Salukifan Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 News report here. Good that the AVA has sewn the first seeds of concern/dissent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 It's all a bit of a sad comedy really. The kinds of people who breed the dogs that end up dumped don't vaccinate or microchip now. What kind of lunatic thinks they're going to spend money on desexing? Without enforcement all these laws will do is punish responsible dog breeders and buyers (and pups) for the behaviour of irresponsible people who will continue on their merry way regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 Yeah and dont you love the comments about how entire dogs are more likely to bite so desexing everyone's baby puppies will solve the issue of those dickheads who breed dogs with bad temperaments Does this one look like he wants to bite and kill people because he has testicles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 (edited) What shits me to tears Steve is that logic and research seems to go out the window when the animal welfare card is played. And that is because the animal welfare lobby is overwhelmingly dominated by rescue based, "save em all" types who see breeding as the root cause of the issue. Here we have it again. There is a problem. Lets jump to a solution without ever asking ourselves "where are these dumped dogs coming from". We have the tool to identify the source of unwanted dogs (microchips). They could have done some basic research about origins. Nope. We'll buy the whole "there are too many pups being bred" approach to solving the problem of unwanted dogs. The problem is that you've got the solution being guided by people who spend their lives cleaning up the problem without ever gaining a genuine understanding of how a dog becomes unwanted IMO. They certainly have minimal knowledge of how dogs can be responsibly bred and placed because THEY RARELY SEE THOSE DOGS. Another nail in the coffin of dogs as pets... that "road to hell is paved with good intentions" saying is absolutely on point. We'll now have the solution as "less dogs". And those lesser numbers will be increasingly dominated by precisely the kinds of breeding that fills the pounds now. Edited October 14, 2015 by Haredown Whippets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Rusty Bucket Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 Steve - have you got any "evidence" or studies or links about what does and doesn't work that I could send to my rep. Already sent him an email, including a link to the RSPCA KB pdf about desexing - which outlines the problem I have with it - ie malformed limbs and joints. So I asked for additional exemptions. Some of the aims I like - eg if you want to breed - you have to get registered and keep records and do health testing and stuff like that. So hopefully the breeders who just want to churn out poor quality puppies can be stopped. But early desex - not so keen on that - even tho my current dog was desexed early. It's not without problems. It was easy to find links to the BSL results in Italy - ie banning 95 different dog breeds did not stop people getting bitten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 14, 2015 Share Posted October 14, 2015 Hang on Ill go looking for the studies but I have a new computer and it will take a minute - should be links too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 Male dogs For most male dogs – especially young male dogs thereis over whelming evidence to believe that sterilisation will not prevent healthproblems and that there is in fact greater risk of health problems arising fromdesexing which far outweigh any health benefits. Positive, sterilisationmale dogs: eliminates the small risk (<1%) of dying from testicular cancer; reduces the risk of non-cancerous prostate disorders; reduces the risk of perianal fistulas; and may possibly reduce the risk of diabetes (data inconclusive). Negative, sterilisationmale dogs: If done before 1 year of age, significantly increases the risk of osteosarcoma (bone cancer); this is a common cancer in medium/large and larger breeds with a poor prognosis; increases the risk of cardiac hemangiosarcoma by a factor of 1.6; triples the risk of hypothyroidism; increases the risk of progressive geriatric cognitive impairment; triples the risk of obesity, a common health problem in dogs with many associated health problems; quadruples the small risk (<0.6%) of prostate cancer; doubles the small risk (<1%) of urinary tract cancers; increases the risk of orthopaedic disorders; and • increases therisk of adverse reactions to vaccinations. Female dogs For female dogsthere may be more health benefits than adverse affects but much is dependent onage a time of spay and breed. Positive,spaying female dogs: If done before 2.5 years of age, greatly reduces the risk of mammary tumours, the most common malignant tumours in female dogs; Nearly eliminates the risk of pyometra, which otherwise would affect about 23% of intact female dogs; pyometra kills about 1% of intact female dogs; reduces the risk of perianal fistulas; and removes the very small risk (0.5%) from uterine, cervical, and ovarian tumours. Negative,spaying female dogs: If done before 1 year of age, significantly increases the risk of osteosarcoma (bone cancer); this is a common cancer in larger breeds with a poor prognosis; increases the risk of splenic hemangiosarcoma by a factor of 2.2 and cardiac hemangiosarcoma by a factor of >5; this is a common cancer and major cause of death in some breeds; triples the risk of hypothyroidism; increases the risk of obesity by a factor of 1.6-2, a common health problem in dogs with many associated health problems; causes urinary “spay incontinence” in 4-20% of female dogs; increases the risk of persistent or recurring urinary tract infections by a factor of 3-4; increases the risk of recessed vulva, vaginal dermatitis, and vaginitis, especially for female dogs spayed before puberty; doubles the small risk (<1%) of urinary tract tumours; increases the risk of orthopaedic disorders; and increases the risk of adverse reactions to vaccinations. <br clear="all" style="page-break-before:always">References 1. http://www.showdogsupersite.com/kenlclub/breedvet/neutr.html2Pollari FL,NEUTERING MALE AND FEMALE DOGS Mary C Wake man dmv 2. Bonnett BN, Bamsey, SC,Meek, AH, Allen, DG (1996) Postoperative complications of elective surgeries indogs and cats determined by examining electronic and medical records. Journalof the American Veterinary Medical Association 208, 1882-1886 http://veterinaryrecord.bvapublications.com/cgi/content/abstract/157/26/829 3 Dorn AS,Swist RA. (1977) Complications of canine ovariohysterectomy. Journal of the American Animal HospitalAssociation 13, 720-724 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WWR-45BCPVC-25&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=dc581398015bf7b46dccb85001e9b293 4 Pollari FL,Bonnett BN. Evaluation of postoperative complications following electivesurgeries of dogs and cats at private practices using computer records, Can VetJ. 1996 November; 37(11): 672–678 5 Teske E, NaanEC, van Dijk EM, van Garderen E, Schalken JA. Canine prostate carcinoma: epidemiological evidence of an increased riskin castrated dogs. Mol Cell Endocrinol.2002 Nov 29;197(1-2):251-5 6 Sorenmo KU,Goldschmidt M, Shofer F, Ferrocone J. Immunohistochemical characterization ofcanine prostatic carcinoma and correlation with castration status andcastration time. Vet ComparativeOncology. 2003 Mar; 1 (1): 48 7 Weaver, AD.Fifteen cases of prostatic carcinoma in the dog. Vet Rec. 1981; 109, 71-75 8 Cohen D, ReifJS, Brodey RS, et al: Epidemiological analysis of the most prevalent sites andtypes of canine neoplasia observed in a veterinary hospital. Cancer Res34:2859-2868, 1974 9 Theilen GH,Madewell BR. Tumors of the genital system. Part II. In:Theilen GH, Madewell BR,eds. Veterinary cancer medicine. 2nd ed. Lea and Febinger, 1987:583–600 10 Glickman LT,Glickman N, Thorpe R. The Golden Retriever Club of America National Health Survey1998-1999 http://www.vet.purdue.edu//epi/golden_retriever_final22.pdf 11 Handbook ofSmall Animal Practice, 3rd ed 12 Hayes HM Jr,Pendergrass TW. Canine testicular tumors: epidemiologic features of 410dogs. Int J Cancer 1976 Oct15;18(4):482-7 13 Ru G,Terracini B, Glickman LT. (1998) Host-related risk factors for canineosteosarcoma. Vet J 1998 Jul;156(1):31-9 14 Cooley DM,Beranek BC, Schlittler DL, Glickman NW, Glickman LT, Waters DJ. Endogenousgonadal hormoneexposure and bone sarcoma risk. CancerEpidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002 Nov;11(11):1434-40 15 Moe L.Population-based incidence of mammary tumours in some dog breeds. J of Reproduction and Fertility Supplement57, 439-443 16 Ferguson HR; Vet Clinics of N Amer:Small Animal Practice; Vol 15, No 3, May 1985 17 MacEwen EG, Patnaik AK,Harvey HJ Oestrogen receptors in canine mammary tumors. Cancer Res., 42: 2255-2259,1982 18 Schneider,R, Dorn, CR, Taylor, DON. FactorsInfluencing Canine Mammary Cancer Development and Post-surgical Survival. JNatl Cancer Institute, Vol 43, No 6, Dec. 1969 19 Feinleib M:Breast cancer and artificial menopause: A cohort study. J Nat Cancer Inst 41:315-329, 1968 20 Dorn CR andSchneider R. Inbreeding and caninemammary cancer. A retrospective study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 57: 545-548, 1976 21 Brodey RS:Canine and feline neoplasia. Adv Vet Sci Comp Med 14:309-354, 1970 22 Hayes A, HarveyH J: Treatment of metastatic granulosa cell tumor in a dog. J Am Vet Med Assoc174:1304-1306, 1979 Page 10 of 12 23 Norris AM,Laing EJ, Valli VE, Withrow SJ. J Vet Intern Med 1992 May; 6(3):145-53 24 Prymak C,McKee LJ, Goldschmidt MH, Glickman LT. Epidemiologic, clinical, pathologic, andprognostic characteristics of splenic hemangiosarcoma and splenic hematoma indogs: 217 cases (1985). J Am Vet Med Assoc 1988 Sep; 193(6):706-12 25 Ware WA,Hopper, DL. Cardiac Tumors in Dogs: 1982-1995. J Vet Intern Med 1999;13:95–103 26 PancieraDL. Hypothyroidism in dogs: 66 cases(1987-1992). J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1994 Mar 1;204(5):761-7 27 Panciera DL.Canine hypothyroidism. Part I. Clinical findings and control of thyroidhormone secretion and metabolism. CompendContin Pract Vet 1990: 12: 689-701. 28 28 Glickman LT,Glickman N, Raghaven M, The Akita Club of America National Health Survey2000-2001 http://www.vet.purdue.edu/epi/akita_final_2.pdf 29 Glickman LT,HogenEsch H, Raghavan M, Edinboro C, Scott-Moncrieff C. Final Report to theHayward Foundation and The Great Dane Health Foundation of a Study TitledVaccinosis in Great Danes. 1 Jan 2004 http://www.vet.purdue.edu/epi/great_dane_vaccinosis_fullreport_jan04.pdf 30 Edney AT,Smith PM. Study of obesity in dogs visiting veterinary practices in the United Kingdom..Vet Rec. 1986 Apr 5;118(14):391-6 31 McGreevy PD,Thomson PC, Pride C, Fawcett A, Grassi T, Jones B. Prevalence of obesity in dogs examined byAustralian veterinary practices and the risk factors involved. Vet Rec. 2005May 28;156(22):695-702 32 Lund EM, Armstrong PJ,Kirk, CA, Klausner, JS. Prevalence andRisk Factors for Obesity in Adult Dogs from Private US Veterinary Practices.Intern J Appl Res Vet Med • Vol. 4, No. 2, 2006 33 Marmor M, Willeberg P, Glickman LT, PriesterWA, Cypess RH, Hurvitz AI. Epizootiologic patterns of diabetes mellitus in dogs Am J Vet Res. 1982Mar;43(3):465-70 34 Moore GE, Guptill LF, WardMP, Glickman NW, Faunt KF, Lewis HB, Glickman LT. Adverse events diagnosed within three days ofvaccine administration in dogs. JAVMAVol 227, No 7, Oct 1, 2005 35 ThrusfieldMV, Holt PE, Muirhead RH. Acquiredurinary incontinence in bitches: its incidence and relationship to sterilisationpractices.. J Small Anim Pract. 1998. Dec;39(12):559-66 36Stocklin-Gautschi NM, Hassig M, Reichler IM, Hubler M, Arnold S. The relationship of urinary incontinence toearly spaying in bitches. J Reprod Fertil Suppl. 2001;57:233-6 37 Arnold S,Arnold P, Hubler M, Casal M, and Rüsch P. Urinary Incontinence in spayed bitches: prevalence and breeddisposition. European Journal ofCampanion Animal Practice. 131, 259-263 38 ThrusfieldMV 1985 Association between urinary incontinence and spaying in bitches Vet Rec116 695 39 Richter KP,Ling V. Clinical response and urethral pressure profile changes afterphenypropanolamine in dogs with primary sphincter incompetence. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1985: 187: 605-611 40 Holt PE.Urinary incontinence in dogs and cats. Vet Rec 1990: 127: 347-350 41 Seguin MA,Vaden SL, Altier C, Stone E, Levine JF (2003) Persistent Urinary TractInfections and Reinfections in 100 Dogs (1989–1999). Journal of VeterinaryInternal Medicine: Vol. 17, No. 5 pp. 622–631 42 SpainCV, Scarlett JM, Houpt KA. Long-term risks and benefits of early-agegonadectomy in dogs. JAVMA 2004;224:380-387 43Verstegen-Onclin K, Verstegen J. Non-reproductive Effects of Spaying and Sterilisation: Effects on the Urogenital System. Proceedings of the Third InternationalSymposium on Non-Surgical Contraceptive Methods for Pet Population Control http://www.acc-d.org/2006%20Symposium%20Docs/Session%20I.pdf 44 Hagman R:New aspects of canine pyometra. Doctoral thesis, Swedish Universityof Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, 2004. Page 11 of12 45.Chastain CB,Panciera D, Waters C: Associations between age, parity, hormonal therapy andbreed, and pyometra in Finnish dogs. Small Animal Endocrinal 1999; 9: 8 46Killingsworth CR, Walshaw R, Dunstan RW, Rosser, EJ. Bacterial population andhistologic changes in dogs with perianal fistula. Am J Vet Res, Vol 49, No. 10, Oct 1988 47 Johnston SD,Kamolpatana K, Root-Kustritz MV, Johnston GR, Prostatic disorders in the dog.Anim Reprod. Sci Jul 2;60-61:405-415 48 Dannuccia GA,Martin RB., Patterson-Buckendahl P Ovariectomy and trabecular bone remodelingin the dog. Calcif Tissue Int 1986; 40: 194-199 49 Martin RB,Butcher RL, Sherwood L,L Buckendahl P, Boyd RD, Farris D, Sharkey N,DannucciG.Effects of ovariectomy in beagle dogs.Bone 1987; 8:23-31 50 Salmeri KR,Bloomberg MS, Scruggs SL, Shille V. Gonadectomy in immature dogs: Effects onskeletal, physical, and behavioral development, JAVMA, Vol 198, No. 7, April1991 51 WhitehairJG, Vasseur PB, Willits NH. Epidemiologyof cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1993 Oct1;203(7):1016-9 52 Glickman LT,Airedale Terrier Club of America,Airedale Terrier Health Survey 2000-2001 http://www.vet.purdue.edu//epi/Airedale%20final%20report_revised.pdf53 53.van Hagen MA,Ducro BJ, van den Broek J, Knol BW. Incidence, risk factors, and heritabilityestimates of hind limb lameness caused by hip dysplasia in a birth cohort ofboxers. Am J Vet Res. 2005Feb;66(2):307-12 54 B. Vidoni,I. Sommerfeld-Stur und E. Eisenmenger: Diagnostic and genetic aspects of patellar luxation in small andminiature breed dogs in Austria.Wien.Tierarztl.Mschr. (2005) 92, p170 – 181 55 Hart BL.Effect of gonadectomy on subsequent development of age-related cognitiveimpairment in dogs J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2001 Jul 1;219(1):51-6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Rusty Bucket Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 Ok here's a nice bit of BS http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-15/new-pet-desexing-laws-will-put-puppies-at-risk/6855352 Desexing to combat rising dog attacks: Environment Minister New figures show a rise in the number of people hospitalised for dog attacks in SA. Dangerous dog Photo: The number of people hospitalised by severe dog attacks in SA has increased significantly in the past four years. (Website: Tekkaus.com) In the past financial year some 299 people were admitted to hospital for severe attacks, an increase of more than 100 on figures four years ago. Environment Minister Ian Hunter said more than 1,300 dog attacks were reported to councils last financial year. "It's a small increase on last year but unfortunately the number of attacks that are leading to hospital admission is on the rise," he said. "It's another very strong case for mandatory desexing of animals. "Desexing dogs is known to be an important modifiable risk factor for dog attacks as it usually makes dogs less aggressive and less likely to attack." Mr Hunter said the majority of dog attacks that led to death were linked to dogs that had not been desexed. He said 56 children under the age of nine were among those hospitalised with dog bites in 2014-15. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 "Desexing dogs is known to be an important modifiable risk factor for dog attacks as it usually makes dogs less aggressive and less likely to attack." Mr Hunter said the majority of dog attacks that led to death were linked to dogs that had not been desexed. He said 56 children under the age of nine were among those hospitalised with dog bites in 2014-15. There are lies, damned lies and statistics. Any factor viewed in isolation from other contributers is dangerous. The primary contributers to attacks on children are failure to supervise and failure to understand the warning signs that a dog is unhappy. Removing a dogs' testicles won't improve rates of parental supervision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog_fan Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 I would say unsound temperament plays a bigger part in dog bites than testicles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
denali Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 "Desexing dogs is known to be an important modifiable risk factor for dog attacks as it usually makes dogs less aggressive and less likely to attack." Mr Hunter said the majority of dog attacks that led to death were linked to dogs that had not been desexed. He said 56 children under the age of nine were among those hospitalised with dog bites in 2014-15. Recently in my statistic class, we learnt that in 2007 there were 4 nicholas cage movies released, compared to one or none other years, and in that year there were 100 more drownings. Therefore, obviously Nicholas cage movies cause drownings. The point of it was to not trust statistics entirely because they can be spun however you want. I would be more likely to assume that these dogs are owned by people who fail to manage and train their dogs correctly, and therefore don't wish to spend money on desexing, leading to these untrained dogs biting and happening to have testicles... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Rusty Bucket Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 (edited) I sent an email to these guys: Paul Ciaica <[email protected]> environment minister of irresponsible comments <[email protected]> Martin Hamilton Smith <[email protected]> The more different people who write the better, with individually crafted emails - not just form letters - the better. State what you want. State why you're writing. Provide your argument and support Try to keep it short. (me fail) Keep it calm and polite (it's easier to understand the message). So what I want is no mandatory desexing. Or exemptions for people who want to do dog sports or have a large breed dog (until 18 months old) and I want Government subsidy of desexing - make it cheap and easy for people to do the right thing. I want better education around desexing and factors leading to dog bites eg leaving visiting children unsupervised with your dog - bad idea. why Health problems for large breed dogs and sport dogs. the dog bite stuff is just fear mongering with out context and I cited a bunch of factors that lead to dog bites and that it's possible to own a well behaved entire dog. That France and Germany can have entire dogs in the city without everyone being terrified of being bitten. I also provided a bunch of information supporting the health benefits of owning a dog. Martin Hamilton-Smith (Waite) is quite keen to reduce the health budget - cos SA can't afford it. Especially with the increasing cost of health problems related to obesity and aging. Walking a dog keeps you younger and fitter longer. I put Paul Ciaca on the list - cos he regularily walks his Cavs on Tennyson beach. this is the list of ministers with contact info https://www.sa.gov.au/directories/government This is a list of elected reps. If you poke around in there - you can find stuff about electorates - to figure out which one is the right one for you. http://www.parliament.sa.gov.au/Members/HouseofAssembly/Pages/List%20of%20Members.aspx PS here is a bit of help for finding your electorate http://www.ecsa.sa.gov.au/electoral-boundaries/find-my-electoral-district and you can write to anyone in the SA Senate aka LC Legislative council - they all represent all of us. Eg Kelly Vincent represents disabled people and some of them need dogs. And an early desex on a Labrador is bad. Edited October 15, 2015 by Mrs Rusty Bucket Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 "Desexing dogs is known to be an important modifiable risk factor for dog attacks as it usually makes dogs less aggressive and less likely to attack." Mr Hunter said the majority of dog attacks that led to death were linked to dogs that had not been desexed. He said 56 children under the age of nine were among those hospitalised with dog bites in 2014-15. Recently in my statistic class, we learnt that in 2007 there were 4 nicholas cage movies released, compared to one or none other years, and in that year there were 100 more drownings. Therefore, obviously Nicholas cage movies cause drownings. The point of it was to not trust statistics entirely because they can be spun however you want. I would be more likely to assume that these dogs are owned by people who fail to manage and train their dogs correctly, and therefore don't wish to spend money on desexing, leading to these untrained dogs biting and happening to have testicles... Yep you can make statistics swing depending on the question and the correlations you make . Do they even keep data on whether a dog has its testicles if it bites someone, do they keep data on who breeds it and owns it and what if anything there is in common? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 I sent an email to these guys: Paul Ciaica <[email protected]> environment minister of irresponsible comments <[email protected]> Martin Hamilton Smith <[email protected]> The more different people who write the better, with individually crafted emails - not just form letters - the better. State what you want. State why you're writing. Provide your argument and support Try to keep it short. (me fail) Keep it calm and polite (it's easier to understand the message). So what I want is no mandatory desexing. Or exemptions for people who want to do dog sports or have a large breed dog (until 18 months old) and I want Government subsidy of desexing - make it cheap and easy for people to do the right thing. I want better education around desexing and factors leading to dog bites eg leaving visiting children unsupervised with your dog - bad idea. why Health problems for large breed dogs and sport dogs. the dog bite stuff is just fear mongering with out context and I cited a bunch of factors that lead to dog bites and that it's possible to own a well behaved entire dog. That France and Germany can have entire dogs in the city without everyone being terrified of being bitten. I also provided a bunch of information supporting the health benefits of owning a dog. Martin Hamilton-Smith (Waite) is quite keen to reduce the health budget - cos SA can't afford it. Especially with the increasing cost of health problems related to obesity and aging. Walking a dog keeps you younger and fitter longer. I put Paul Ciaca on the list - cos he regularily walks his Cavs on Tennyson beach. this is the list of ministers with contact info https://www.sa.gov.a...ries/government This is a list of elected reps. If you poke around in there - you can find stuff about electorates - to figure out which one is the right one for you. http://www.parliamen...%20Members.aspx PS here is a bit of help for finding your electorate http://www.ecsa.sa.g...ctoral-district and you can write to anyone in the SA Senate aka LC Legislative council - they all represent all of us. Eg Kelly Vincent represents disabled people and some of them need dogs. And an early desex on a Labrador is bad. Good thinking - everyone should have a go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flame ryder Posted October 15, 2015 Author Share Posted October 15, 2015 I'm embarrassed to be a South Australian with stupid rules like this. Seems to be overwhelming support of it on most FB sites today and last night. I totally get what some of them are saying, but to de-sex every dog except those of registered breeders seems a bit OTT. All these do-gooders are living in the present where yes pounds are full, lots of dogs are dumped and many end up getting put down. But if things go to plan and everybody follows the rules then think about the impacts in the future, the good old mutt may be a thing of the past, a rarity, a dog Nana used to have but we are no longer allowed that privilege. I'm sure alot of them would have been cheerfully typing away with a mutt or crossbreed sitting at their feet, did they for one minute stop to think where it came from? Probably not...and should they want one in the future they may have to illegally obtain one or drive over the border to bring one back. Ok now I'm all for buying from a registered breeder and now that I am more educated I prefer to do so...however I don't like being told I have to. How on earth will the registered breeders cope with the demand? Bad enough now trying to buy from a registered breeder, long waiting lists, they will only get longer. Then there's those who tell you if you want a dog go rescue an adult dog from the pound, or a greyhound. All well and good if you want to but I have been there done that and I prefer to buy a puppy - my choice. Things might get interesting too regarding the age of de-sexing. When I get a new pup (and I will as humans outlive many dogs) then no-ones going to tell me to de-sex my large breed dog young...bad enough I had to get my rotti done at 14 months because I wanted to trial him...but that was my choice. Anyway I'm going to stop ranting and raving but this has got me all fired up Lets wait and see how this pans out 10 years down the track. All those do-gooders will be complaining about how expensive dogs are to buy and you just can't get puppies anymore for the kiddies. Meanwhile there will still be plenty of cats...always will be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 I would say unsound temperament plays a bigger part in dog bites than testicles. Agreed - problem is we have nutters in the dog world who actually select for cranky dog temperaments when they breed them or who think when Mum or Dad is nuts that its a one off . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 I'm embarrassed to be a South Australian with stupid rules like this. Seems to be overwhelming support of it on most FB sites today and last night. I totally get what some of them are saying, but to de-sex every dog except those of registered breeders seems a bit OTT. All these do-gooders are living in the present where yes pounds are full, lots of dogs are dumped and many end up getting put down. But if things go to plan and everybody follows the rules then think about the impacts in the future, the good old mutt may be a thing of the past, a rarity, a dog Nana used to have but we are no longer allowed that privilege. I'm sure alot of them would have been cheerfully typing away with a mutt or crossbreed sitting at their feet, did they for one minute stop to think where it came from? Probably not...and should they want one in the future they may have to illegally obtain one or drive over the border to bring one back. Ok now I'm all for buying from a registered breeder and now that I am more educated I prefer to do so...however I don't like being told I have to. How on earth will the registered breeders cope with the demand? Bad enough now trying to buy from a registered breeder, long waiting lists, they will only get longer. Then there's those who tell you if you want a dog go rescue an adult dog from the pound, or a greyhound. All well and good if you want to but I have been there done that and I prefer to buy a puppy - my choice. Things might get interesting too regarding the age of de-sexing. When I get a new pup (and I will as humans outlive many dogs) then no-ones going to tell me to de-sex my large breed dog young...bad enough I had to get my rotti done at 14 months because I wanted to trial him...but that was my choice. Anyway I'm going to stop ranting and raving but this has got me all fired up Lets wait and see how this pans out 10 years down the track. All those do-gooders will be complaining about how expensive dogs are to buy and you just can't get puppies anymore for the kiddies. Meanwhile there will still be plenty of cats...always will be If you must, take the vasectomy option - hormones remain and dog doesn't pay the price for stupid laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 I'm embarrassed to be a South Australian with stupid rules like this. Seems to be overwhelming support of it on most FB sites today and last night. I totally get what some of them are saying, but to de-sex every dog except those of registered breeders seems a bit OTT. All these do-gooders are living in the present where yes pounds are full, lots of dogs are dumped and many end up getting put down. But if things go to plan and everybody follows the rules then think about the impacts in the future, the good old mutt may be a thing of the past, a rarity, a dog Nana used to have but we are no longer allowed that privilege. I'm sure alot of them would have been cheerfully typing away with a mutt or crossbreed sitting at their feet, did they for one minute stop to think where it came from? Probably not...and should they want one in the future they may have to illegally obtain one or drive over the border to bring one back. Ok now I'm all for buying from a registered breeder and now that I am more educated I prefer to do so...however I don't like being told I have to. How on earth will the registered breeders cope with the demand? Bad enough now trying to buy from a registered breeder, long waiting lists, they will only get longer. Then there's those who tell you if you want a dog go rescue an adult dog from the pound, or a greyhound. All well and good if you want to but I have been there done that and I prefer to buy a puppy - my choice. Things might get interesting too regarding the age of de-sexing. When I get a new pup (and I will as humans outlive many dogs) then no-ones going to tell me to de-sex my large breed dog young...bad enough I had to get my rotti done at 14 months because I wanted to trial him...but that was my choice. Anyway I'm going to stop ranting and raving but this has got me all fired up Lets wait and see how this pans out 10 years down the track. All those do-gooders will be complaining about how expensive dogs are to buy and you just can't get puppies anymore for the kiddies. Meanwhile there will still be plenty of cats...always will be If you mean registered purebred breeders coping with demand they cant - no where near it but they cant make laws that prevent a person from breeding cross bred dogs or non ANKC registered dogs anyway . They can introduce a system that allows everyone regardless of what they breed to be registered with council and in some states they also allow exemptions to a point for breeders who are registered with some other orgs. but they have to give everyone regardless of what they breed the ability to do so with an even playing field. All this registration or licencing process does is make it hard for small breeders who want to just have a litter now and then does and make it hard for small breeders. As small breeders stop breeding bigger breeders fill the demand or the small breeders have to get bigger to get their money back that they have had to use to comply with crazy laws - in the meantime the really rotten ones carry on as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 (edited) What shits me to tears Steve is that logic and research seems to go out the window when the animal welfare card is played. And that is because the animal welfare lobby is overwhelmingly dominated by rescue based, "save em all" types who see breeding as the root cause of the issue. Here we have it again. There is a problem. Lets jump to a solution without ever asking ourselves "where are these dumped dogs coming from". We have the tool to identify the source of unwanted dogs (microchips). They could have done some basic research about origins. Nope. We'll buy the whole "there are too many pups being bred" approach to solving the problem of unwanted dogs. The problem is that you've got the solution being guided by people who spend their lives cleaning up the problem without ever gaining a genuine understanding of how a dog becomes unwanted IMO. They certainly have minimal knowledge of how dogs can be responsibly bred and placed because THEY RARELY SEE THOSE DOGS. Another nail in the coffin of dogs as pets... that "road to hell is paved with good intentions" saying is absolutely on point. We'll now have the solution as "less dogs". And those lesser numbers will be increasingly dominated by precisely the kinds of breeding that fills the pounds now. Its not just that - when they do introduce knee jerk things into legislation they have no method of measuring whether its having any negative or positive impact - The ACT mandatory desexing made no difference - they see this they know this yet there is never going to be a discussion about whether it can be lifted because it hasnt had the desired result. They aren't pushing for a pilot study or a gathering of real research.they haven't built in a method for assessing the results. They are talking about every dog owner and their dogs being affected who live in that state based on assumption and do gooders. Edited October 15, 2015 by Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Rusty Bucket Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 (edited) I don't think they can do a vasectomy or a tube cut on an 8 week old puppy That's the problem. I don't mind getting my dog desexed - I just don't want it done until she's 18 months old and done growing properly. Edited October 15, 2015 by Mrs Rusty Bucket Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now