asal

It's not important enough for me to stick it on my calendar. And I know there are others who dont agree with me and think the shows is great. Good on them . I watched a new Australian film the other night and thought it was absolutely brilliant. There are more people on the internet movie data base forums who think it's garbage. No big deal to me. I dont take it personally - not sure why people who like the show and love Dr Chris are getting their knickers in a twist that a lot of people here are saying the show is unrealistic. If you watch the film critics on The Movie Shw say your fave film is garbage, is that going to upset you? No it's not going to upset me at all and that's why I love the freedom of speech. I don't take this personally and I haven't noticed my knickers in a knot what you are forgetting is there is an element that do not think anyone with dogs has freedom of speech or decisions anymore.. look at all the legislation thats being passed and contemplated all in the name of "in the best instrests of the dogs" like how is the law that meshed Judy guard in the best interests of anyone ? well except for income generation for the rspca? this is one section of australian citizens who are losing their freedom of choice all in the name of "for the greater good" so dont presume democracy is alive and well for all eh?

Not from me Not this one The show is not an instruction manual on "how to be a vet" or "Veterinary Procedures for the Homeowner". It's a show, entertainment - the show features a couple of blondes dealing with animal illnesses. And it's about entertainment - if you fnd it objectionable, don't watch. He dealt with the chi as he did because it is entertaining - as the snake in the pool was also entertaining. Hairless roos are almost impossible to rear. I am quite sure Chris knew that...... but it gave him the opportunity to warn intending rearers about cows' milk which is one of the major causes of roos found by the "public" dying. By the time they are taken to a vet/carer because they wont drink the cows milk, the damage has been done. It also allowed people who had never seen a baby roo (most of the population) to see one. I didn't think much of the comment about the dog with the congenital problem being "inbred" but the specialist said that - and it showed people this problem which is relatively rare. Chris paid for the specialist surgery. For the past 15 - 20 years, only those who rate in the top 2% academically may enter vet school, which explains why the minority of graduands began vet school after Yr 12. He was in that 2% which makes him a lot smarter than the other 98%. So I don'r think he is stupid. Also, most vets don't get rich, unless they have their own TV show --- so exactly how dumb is he? Not at all. I'd rather watch him on TV being a showman than some shuffling old toothless horror with halitosis and a green cardi who mumbles his way through 100% correct (and dead boring) diagnoses and treatments. Give me entertainment any time over boring as bat excrement. And if it is entertainment which offers a few tiips, so much the better. I watched Big Brother a few times, and learned nothing. If I want correct and relevant diagnoses and treatments, I'll go to my own vet and pay for it. Not expect to get it from the TV. *goes back to TV remembering to keep knees together, having noticed Mr. Raz' dire note* sadly today so many top class students have amazinly little animal knowledge, they get the academic learning but as my vet likes to say, all they have at graduation is a licence to learn at the pet owners expense. he had a young guy in to help once and i couldnt belive some of the things that came out of him. for example all dogs that are sensitive to ivermection should die. ie dose all collies and the ones that dont die are then left to continue the breed. so i asked him so you would advocate a murry grey breeder worm their cattle with Ivemec and then he wouldonly have left cattle that were not sensative to it? he said yes, thats what should be done. considering one herd it killed the lot, thats how it was discovered that there is a sensativy issue with some animals and breeds. thats pretty heavy culling?

You weren't there, you don't know my dogs or their relationship, so what you would do in such a situation isn't really relevant. Well if you don't want anyone to comment on what you say, or your situation or your dogs, then don't post at all - what you have said is not relevant, is it? If you don't think one dog attacking another in the way you describe isn't horrific, that is your business. If one of my dogs decided to get one of my other dogs by the throat in the way you have described and I chose to put my own dog to sleep, that is my business. as is spikes decision. well for now what the future holds is a whole differnt ball game

What an incredibly harsh and insensitive thing to say. First of all, having an incident break out between two dogs could happen to anyone, even the most experienced of dog owners. Unless you keep both dogs separated at all times, you never know what completely random thing could happen to affect one of the dog's behaviour - unexpected illness, new stimulae, toxins ... dogs are living creatures and cannot be 100% predictable. Second, from what I can see, the OP is doing the best possible given an incredibly difficult situation. I know some would say PTS the Akita but that sounds profoundly unfair and extreme given the circumstances. I'm no expert but I'm guessing that it's going to be far easier to find a good new home for a Fox Terrier than it would be for a male Akita given the fact that there is undeniable bias against and fear surrounding large breeds in the community. Your comments above would appear to be clear manifestations of such viewpoints. In any case, it's really unfortunate that this thread has to devolve like this. Can't we just sympathise with the poor OP and give helpful suggestions instead of making OP feel worse? Tapferhund if you really feel so strongly about Akitas and scenarios like this and believe that people take it upon themselves when they select breeds like Akitas - couldn't it be more appropriately discussed in a new thread? I'm sure many would like to engage and discuss over there. Agreed! Tapferhund what would you like to see the owner of these dogs do? Would you rather that they rehomed the akita? Or would you prefer that they kept both dogs and risked another incident? I think given the situation the owner is doing the best thing possible if they are not able to keep the dogs separated. Your comments are incredibly harsh and judgmental.. completely unnecessary. trouble is this IS they type of thinking and judment making thats getting so many laws passed to CONTROL anyone owning a dog. all in the name of defending the dogs. altough i doubt judy felt her dogs needing seizing.. but the mentality that set the train in motions is just this..... roll over any rights of the owners or their stress....even when its not necessary.. reads as quilty until proven innocent mentality

What an incredibly harsh and insensitive thing to say. First of all, having an incident break out between two dogs could happen to anyone, even the most experienced of dog owners. Unless you keep both dogs separated at all times, you never know what completely random thing could happen to affect one of the dog's behaviour - unexpected illness, new stimulae, toxins ... dogs are living creatures and cannot be 100% predictable. Second, from what I can see, the OP is doing the best possible given an incredibly difficult situation. I know some would say PTS the Akita but that sounds profoundly unfair and extreme given the circumstances. I'm no expert but I'm guessing that it's going to be far easier to find a good new home for a Fox Terrier than it would be for a male Akita given the fact that there is undeniable bias against and fear surrounding large breeds in the community. Your comments above would appear to be clear manifestations of such viewpoints. In any case, it's really unfortunate that this thread has to devolve like this. Can't we just sympathise with the poor OP and give helpful suggestions instead of making OP feel worse? Tapferhund if you really feel so strongly about the temperament of Akitas, scenarios like this and believe that people take it upon themselves when they select breeds like Akitas - couldn't it be more appropriately discussed in a new thread? I'm sure many would like to engage and discuss over there, particularly if you believe that there is a genuine basis for avoiding the breed. LOL well it doesnt sound like Tapferhund 's temprement comess across as too noice b maybe needs rehoming

take that as a given from what ive seen in the past.

Got that one courtesy of my thread about trampolines! :) memories ;) BUT THEY ARE OWNED BY WHAT? ;) people..... thats what. thats who. since the same people can choose to vaccinate or not to vaccinate their own progeny. why does anyone including a politician feel they have the right to take that choice away? does anyone here seriously belive you cease to be a part of the "people" or cease to the right to to freedom of choice if the choice involves your dog??? for goodness sake? you can take the poor dog or cat or whatever and have your vet kill it, on your order and its perfectly legal.. it doesnt have to be ill or injoured. where is the sanity in this scenario?

there's a difference between saying, "dont you think my dog is cute." and "my dog is cuter than yours because i bought him from a top breeder and you bought a dirty mix breed from the newspaper." I don't think I've read that in this thread. Am I a purebred dog snob? You betcha, I am. I have purebred dogs because I like a particular type of dog. I like wheaten and kerry blue terriers. Do I think they're the best dogs on the planet? You betcha, I do. Am I going to say so? You betcha, I am. I didn't buy them but their breeders are indeed tops. Will I say so at every opportunity? You betcha, I will. Why should you condemn me for having purebreds and not a mixed breed? Yes, it works both ways and you're doing it right now. sorry sunshine, i'm not, because then i would be condemning myself. i understand this was a forum set up to discuss pure breeds, i didnt when i signed up, and this was the first thread that made me feel uncomfortable about the situation. i thought this was a big dog loving community but apparently some have a higher status than others. don't worry guys, i'll stay out of your precious pure breed threads, i'll stick to conversing with those old enough to understand that we are all created equally, i think they teach that in kindergarden these days? are u serious???? seriously. have you really read all the threads in the past week? if you own a dog your guilty UNTIL proven innocent. you dont have to vaccinate your child,,,, because that would impinge on your human rights. BUT you have to have PROOFF YOU OVERVACCINATE YOUR DOG OR you have now broken a LAW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YET THERE IS NO SUCH LAW FOR FORCE YOU TO VACCINATE YOUR CHILD?? THAT to me anyway does not smack of "we are all created equally," lookes from where im standing you arent if you have a dog or dogs do our lawmakers really care more about overwelfare of cannis famiaris (even to the point of vaccinating them to their detriment even death) than a child whose parents wont even consider vaccination for polio, there it is called freedom of choice?? if you can freely choose to risk your child to all manner of potentially deadly in the belief and sometimes well grounded fear the vaccination could kill or maim... and i know it happens... my own nephew cardiac arrested after his first vaccinations. he is only alive today becuse his mum worked there and stayed to talk to friends so when he died the crash cart was beside the door. or.... he would have been just another unfortunate stastic...

no idea what the nature of the complaint was but sure had the rspca pay a call.... so the games still playing in a home near someone... be careful who you annoy

no idea what the nature of the complaint was but sure had the rspca pay a call.... so the games still playing in a home near someone... be careful who you annoy

so whats new about that, hasnt dogs nsw new chairman just had someone try that?

hey i figured it. they have to do something to make up for all the $$$$$$$$$$'s lost since its been made public u DONT have to vaccinate every single iddy biddy year. think of the hundreds of thousands lost yearly now there? You do in Victoria and NSW - no choice mandatory code. whats with the "snipping"? nancy gate didnt cut anything, she would use a small hemostat to clamp the dewclaw and flick the nail out with her finger nail? gone in a flik and no bleeding at all and the pups didnt even notice? although they were newborn. i saw her do hundreds and since i had quie a few she bred to look after when be became ill, there wasnt a single one grew back. me? too squeemish I think snipping would be outlawed too I meant vaccinations .In Vic and NSW you HAVE to vaccinate every year or have a note from your vet to get out of jail that its not in the dog's best interest. More money. are you sure? i know i was told some ten years ago that i did not need to vaccinate yearly that its not good for their immune system n the teller was my vet. i have used two other vets in that time and they too have said the same, none of them have offered me anything in writing though.. soo are you supposed to ask for it?

hey i figured it. they have to do something to make up for all the $$$$$$$$$$'s lost since its been made public u DONT have to vaccinate every single iddy biddy year. think of the hundreds of thousands lost yearly now there? You do in Victoria and NSW - no choice mandatory code. whats with the "snipping"? nancy gate didnt cut anything, she would use a small hemostat to clamp the dewclaw and flick the nail out with her finger nail? gone in a flik and no bleeding at all and the pups didnt even notice? although they were newborn. i saw her do hundreds and since i had quie a few she bred to look after when be became ill, there wasnt a single one grew back. me? too squeemish

hey i figured it. they have to do something to make up for all the $$$$$$$$$$'s lost since its been made public u DONT have to vaccinate every single iddy biddy year. think of the hundreds of thousands lost yearly now there?

Around $30 a pup for front dew claws. Beautiful job too. Done at 24 hours and taken straight back to Mum who was outside. yes and such a difficult technical job too...... seen nancy gates nip em with a pair of teeny hemostats and not even a drop of blood , n now u need a BvSc to do it???

It is not only a shame, it is another nail in the coffin. But, we can ALL DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT, and easily. Get those well bred, healthy looking dogs out there trotting smartly alongside you on a road, safely on lead. They will be seen by a lot more people than they will ever be in dog parks, or in dog shows. They will be seen by people who say: "Gee, take a look at that dog, will you! I would LOVE to own a dog like that!" We have seen what happens when beautifully bred, healthy dogs appear in movies ...... the whole world wants to own one just like the dog in the movie. The same thought can be achieved by putting your dogs on view to drivers, particularly those stuck in traffic ...... after all, you have a CAPTIVE AUDIENCE It wasn't until I saw these 2 stunning dogs out and about yesterday that I realised how much we need to do this. Full credit to their owners and their breeders, they both moved like a dream. Soooo important. Souff thats what happens when purebreds are sold as pets, they are always on show whever their proud owners take them be it shopping , picnick, walkies or in the case of two of mine to car shows. the phone calls start even while they are there. but what ehtical breeder wants the breed surplus if they can prevent it. and soo there are fewer and fewer to be seen. its a catch 22

Well that's good to know they are genuinely interested in the animals, and the stupid things they say and do arent their fault - the producers call the shots on all that crap to make it more interesting for the target viewers, which is why most people on here cant stand the drivel. I mean the whole thing with the chi - you can just hear the producers saying it - rev the little land piranha up so it looks really good for the silly old bitches at home who want to see Fabio hold up his finger and show blood blood blood. Then you can hear the collective sigh from the old girls - Nawwwww Fabio my darling, I'll fix that war wound for you I should become a tv producer. I am not defending his stupid behaviour but more the fact that I really believe they are sincere in their love for animals. I understand that the stupid things Chris does and says calls his credibility into question time and time again, no doubt about that, but the fact is I still do believe he is a genuine animal lover. Lots of genuine animal lovers do some stupid things with their animals and and say stupid things about them, but unfortunately he does them on national television probably at the behest of the producers to boost the ratings. In the process of doing so he conveys the wrong message out there and opens himself to ridicule by the likes of us dol members and more animal savy people, but I still believe both he and his ditzy offsider are genuine animal lovers. and that unfortunately is how disinformation is spread. to the detriment of the animals and those who believe what they see and hear.

No, you have missed nothing, as far aw I know anywho. But, there are those receptionists at some vet surgeries will tell you "We dont remove dewclaws on pups here". They say it as a form of mutilation and this is the general feeling that is passed on to new vet nursing recruits I am told. The vets themselves WILL do it, 9 times out of 10. It is pathetic when you have to get past the receptionist and ask the vet but that is the way it is. I suppose they feel that if they keep up their PETA mantra and keep on bullying people out of having it done, most people will THINK there is a law against it, when there is not. Souff Unfortunately, it looks like I DID miss something Under the DPI (Vic) regulations, dewclaws may only be removed by a veterinarian. So at least we can still do it, but..... now to find a vet who will as you say, do it and be, who KNOWS how to do it. Gonna say here and now, if there is anyone in Victoria who hasn't read the DPI website and all publications/links relating to dogs & cats in Victoria - do it as soon as you can and take notes because any one of us could be next Are you kidding me- when were they going to let us know - when the first charges were laid? No fricken' idea! I will find the exact legislation tomorrow (if you haven't already, I'm about to go to bed). I had to read and re-read as when I had my litter I checked and triple checked what the legislation was. Definitely something that NEEDS to be out there so that people know. Erny- I would rather trust a breeder with hands on experience over a clinically trained veterinarian to touch my babies any day. Not to mention the risk that is incurred taking the litter to a vet clinic to be done. One thing I am still unclear on is, can we still have our dogs debarked interstate as long as we don't exhibit in Victoria? yes cute isnt it, you take your puppies to the vet for their vaccinations and they take no responsibility if they catch any of the 101 diseases some visiting actually SICK dog is busy shedding in the waiting room. and now they want you to bring them in even younger for their dewclaws to be done IF THEY will do it? yet how many have seen the mess unclipped dewclaws can make when they havent been removed? like who decides to make this nonsense law?

I remember that from when i was a kid, didnt realise they were still breeding them. fascinating isnt it. discovering the link of particolour coats to friendlyness.

Only you, Souffle! It's time you changed your avatar - that bird is looking poorly. Was listening to an old John Williams (Emu) song on a long boring drive yesterday and the song was about him taking the family's sick budgerigar to the vet .... outrageously funny. Had to take it to the vet .... vet cost $35, bird only cost $5 ..... "antibiotics for its colour, 2 drops on its beak, clean out the cage twice a week". There was a lot more to it ... probably best not to mention here. Emu needs to update that song, the vet visit will now set him back a lot more than $35. yep $120 , just ask my bird, ive the invoice to prove it.

I think your ideas are good ones. and yes, barking and howling that "other" dog breeders need to be "controlled" is what is driving the machine that will roll over all instead, although by that i mean all tracable registered breeders. i so wish you well that it may happen as you suggest. when my fellow members began the "get rid of puppy farmers" so long ago, i cant understand how or why they simply couldnt GET that joe or jane public or politicion would see them in exactly the same light. it would have been nice to find i was the mistaken one, but looking at the present day, Judy Guard and to many to mention others that are the resulting collateral damage, my misgivings and foreboding that witchhunts are like spraying a locust spray, ever thing there gets sprayed too. although maybe thats the wrong anology, the people so dispised are not a swarm, although looking at that pie graph, maybe it is???? but they are so dispersed and untracable only the ones that are registered breeders are in the spotlight for erradication

One law to apply to everyone who breeds dogs? Yeah, you're right, in your dreams. Buggar the dogs, they dont need a future anyway. PETA will fix it. i do think you are right. we who have been the lucky one to have been able to grow up with our dogs, can only feel sorry for those of the future. maybe bring in a ballot system, lodge an application and go on a waiting list for a pup? although Peta wont be letting even that happen.

Well, government has just about everything else regulated ASAL and I am not certain that they would make any worse of a hash of it than what the present situation is. I have never seen so many crossbred mutts and poorly bred purebred dogs as we now have - and they are being pumped out all the time and just for the $. But you don't need to worry, there is no money in it for governments so they too will stay well away from it. Poor dogs are u really seriouly thinking any legislation to control dog breeding is going to apply to anyone but registered breeders?????? in your dreams. do u think a big red light is going to turn on above every home that hasnt had their pet desexed and gets in pup?????????

kids need to be taugh from kindi, pet responsibilty, if the parents cant do it the govt should be making sure the schools are doing it. grief the politicians actually can read and write, they proved it they wrote the joke that put judy guard in the nighmare as a result of that marvelous bit of law reform. now how about doing something posative instead of negative????? teach the kids. its and oldie but still a goodie, give me a child until its 7 and its trained for life" or something like that, the priests and nuns and the ministers too used to say that when i was a kid, they couldnt get us into scripture class fast enough. soo why not educate them about pet care and responsibilty? even a bit of dog training, ie sit heel n stay? some people havent even a clue about one basic let alone any? they just arent getting it from their parents and grand parents like once upon a time

wonder if anyone might twig before its too late and there are no registered breeders, that it is the throw away mentality of some puppy buyers THAT IS THE PROBLEM. gee i said a bad thing didnt i. the dog worlds problems arent the fault of anyone but the mongrel who breed the dog surely?