sandgrubber

As I read it, they weren't to capacity with the 30 day limit, so going to the 10 day limit means 1/3 as many dogs, hence 1/3 as much revenue. This would be the equivalent, in a boarding kennel, of decreasing your number of boarders to 1/3 the number. Having run a kennel, I know this would greatly increase costs per dog, especially if you were paying for full time staff that you couldn't just lay off and you had to pay financing costs on the property and facilities.

I suspect you could do as well by taking a normal dog crate, preferably with a low roof, and throwing a pile of doonas over it. Alt., bend a piece of weldwire mesh. Advantage: uses stuff you've already got and relatively easy to clean. The beauty of those is that there is no mesh/steel/straight hard walls ;) I am presuming that when a dog curves/stretches that a surface which moulds and moves is more comfortable than mesh ;) I make my own "dog rolls" from foam bed toppers ..rolled into a cylinder , and filled with bedding :) True, but as someone with a foot ailment that hurts badly when anything presses down on it -- usually covers or a dog resting its head -- I think an ailing dog might be better off with a 'cave' than with heavy covering. Nature has long had canines in dens.

I understand why, in the short term, they need to increase daily fees to cover costs, given that fixed costs dominate their budget and the 10 day period will bring in less revenue than the 30 day period. However, as I understand it, they have closed some facilities, which should bring down fixed costs (and effectively increase costs by a large amount for WA customers, who will now have to operate through the east coast). Without seeing their budget, it's hard to comment much further. I would be surprised if there weren't ways that they could bring the daily service cost down from $149 without effecting the quality of service.

Unfortunately,'stakeholders' with the biggest financial stake are the most likely to make it into the meetings where the real decision making takes place.

I've moved from Oz to Florida. We have scads of ticks here, fortunately not paralysis ticks, but lyme disease and a few other diseases show up occasionally. I was getting two ro three ticks a day each on my three dogs (Labradors). Then I tried a tick collar tried Preventic, active ingredient is amatraz. I have found only one tick in the last four months, and I haven't changed the collars yet. Pretty amazing cause they're only supposed to be good for two months. I know the buggers are still out there, cause I find them on myself every now and then. I've never heard this particular drug discussed on DOL. Given what a horrible problem paralysis ticks are, thought some of you might want to try it. It is available in Oz, and not that expensive. eg., http://www.vetshopaustralia.com.au/preventic-tick-collar-C99.aspx

I suspect you could do as well by taking a normal dog crate, preferably with a low roof, and throwing a pile of doonas over it. Alt., bend a piece of weldwire mesh. Advantage: uses stuff you've already got and relatively easy to clean.

Why call it breed specific legislation if it isn't even breed specific? 'Prejudice against certain looks' legislation would be more apt.

My vet -- one of them anyway -- told me not to worry too much about adults with the runs so long as they were looking bright and acting normal. Another remedy is pumpkin, canned or cooked fresh. There are lots of remedies and most of them work most of the time cause such problems tend to pass on their own. I don't bother fasting the dogs unless it is really bad.

Mars mostly markets confections, which wouldn't go very well in dog food. USDA and FDA both regulate pet food manufacture. They probably go pretty light on inspections, but I don't think recycling unsold human food would survive as a regular practice.

.No need to apologize. Sometimes some of us are quarrelsome, and there are a lot of people who, for good reason, are defensive about breeder bashing. The forum has had its share of trolls, and they are annoying. One factor I haven't heard anyone raise is the buyer's contract. If the breeder offered a guarantee on the pup's health to a certain age, that prevails. If not, some breeders will still accept responsibility even though they don't have to. For example, someone once bought a pup from me who developed late onset deafness, a condition rare in Labradors, but a similar condition did appear in a couple other pups with the same sire (I don't own the sire). Not clear when the condition developed. The pup may have been deaf for many months before it was diagnosed at two years. I gave them another dog, one I was going to rehome, to serve as a 'hearing ear' companion for the deaf dog;This was purely voluntary; it worked out well and I felt good about it. They were very good owners, and I was glad to be able to help them.

Not if it's an iPad . Sorry. Couldn't resist. <div>I think the general pharma rule is you can split tablets that have a score mark dividing them in half on one side.</div>

Market power tests aren't likely to be a problem with the acquisition leaving Mars a distant #2 to Nestles.

totally agree. Large fines for repeat offenders. Slap on the wrist may be appropriate for first offenders. Sometimes it takes a first offense to diagnose a fencing problem. Eg, it may be a surprise when you discover your puppy can dig UNDER the expensive fence you put up.

Sprocket, a rescue I had in the 80s, was big on doing jaw exercises with tennis balls, leaving them well coated with slime. Depositing a slime ball in a guest's lap was bad enough. Once she deposited one right into a friend's G&T. o,k. more funny than embarrassing if you have that sort of sense of humor.

Pull lovely smelling things out of the bathroom trash.

My dogs, and almost all the Labradors I've met, are obsessed with food, but paradoxically, not the least inclined to resource guarding. I don't regularly take their food off them, but I do periodically need to take something out of their mouths -- they pick up all sorts of crap, and a lot of it is literally crap, on their walks -- and sometimes I need to take it away from them -- like if it's a cooked bone. I get zero resistance, even if I put my fingers down the throat a bit. [A few weeks ago I went to remove something and it was well fermented cat poo, which I got all over myself and the smell was hard to wash out]. Point being, I suspect resource guarding is pretty rare in some breeds and if you're sensible with management of food, you won't have problems.

Given Mars is historically a candy manufacturers, I wouldn't expect attention to nutritional value, as opposed to the bottom line. Look for more product differentiation with price elevation for those who are willing to pay, as in the expensive breed-specifics from Royal Canin.

To Slim Down, Procter & Gamble Sells Most of Its Pet Food Brands to Mars Mr. Lafley set about addressing Mr. Ackman's criticisms on Wednesday, agreeing to sell most of Procter & Gamble's pet foods brands — including Iams and Eukanuba — to Mars, best known as a candy maker, for $2.9 billion in cash.Since A. G. Lafley returned last year for a second stint as chief executive of Procter & Gamble, investors have been waiting for him to make a big move. blah blah blah ... streamlining the company ... Another possible deal for Procter & Gamble could be the sale of the remainder of its pet food business. The company said it would sell the remaining 20 percent of that unit to Mars or another buyer, which could fetch $700 million. ... Mars, one of the largest private companies in the country, is best known as a confectioner, the maker of M&M's, Snickers and Twix. But the company also has a robust business selling food for cats and dogs. This is the biggest purchase for Mars since its $23 billion acquisition of the chewing gum company Wrigley in 2008. Mars has annual net sales of about $33 billion. Its stable of pet food brands includes Whiskas cat food and the Pedigree and Royal Canin pet food lines. If approved, the deal will give Mars 20 percent of the United States market for cat and dog food combined, up from its current 13 percent. But it will still be well behind Nestlé, which has 50 percent of the market with its popular Purina brands. In dog food alone, the deal will make Mars somewhat stronger, giving it control of 28 percent of the country's dog food market, up from 19 percent. Source: http://dealbook.nyti...type=blogs&_r=1 Spotted on Terrierman blog.

How about educating themselves to know that males in the wild kill the young. They could have separated them. Unfortunately, zoos function as public entertainment and the public loves baby animals. This sets up many ethical problems. I'm sure they know that males will kill young. But they would probably have to euth the young in any case if they don't have the facilities to care for them. For all we know, the bears were an unwanted gift from Putin. To turn them down would have been an insult . . .

Glad you've worked it through. They sound like typical Labradors . . . super keen on food, but not prone to aggression.

Quoting from the article: 'Zoos have too many captive bears and it is almost impossible to send them somewhere. Surplus bears have to be euthanised, and it is better to do that at a very young age when the mortality in nature is also the highest.'

Cutting tempered glass and engineering the result to get it back to original strength would be prohibitively expensive. I don't think anyone does it. Go for a click in . .. or build one if you're handy.

I feed my three labs together. I fill all three bowls at the same time and set them down simultaneously. The puppy finishes last. I've never had any trouble with growling or stealing, although I think it would be less peaceful if they were feed sequentially rather than simultaneously. You do not want the pup finish first and come over to the older dog to see if there's anything to be had from the other bowl.

Have I missed something? I've seen no mention of how large this class is, and little mention of how the trainer set forth, communicated, and enforced rules. Also no mention of discussing the incident in class with those involved. I've attended classes that were utter chaos . .. too large, no one can hear the trainer, people pretty much doing what they see fit. Such classes may be ok for easy-going dogs whose owners want to learn basics, but they are not appropriate for working through the problems of reactive or DA dogs. The club or the trainer or whoever set up the class should be ensuring the safety of everyone involved. Should this situation have come to a bad end, I would guess that the club or the trainer would be legally liable, moreso than the owner of the aggressive dog. From what I've read (not everything carefully) the humans involved learned from this event . . . other than aversion.

I don't have much to add, other than to say KISS. Too many treatments at once and you'll never figure out what is working. Also, remember, histamic reactions are at least as often an out-of-balance, over-reactive, immune system as they are a weak immune system. It's hard to achieve balance when you're juggling several meds/supplements.