sandgrubber

I think you'll find oxygen can be purchased through welding supply places (If I remember right, Boc is a company that supplies gasses for industrial purposes in Oz). Oxygen isn't dangerous per se, but things burn better at higher oxygen levels and in some circumstances, oxygen may promote explosions. So you need to avoid flammable materials and anything that might cause sparks. As for making a tent, mask, or whatever, that's another question. p.s. I spent a year burning things in enhanced oxygen environments (scientific experiments) so I got to know sources of O2.

This topic has come up before, and I've posted this answer before. Get a pallet and some thrown out carpet from a tip, or recycling center, or curbside disposal. Cut the carpet to size and tack it to the pallet with roofing nails or carpet tacks. The dog will have a hard time destroying it, and if the bed does get destroyed, you will only be out a few bucks replacing it.

Correction: Sudden popularity, particularly combined with media hype, IS a curse for ANY breed. Labradors top popularity lists in several countries, and have held their place for decades. In Australia, SBT's are high on the list, too, and I don't see any media hype push behind their popularity. Not to say that there aren't health problem with Labs . . . or people denying health problems (eg, epilepsy and old age cancers). Not to say that SBT's don't have problems either. Point being, it's the craze that's the problem. Popularity may have a firm basis.

The sickos that give thumbs up to such displays on U-tube are as much a worry as the perps who post the vids. Btw, there are real people who are proud to call themselves cowboys. They can be rough, and many might use a rifle where the RSPCA would call in a vet to inject the Green Dream. But most of them would be disgusted by setting dogs on pigs to watch blood and gore. . . just as would their Australian equivalent, the jackeroo.

Labbies have a reputation for bad hips. No one can or should deny that hips can and should be a concern in any larger breed. But look at the OFA database. Labradors don't deserve the bad rap. They are #87 breed on the list, going from worst to best, and have more observations than any other breed. Poodle, a bunch of spaniels, pugs, GSD's, SBT's and various other terriers, and many many other breeds have worse hip score averages. Most Labbies DO deserve the reputation for being shameless gutsers, though.

Curious. The elite among working dogs are valued, coveted, etc. What do their breeding programs look like? Is it possible that the various apparently genetic diseases people have referred to above are coming out of inbreeding or tight line breeding? I though kelpies were generally tough critters with few health problems.

I don't mind them indulging in herbivore scat. Dogs will be dogs. But kitty crunchies are disgusting! Still, dogs will be dogs. My personal theory, which I can't get anyone to buy, is that they're enriching their gut flora . . . and pooh eating is a natural (and cheap) form of probiotics.

Interesting study that contradicts a lot of people's beliefs! Hope you don't mind if I quote another bit to encourage people to read it: "Puppies usually live with their mother at the breeder's for the first eight weeks of their life. Several factors related to the living conditions at the breeder's were shown to have an influence on the incidence of HD. Puppies born in the spring or summer and at breeders who lived on a farm or small holding, had a lower risk of developing HD. After about eight weeks, the puppies began life with their new owner. The opportunity to exercise daily in parks up until the age of three months reduced the risk of HD, whereas the daily use of steps during the same period increased the risk. Overall, it would appear that daily exercise out in gently undulating terrain up until the age of three months gives a good prognosis when it comes to preventing HD."

In the US, pig dogging ranges from mark and recapture sport where the pig lives to be hunted again to something equally as brutal as bear bating or pit fighting. . . . which have been banned for more than a century. Society still tolerates brutality toward pigs (and rats). So far as I know, our local pig hunters use dogs only to locate the pig (or boar) and get him in the open, where a rifle can be used. I have no idea how many blood sport types there are; I'd guess that they are a small minority, but there's plenty of evidence on U-tube that they exist, and that there are blood sport voyeurs to encourage them. I suspect that people who set their dogs on a pig end out with a lot of dogs getting killed . . . and very few rescued. Dogs used in blood sport are encouraged to tear their 'prey' to pieces, and are bred to take easily to such encouragement. The combination of low bite inhibition and great strength is a combination better to keep away from kids . . . unless the owners are extremely attentive and both dogs and kids are well restrained.

When I did tracking with the SES we had a veterinary first aid training session. The vet advised us about how to do an emergency job getting gas out of a bloated stomach by piercing through to the stomach with an ice pick or similar. I don't think I could do this, and think some people might do more harm than good trying. Wasn't sure if the vet was doing a wrong thing by teaching the procedure. Since then I have been curious to know if anyone has heard of success with a DIY emergency bloat 'surgery'. I know a person whose life was saved by a DIY tracheostomy done by her father, a farmer with no medical training, after a car accident . . . so I'm willing to believe DIY emergency surgery could be a good thing.

Seems to me that the first thing you need to figure out is whether the dog is barking at something, or trying to communicate that she feels left out and wants to get in (or it could be something else). You said your dog barked with tail up and aroused-looking. But what about the nose. Which direction does it point? Is she consistently going to one section of fence? If she's barking at something, there should be some focus on something she finds bark-able. If she's expressing frustration at being out, she may focus on the house, or bark in circles, but is unlikely to focus on some area away from the house, and will almost certainly be eager to come inside when you open the door. My Labs get 'no barkies' in a stern tone when they bark at wildlife or bark in response to other dogs barking. They've learned; now they woof once or twice, but don't bark in an ongoing and obnoxious way. I make sure to do this loud enough that neighbors know I'm making an effort.

Lab owners often don't get asked that question. People often ASSUME Labs are good with children, even children who do very stupid things with very stupid parents who don't supervise. Sigh!

I'm considering a very different option: GPS-based e-collar. http://dogexpeditionsystems.com/ If you accept e-collar thinking, this looks like a great system . . . I love having a warning zone as well as an enforcement boundary. It's great that, unlike e-fence, you don't have to bury anything and you can move the boundaries around . . . set up new containment if you take the dogs on holiday. Also useful to be able to track your dogs when they are loose. The need to recharge batteries looks like a pain in the posterior, though.

What's this about Americans keeping their dogs inside? Mine are free range, though they sleep on my bed . . . I'd rather not have them meet Mr Skunk overnight or do a big barky thing when a coyote comes around and annoy the neighbors. Most of the dogs in the neighborhood are free range. Sure, when you live in town and you've got a pit bull next door and a yappy mix breed on the other side, it's simpler to keep your dog in during the day if your not home. . . . and to bring them in at night. And as a breeder, I don't like placing pups with families that don't allow their dogs inside. But if you're getting the impression that all Americans keep their dogs inside and crate them during the day, you're reading the wrong forums.

And she's in Virginia . . . don't blame California. (Sure, we've got more than our quota of loonies . . . but this one doesn't belong to us) :D

The latest version of electric fence seems to be GPS controlled, hence requires no buried wires, and you can take it with you when you move, or go to a friend's place, or whatever. Unlike conventional e-fence, it lets you set up a warning zone within the boundary. Also works as an e-collar for training, and apparently, allows you to track your dog's whereabouts within a one mile radius. See: http://borderpatroltc1.com/ Sounds like a neat gadget that will probably be banned in many parts of Australia. Has anyone seen one in action?

Good on you for taking in older fosters. Epilepsy is alarming and in the extreme, can be deadly. But milder versions are easy to cope with once you get over the initial terror. It sounds like you have a good vet. I would take his or her advice. You've probably been told already, but many cases of epilepsy respond well to phenobarbitol (sp?), and though it's a controlled substance, it's cheap, and no harder to give than any other little pill. Monitoring pheno levels in the blood can get expensive, depending on what sort of laboratories are available in your area. It may be easier to start with the 'recommended' dose and decrease if symptoms are fully controlled . . . or increase if they aren't.

All straight out in this household. My female labs do this. Usually when they are having a stretch. They stretch their legs straight out behind them so their tummy is almost touching the ground. These girls have great hips scores - 0:0 and 1:1. My other dogs don't do it and growing up our family dogs did not do this either. I don't think there's a pattern. I have a 2:1 who never stretches her legs behind. I've seen much worse scores who do.

No way in the world would I suggest the Husky needs rescuing. It needs PTS. Owners are dickheads and this dog has killed before. My daughter is distraught and her kids are traumatised. I'd say husky rescue would be in better position to make this decision than we are. They get lots of dogs with a history of problems and may put many -- including dogs like the one in question -- in the 'too hard' basket and recommend PTS. On the other hand, they may know of huskies who killed when confined and given no stimulation, but became decent dogs in another setting. I don't know. Can a big dog who has had 'dickhead' owners, and has come to view small dogs as 'prey' be reformed? I'm sure there are many dogs who would have killed a little dog, but were prevented from doing so because they were well fenced and kept on leads. My dogs kill loads of rodents and the occasional rabbit. If I moved to the suburbs and they got a pet rabbit, should they be PTS? Who knows what is going on in a dog's mind? Who knows how much of behaviour is innate and how much in conditioned by environment?

Things aren't that bad in most of the USA. Having lived in both places, I'd say this is a peculiarly Ozzie tempest in a teapot.

Don't know if the OP is still onboard, but it would be good to suggest Husky Rescue to the neighbor. Lots of people fall in love with the image of a husky and are totally unable to cope with the realities of owning one. Sounds like the neighbor's dog is as much a victim as a perpetrator. The best solution would be to get him to a home that understands huskies (the breed and deed often go together . . . though not always and the right owner can make a lot of difference). If no such home is available, PTS may be the best option.

My heart agrees, and the absurd Vic dangerous dog laws are worthy of ridicule (if not obscenities); but when I look at the statistics for what happens to APBT's in the US (where they dominate shelters and rescue populations and account for 60% of the dogs euthanized in shelters), I wonder if Oz hasn't done the right thing by imposing import bans. See, eg., recent blog entry at www.astraean.com/borderwars/

this comes from a blog, but presents statistics DOL'rs regularly look for, so I thought it worth bending the rules to post it. The original source, the National Pet Owners Survey, is not available online but can be purchased through the American Pet Products Association. I've dropped the last couple paragraphs (which are somewhat anti-pit bull). I haven't reproduced the figures. It's worth referring to the original to see them. Now Only 2% of Dogs Die in Shelters By Christopher – June 26, 2012 from http://www.astraean....n-shelters.html New data released by the ASPCA, HSUS, and the American Pet Products Association's National Pet Owners Survey show that shelter killings are at an all time low in both whole numbers and percent of pet dogs in America. Down from a high of nearly 25% of all dogs per year in the 1970s, as little as 2% of dogs now find their end in US shelters, the majority of them are pit bulls. Despite both the human and pet dog populations in America rising, the number of dogs entering and dying in shelters has fallen steadily for decades. While this vast improvement hasn't stemmed the degree of vitriol against "breeders" by those in the shelter/rescue community, a look at statistics shows that there is little foundation for their anger. The situation is getting better every year and very little of the past or remaining problems have anything to do with hobby breeders or people who buy their dogs. The most significant factor in the steady decline in shelter intakes is widely credited to the advancements made in spay/neuter programs. Nearly four out of five pet dogs are now desexed. Despite making up only 1 in 5 pet dogs, intact dogs account for 9 out of 10 shelter intakes, a staggering asymmetry. Purebreds are under-represented in shelters versus their proportion of the 78 million pet dogs, but up to a quarter of intakes are deemed to be pure versus 75% deemed mixed-breed. The most significant disparity between the general population of dogs and dogs that enter shelter and are euthanized is being designated as a "pit bull" or a pit bull mix. Whereas the percent of dogs desexed has increased since spay/neuter programs were widely introduced in the mid 70s, the popularity of pit bulls and their share of euthanized dogs has steadily increased from as little as 2% in the 1980s to the 60% we see today. The 2.4 to 3.5 million Pit Bull type dogs that are currently pets make up between 3% and 4.5% of the owned dogs in the USA yet the 1.1 million that enter shelters each year account for nearly 30% of all shelter intakes and 60% of all dogs euthanized. That means that more pit bulls are killed than all other breeds combined. ... Purebreds are less likely to end up in shelters than mixed-breeds. Dogs purchased from breeders or pet stores are less likely to end up in shelters. Dogs given as gifts or acquired for more than $100 are less likely to end up in a shelter. Dogs acquired for less than $30 or dogs adopted from a shelter are more likely to end up in a shelter.

1. Legal issues: It's not going to be cost effective bringing in a lawyer. Small claims is a hassle, but cheap, and you don't need representation. The outcome is unpredictable if the contract was verbal, and I'm not sure what happens when someone in QLD sues someone in NSW. I suspect you're going to have to swallow bitter medicine. I had a similar thing happen with a black Lab pup from a well-regarded breeder . . . except she gave no guarantees. 2. I'm tired of chocolate Lab bashing. There are more choco Labs in Australia than there are total dogs of many less popular breeds. There are some damn fine chocolates around. Some people go for chocolate cause it's a challenge and helps narrow a very wide field of options. It's just a colour . . . only two genes are involved and neither has any known functional significance. A few generations back, yellows were rare and trendy, and there was lots of carping about 'breeding for colour'. Now, despite being a recessive colour, yellows dominate blacks in the ring. Sure, trendy colours attract some people who discriminate only for colour. The problem isn't the colour. It's the people involved.

Also, do a study of life expectancy. There are several studies around . . . all flawed . . . but they pretty much agree that the giant breeds have relatively short lives. Some estimates are as low as five or six years for some giant breeds. Moreovert vet costs are higher for procedures on large breeds. A Dane with a torn cruciate ligament is going to be a significant bill . . . and health insurance costs will be higher.