem. Who do you kick up to if an inspector enters your home. Regarding lodging a criminal or civil claim against the inspector, how can you if the law under which they enter your premises allows them to do it. They have not broken a law. They actually have permission to enter your home if they believe something is being done or is about to be. How can you prove that what someone believes is wrong? I may believe in Santa Claus. How can you rule that I may be wrong because I choose to believe something. I may beleive that my neighbours are a family of potential homicidal maniacs. I may be right or I may be wrong. But if thats my belief, thats my belief. I can't call the police and have him arrested because of what I beleive. But an RSPCA inspector can believe that you are guilty of an act of cruelty you are going to commit tomorrow and so can enter your house tonight and seize property (Animals and equipment) based on that belief. Thanks Yarracully, you have put it very well. Should a police officer behave like what was seen on that show, you know that you can go somewhere and take action. That they are answerable to a proper process. Souff EXACTLY as well, those of you who sooo eroniously believe they do not have more power than the police what happened to Sam and Rose D'Agostino in Gunnedah PROVES THAT BEYOND DOUBT, the Tamworth or was it Armidale? RSPCA inspector never left her office (i forget which branch but either way thats a awful long way from Gunnedah) she PHONED THE GUNNEDAH POLICE and told them to arrest these people if they had not turned their bull loose from the tether it was on. she refused to listen to the two police officers she ordered to arrest them that the bull could die if turned loose into knee high clover. as they told my friends, THEY HAD TO FOLLOW HER ORDERS. rose and sam had to release the bull or they HAD TO ARREST THEM. their advice was turn the bull loose and sam finish the bull yard and rose walk behind him so he couldnt eat enough to bloat. IF THAT DOESNST TELL THE DOUBTERS THAT THE RSPCA CAN AND WILL ORDER THE POLICE TO DO THEIR BIDDING WHAT ELSE DOES???? the two police officer were raised on the land, they knew the bull would die if they arrested sam and rose and he was left in all the clover to munch while they were locked up under RSPCA orders. you can look the lady up in the phone book, she will verify what is here i have her permission she lives in port macquarie. put that in your holes in the sand and smoke it so some are asking maybe, how could someone so far away know the bull was tethered? because a tennant on their property wanted to cause trouble after a argument and used the rspca to cause trouble, did so pretty successfully too dont you think? the bull was being tethered on a 15 foot chain with access to a large shed with is feed and water while his bull yard was being built. why? because it wasnt finished yet, and he had arrived while their property was chockers with clover so it wasnt safe to let him out onto it because he wasnt used to that level of feed. he was a show bull and taught to lead and used to being tied so where on earth was the issue anyway? but the inspector "formed the opinion" from a nusiance call and made her oders without ever bothering to see for herself, and so his ass was grass. the true cruelty of this incident was my friend was over 65 yet had to walk behind that baby bull all night while her cancer ridden husband had to work all that night by lights to get the yard finished. if that is not cruelty what is? but the cruelty to the owners doesnt cross any radars does it. the yard was almost finished anyway, the inspector was told that, she didnt care a fig. there was no reason for that power struggle.

I have it in writing from the minister for agriculture. all an inspector has to do is "form the opinion" to this little gem "(2) Despite subsection (1), an inspector may exercise a power under this Division to enter a dwelling only with the consent of the occupier of the dwelling, the authority of a search warrant or if the inspector believes on reasonable grounds that:" SO all an inspector has to do is "form the opinion" n their in like flynnn. I rest my case.

OR THAT THE DOG COULD HAVE DIED under the anesethic, all done without the owners knowledge or CONSENT. no vet can do that but the rspca can and will and DOES.

trouble is, the mugs who do are simply sticking their heads up for the chopping block. all it elicits is would never have happend i u were innocent, the total favourite, where these smoke theres fire. n make a fuss and your "hysterical" n who takes any notice of anyone "hysterical"? theres been a lot of "victims" over the decades and its always asumed the victim is guilty unless proven innocent . even judy guard pleaded guilty , amazing the magistrate refused to accept the plea, isnt it?

remind me never to read anything with that set of initials in the thread please

remind me never to read anything with that set of initials in the thread please

Megan, the RSPCA is answerable to the 'greater good', which is a far greater position than the minsiter. Be Green Vote Green, end animal ownership and animal slavery in Australia! We don't wear them, we don't eat them, we don't own them! Support maditory desexing of all pets. I'm not sure if this is a joke or not either way food for thought. so if all foul domesticated methane excreters are to be eliminated?? does that mean all wild methan excreters are next for extermination????????? theres millions of them,, um actually a few billion of em particularly so in africa yikes homo sapiens also excrete..................what..................methane?

well maybe i will number crunch for all the state rspca's. I think this might be something to consider - RSPCA NSW for example is completely different to RSPCA Australia (according to friend who is a vet nurse in RSPCA NSW). The news/opinions of RSPCA NSW or another state might be (and often are) very different to those of other states or RSPCA Australia. I do think it is very worrying that RSPCA Australia seems to have such a large amount of profit. They are not for profit... Also paying the ceo of a not for profit $120 000 seems pretty cushy! But then most ceo's make unbelievable amounts of money! wonder how many CEO's deliberately say at Mcgraths hill saleyards, "no one but the doggers is allowed to bid "on a bunch of horses they let the owner think and believe would be found good homes, thus to send 10 mares and foals to the doggers? although that was pre 1999 before he became CEO wonder if the attitude has changed since then? i was with the owner when she signed and heard the promise, i also was at mcgraths hill to hear that. so none of it is heresay.

far as i can figure our politicions think the rspca has the power of infalability.. u know like the pope?

your problem is what actually do you think constitutes "evidence" in the case of the gunnedah incident, the rscpa inspector received a complaint re the bull in gunnedah. she did not go to gunnedah. she did contact the owners of the bull and told them to turn it loose. they refused. she then contacted the gunnedah police and told them to enter the property, inspect the bull and ensure it was turned loose, if not, to arrest the owners and jail them. before they left with the prisioners they were to turn the bull loose. my friend did as the police advised, turned the bull loose. the bull only survived because my friend walked behind it all that afternoon and night keeping him moving so he couldnt eat enough clover to kill him while her husband finished the bullyard that was already being constructed and finished before dawn the next morning. the rspca officer never left her office in armidale. either before during or after the incident to come to the property personally. pending the finishing of the yard for him the baby bull was on a 15 foot tether chain (thats a 30 foot circle he could move around in) with access to a large barn with shade and water and hand fed (he was a $7,000 show bull, you could see your reflection in his coat)

no they are not "answerable" to the minister. they must submit an annual "report" to the minister. there is a heap of difference in that. from what i have personally learned that report does not necessarly mean it has to contain the truth either and even if this is pointed out, and i have been in the position to point out what was reported to the minister was in a court of law would be classed as perjury, the minister chose to ignore and end all further correspondance. so dont go holding your breath too long waiting for any accountability comming from there in your lifetime

I'm with you on this one. Desexing is the only way to stop the unwanted supply of dogs and cats out there. I have no problems with any of the laws wanting to be introduced. Registered breeders should be the only ones allowed to have undesexed dogs. Pounds, rescues, shelters, pet shops (which I wish they could ban from selling puppies and kittens), all should be desexed before going to their new homes. Wait until March-April 2011, when all the Christmas puppies and kittens hit the rescue pages or pounds etc. So very sad. You see to have forgotten another important part of the remedy. Education. Teaching responsibiity to owners, like - "if you OWN AN ANIMAL then you are RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LIFE OF THAT ANIMAL and NO, YOU CANNOT PALM OFF YOUR RESPONSIBILITY OF ANIMAL OWNERSHIP ON TO A RESCUE ORGANISATION OR A POUND. IF YOU own the animal, then YOU TAKE CARE OF IT .... til death do us part". Don't want the dog any more, for whatever reason? Then you be the one to hold the dog in your arms while the vet gives it the final needle. Not an easy task. If pet owners had to ask themselves "Can I do that?" BEFORE they committed to animal ownership there would be very few dogs and cats on death row. Most animals are on death row because they were with the wrong owners. Souff HUSH YOUR MOUTH SOUFF, naughy souff, you cant put the owner on the hook surely? surely you know it is the montserous mongrel who bred that poor creature to make $$$$'s from its mummys suffering, they are responsible. ive been told so, so it surely is right? isnt it???????????

who told u that furphy? so you dont know a rspca inspector in armidale can call the police in gunnedah and tell them to arrest the owners of a bull if they have not turned it loose when they arrive to check they have done as told? i know this case i can get me friend to send you a stat dec if you really need one. to turn this baby loose on a property covered in clover was a death sentance, but could she, her husband or the police she sent get this through to the faceless voice on the other end of the line??? nope so dont try that one. the police all raised on the land said they had to do as directed if they didnt turn the bull loose . they had to obey the rspca inspecter even though she never set foot on the place to ascertain the situation herself. the bull was turned loose. as the police said, if they arrested my friend and her husband then there would be no one to save him when he bloated.