sandgrubber

There may be some physics behind the various answers. Allen's Rule in ecology says that warm blooded animals tend to be lanky (read greyhound) in hot climates and rounder with smaller limbs (read Staffy) in cold climates . . . the idea is you want to minimize surface to volume ratio to deal with cold . . . and maximize it to deal with heat. Add the fact that dogs function as evapourative coolers using the surface area of their lungs as the evapouration chamber . . . and voila, the greyhound / whippet -- with enormous lung capacity -- lies in the sun will the staffy seeks the air con. Or so theory says. It's always fun to predict things after the fact

Try a search on the forum. This was discussed at length last year, including some links to snake forums (where the people regarded the sensors as poppycock). I concluded that it was better to snakeproof through e-collar training than it was to buy some system that may or may not work.

News? More like garbled complaints. Some of them, no doubt, justified.

But would you pay a few percent more for the product to ensure that animals weren't abused? My answer is generally yes . . . though sometimes free range eggs are so expensive that I buy the caged variety anyway. I wouldn't complain if they outlawed the worst abuses on egg farms and I had to pay a bit more for eggs. In the case of drug production, where they spend 10 times more on advertisement and research than they do on production, I'd say tighten the screws and make the company pay to keep the bunnies happy.

Ask them for a quote. These things change all the time, so any answer you may be given may be well off. All I can say from experience is it's a damn sight cheaper if you can fly the dog as accompanied baggage as use air freight or any of the pet transport services. Sometimes a round trip human booking is cheaper than the cost of shipping one dog.

My Jarrah (discussed in the initial post on this thread) has two daughters and a granddaughter who have had litters. All are excellent whelpers, and like their mum, think a 'litter' means 10 pups.

In my experience, Ridgies and Labs are fine together . . . I breed Labs and board a lot of them . . . get quite a few ridgys as well . . . some of the mates in your current play group may still be good.

Me too. I find two pups at the same time has advantages. Labs have no trouble bonding to people, so the bonding with dogs and not people problem isn't the crunch. I have two now . . . about three weeks apart in age . . . who are best friends and keep on another active and interested in all sorts of things. One is obedient. The other wants to do the right thing but I can't trust her cause discipline goes out the window when she senses rabbits or other game. The real concern, in my books, is that they will develop a crash and tumble play routine that ends out with skeletal damage. This can be prevented by intervention and training . . . but requires that someone take the time to police their behaviour. On the other hand, if my dogs can't come up with good hip and elbow scores despite natural vigorous play as pups, I'm ready to cull them from breeding programs. I think dogs should be allowed normal dog behaviour . . . ideally, including play with siblings or pups of near the same age. It requires some care. But the alternative in a dog breeder establishment . . . seeing a young pup confined on its lonesome for long hours each day . . . isn't so nice either.

So what's a better solution. Here in WA, I trust the RSPCA more than I trust my local council or the police. The Canine Councils wouldn't touch it -- nor should a pedigree breed authority be put in charge of policing DD breeders. Should it be business as usual for the puppy mills? Or is someone going to get an effective organisation going to counter the current main and practically lone contender for the job of policing animal cruelty? I've noted Santa Cruz California on DOL several times. Desexing was made mandatory there >10 yrs ago and breeders require licenses. Sta Cruz is viewed as a model, and there is legislation afoot to borrow from the Santa Cruz example in making California-wide regulation. But California has lots of other problems, and seems likely that pet legislation will be put on hold for some time. There are still breeders in Sta Cruz, and by in large, I don't think they find the regulatory regime to be onerous. Google searching will show that the Santa Cruz dog community includes a high end breeder of APBT's and a specialist in guard dogs who specialises in imported European lines, specially trained. I have been unable to find any evidence of surviving puppy farms. I know the smallish breeder that my brother uses for Rat Terriers is still going. The kill rate is way down in dog/cat shelters. The powers that be are too bankrupt to strictly enforce legislation and emphasis has been on education and subsidies for desexing . . . so you still find unregistered entire dogs in rural areas and small breeders doing their own thing. No one seems too worried about the 'dog cops' coming down on them. I don't think registraton of breeders has to be awful, and in theory, a system of controls that curtails commercial production of puppies -- without concern for the lives of mature dogs -- could be a big plus. I despair in seeing that many people seem more interested in bagging the RSPCA than in organising to work for a better solution. It would be great if a relatively ideology-free group were to get formed to

COI is not based in biology, it's based in math. It weights ancestors but does not truly reflect the influence of the particular genetic traits of the "names" in the pedigree but gives a weighting based an instance. Having a extremely (genetically) heterogeneous dog multiple times in a pedigree is not the same as having a extremely (genetically) homogeneous dog a couple of times. A sire is has a high COI is bred to an unrelated dam (who in herself may have a high COI) and the offspring have a COI of 0%. It would be quite interesting to do genetic diversity analysis on breeds such as the Havanese (15 founders), Lowchen (6 founders, though there are inaccuracies in pedigrees and unrecorded outcrossing to other non-Lowchen), or PWD. COI is used by zoo biologists to reduce inbreeding. It is based on the biology of gene recombination. Many biologists are poor at math and avoid it wherever possible. That doesn't reduce the validity of the math. In theory, the index incorporates the COI of the ancestor, so your high COI sire bred to an unrelated dam should end out with his COI getting halved . . . not end up with a 0. I agree that the COI is overrated. And I'm sure, were you to travel around South Pacific islands you could find some very very hearty goats and rats with extremely high COI's. But it is a well documented and straightforward index

Chicken pet mince on special is ok once in awhile, but until you're sure it isn't a gross mixture of chicken fat, skins, guts, and bones, perhaps gone a little rancid, I wouldn't make a habit of feeding the stuff. Ask them what, exactly, they grind up to make 'pet mince'.

Locked up for a long time and 'fixed' for the guy with the gun. I think the other bloke deserves a lot of sympathy even if he may not be my type.

Fantastic, interesting, and well written articles. Thanks for posting them. Not sure that they are relevant to the Chess . . . which so far as I know hasn't been seriously affected by any particular genetic defect and/or witch hunts that seek to totally eliminate a widespread genetic defect . .. but nonetheless, great, well-written articles that make it clear that 'improvement of the breed' can be more complicated than it seems and that over-vigilance in clearing out genetic defects can wreak havoc on a gene pool. Diversity is not a goal in itself. My breed is common and genetically very diverse. This means that all sorts of problems, ranging from gay tails to unacceptable colouration, to heads that look like some other breed, to curly coats can appear in a litter of pups when you join non-related (or not clearly related) lines. The problem is how to 'narrow' the gene pool without concentrating deleterious genes.

From a science perspective: No. It only indicates that sucking behavior in Dobermans has a genetic basis and identifies where that basis is coded. This adds substance to the hypothesis that other compulsive behaviours are hereditary, and is likely to inspire/stimulate further research. Experiments would have to be done on raging vs non raging cockers and shadow-herding vs. non shadow-herding BC's to put a scientific basis to speculations about other compulsive or otherwise abnormal behavioural patterns. It may be that other problem behaviours are hereditary or have hereditary tencencies, but I don't think, at this point, there's anything to suggest that they are all linked to the same bit of genetic coding.

Unfortunately, in my experience, most people doing COI's do the five generation version -- and conclude things are great when the lines are in fact, highly inbred. The COI is a place where math and biology are close together. That is, it's an excellent and reliable predictor of the fraction of genes derived from a single source. What it doesn't tell you is which genes, what defects were present in the 'founder', and whether defective genes have been passed on. . . which is really what you want to know. Both biology and math say genetics is a crap shoot. You can only call the probabilities. Not the roll of the dice. Ten years hence, I'll bet genetics is able to be -- at reasonable cost -- specific about which genes have been passed on and able to identify most of the problems. I sincerely hope pedigree breeders will work themselves into a position to take advantage of such scientific advance.

http://www.physorg.com/news180722905.html extract from middle of article . . . beginning describes canine compulsive behaviour and its breed associations Now, Lindblad-Toh, Karlsson and their colleagues, including Nicholas Dodman at Tufts University and Edward Ginns at the University of Massachusetts Medical School, have taken a first step toward . . . identifying a gene associated with CCD. The work was published online December 22 [2009] in the journal Molecular Psychiatry. The researchers explored the genetic basis of CCD by focusing on the Doberman pincher breed. The manifestations of CCD, including flank sucking, are not only common in the breed, but they are also easily distinguishable: dogs either do it or they don't. That facilitated the researchers' task of identifying affected dogs, making it possible to collect a sufficient number of DNA samples for study. With roughly 150 affected and unaffected dogs, the researchers analyzed the DNA samples using a technique known as genome-wide association, which scans thousands of genetic markers — called SNPs or single nucleotide polymorphisms — throughout the genome to identify ones that are more common in affected dogs compared to in unaffected ones. Those high frequency markers act as signposts for genes and other key functional genomic elements that increase a dog's risk of developing the disorder.

WA = Wait Awhile. Chipping is not required here. I find that if I chip all pups, half the owners don't bother to transfer the chip into their names, and if a chipped dog goes wandering, the Rangers don't always find the chip. So I only bother with chipping if the puppy-buyer requests. I'll be happy to deal with it if the system seems to be working here.

What breed are they? Ditto the question. If they were Labs, I'd say put them under both puppies and mature dogs, and mention on DOL that you're willing to ship to WA and drop the price to below $1000. You'll have well qualified buyers lining up. Fpr high-demand breeds, we cannot produce enough pups in this state. Yes, it is ideal to place at 8 wk but lots of pups adjust beautifully at 6 mo, 1 yr, 3 yrs, 10 yrs, or whathaveyou, especially if the new owner is dog saavy or willing to consult a behaviourist..

I don't read this thread often. I am a Lab breeder. I think there's a need for discussion about where the breed is going and should go . . . because retrieving game is a dying profession for dogs, lab's #1 role deals with their extraordinary 'people skills'; also our breed standard calls for a broad head (which may ultimately result in problems with whelping and a head that looks like a Gr Ch Rottweiler) and dual coat (which means they suffer greatly under high temperatures). Great, also if breed-relevant questions like the pros and cons of EIC genetic testing, or the need to do both PRA testing AND annual eye examinations were to show up. But they don't seem to land here. I don't see that the thread is moving to discuss what I see as significant breed issues. Is Dog Breeds 101 a success? Or just fluff that moves the Training threads off the bottom of the list you see . . .making it necessary to scroll down to get to that forum.

Good luck. It's awful for everybody when a dog goes missing. Hope Tolkien is people friendly and wanders into the right yard. Southern River people are generally dog-friendly . . . so fingers crossed.

I opted against Chess's and went with Labbies cause I didn't want to deal with a rare breed .. . and it seems like the heavy oily coat that is common with Chesses makes dogs pretty uncomfortable in Oz unless there's a good soak nearby. Also . . . Chess chat groups seem to confirm that they are headstrong dogs, making pups unsuitable to inexperienced dog owners of softies. Having said that . . . the most cost effiecient way to deal with genetic diversity in a rare breed is to acquire a sound bitch with good conformation . . . and then go for AI via frozen semen from a complimentary, but not closely-related dog with great health stats, pedigree indicating high heretibility of soundness, and excellent conformation. The semen import will cost you a little less than importing a pup or mature dog, and will, hopefully, result in several pups. Repeat the process a few times and you have a reasonably broad genetic basis for a breed. Cooperation in breeding strategies with others in the same breed will make it a bit cheaper and more effective.

Iodine is an element on the periodic table and even a talented alchemist with a blowtorch can't change it into something else . . . whatever the expiry date on the package. Betadine, so far as I know, is a trade name for iodene solution. I have some left over from 15 yrs ago when I had a hysterectomy and regard it as still fine . . . if I want to deal with the colour. I would trust it 100 yrs from now, if I happened to be alive (fat chance). If you want to kill all bugs with something that tastes bad but doesn't stain, I'd recommend chlorohexadine . . . likewise chemically inert and toxic to bacteria and fungi. My bottle of the stuff came from a dentist who recommended it for gargle but it tastes like chemical waste and I couldn't use it. Great for cleaning thermometers and wiping off wounds. Hot spot treatment is helped by drying . . . so adding something highly volitile, like rubbing alcohol, or something drying like peroxide or rubbing alcohol or tea tree oil may be a good idea. With hotspots, I find that the most important thing is cutting back the hair . . . lots of things work well for wiping out the infection if it's exposed to airflow.

I would only be okay with it if the animals could live in a situation where they could exhibit normal rabbit behaviours, ie eating grass, have some room to run around in and dig in dirt. I would not agree at all if babies were routinely killed just to keep mum in lactation. Having said that it very well could be abused as other forms have been as you mentioned. IF they were humanly treated I have no problems, but I guess it most likely wouldn't happen. Much as some people love to bag the RSPCA, I think their involvement here is good. May well be a great drug production outcome. Who cares if the final product costs 2% more because they give the bunnies a big enclosure and allow them to act like rabbits rather than caged factory animals? Someone needs to keep watch on these things. I don't have the time. Glad someone is doing so. Animal cruelty and animal welfare are charged subjects in a time when values are changing. Anyone taking it on is going to get jumped for two or more directions.

ditto this, except in my experience it's three to four times more expensive to do surgical, harder on the bitch, and a lot more hastle . . . more prog testing required . . . the timing of insertion is highly critical so you end out having to hover for days waiting for just the right time. On the other hand, if you get access to some highly desirable frozen semen, it's wonderful to have it in storage as backup for situations where, say, the planned chilled semen donor gets ill or the parcel gets lost in transit. Because the ideal day for chilled vaginal insertion is a couple days before that of surgical insemenation, having something in the freezer may save you having to skip a season when the chilled stuff doesn't come on time.

Genetic diversity is generally good, but biogeography and evolution tell us it isn't the only factor in health. Think about the goat populations on various smallish tropical islands . . . all descended from a pregnant nanny left behind a century ago. Many such populations are full of rugged, very healthy individuals. Or take most of the species 'native' to Hawaii or the Galapagos. Having a narrow gene pool can be ok if the unhealthy are consistently culled (or desexed) over many generations. Island populations with narrow gene pools do tend to get wiped out when islands get settled by people and the species they bring with them, but that's because they often evolve under weak competition, often without top predators, and they get undone by introduced species or introduced diseases.