kendalyn

aww! It's cute :-)

[quote]the fact that this could happen never occured to him, it's not something men generally think about[/quote] Must be nice! :roll:

Wipe the discharge away and then check 15-20 minutes later and see if it's back. That will tell you if it is traces of urine.

You might want to sign up for a genetics class at your local college. I just finished an advanced genetics course (Not for breeding purposes, it was a requirement for my major) and I think you would find it very educational.

When Buck was younger he had some yellowish white discharge from his penis. I asked the vet about it and she said it is completly normal in a young dog. Buck is almost 2 and he hasn't had it for quite a while. He didn't show the licking behavior though. The licking is a concern. Usually when dogs continuously lick one area, there is a reason. Plus, I seem to remember that Duke is not a very young dog and my vet did say it was normal in young dogs. I would have him looked at since it has been 4 days. It'll probably take you a few days to get an appointment anyway.

I could very easily be wrong here but I thought it was usually the owner of the bitch that kept and cared for most of the puppies. I thought that the owner of the stud gets paid the stud fee and maybe gets one of the puppies when they are ready to go. Does the owner of the stud dog bear the same responsibility in caring for the pups as the owner of the bitch?

The only thing I know about showing is that usually the dogs cannot be spayed or neutered to participate and he also needs to be registered. If he is already "fixed" there are a lot of other competition sports that Cole can participate in such as fly ball and agility. I'm sure others will have more information for you though as I have never participated in showing. :-)

You can buy stuff called "Safe Paw Ice Melter". It is made by a company called Gaia. I've never used it but it looks good. Here is a description of the product from the web site: "Finally a safe ice melter for your pet! Chemical ice melters can cause severe burns between the pads on your pet

:lol: That was good HF

ugh, around this time keeping the snow out is the hard thing. My solution: I cover the entire backseat in an old sheet before Buck gets in. And I also don't care if my seat gets a little wet or muddy. :lol: I tried one of those seat covers that are made for dogs, but it kept popping off the seat. The sheet works the best. Oh no! Will you still be able to have the dogs in the car once the baby comes?

when you drive around in the middle of winter with your window down so your dog can stick his head out! People kept looking at me and my silly dog sticking his head out the window because he just LOVES to ride that way! I just turn the heater on a little higher. :-)

good point Courtnek

It would have been kinder if your boss had worked with the dog and taught him not to chase cattle. Putting the dog down is a horrible solution. I don't think your boss really cared about his dog.

I vote for Dancing Queen. Kung Foo Fighting is good too :-)

[quote]Why not use a normal every day dog? That seems like it would be the best candidate for testing[/quote] In doing research every possible variable must be controlled. The dogs must all be of the same breed and probably the same litter to rule out variables for breed related differences. They could also do a round of clinical studies where the different procedures are done on dogs out in the public and the results recorded. [quote]Why not take one from a shelter?[/quote] The researchers need to know the exact lineage and breed of the dogs. How would they know anything about the animal? It could even be possible that a dog from a shelter had already had damage done to his/her leg and that could effect future breaks or healing. There are just too many uncontrolled variables. [quote]I have a hard time dealing with those who dispose of animals just because it's most convienient[/quote] It's not out of convenience. The researchers want to examine the broken leg under a microscope. Either they would have to amputate the dog's leg or euthanize it. Examination under microscope will tell the scientists exactly how well healed the leg is. An x-ray wouldn't give as much information. This is the argument that the grad students are making. They don't believe that examination under microscope is necessary. [quote]You also have to take into consideration that these dogs had their legs intentionally broken by humans. What kind of mind set are the dogs in? Are they concious of what happened and how was the proceedure done? Were they left to suffer in pain? Are they fearful or even aggressive towards humans because of this? [/quote] My best guess was that the researchers did not leave these animals in pain unnecessarily. It does state in the article that the dogs were given pain medication. The legs were most likely broken surgically so they could control the kind of break. Sort of like when you break your nose or a finger and it has to be rebroken in order to set properly. I'm sure psychologically this isn't much fun for the dogs. It would be nice if after the research they could go to nice homes, but sometimes the kind of research requires euthanasia. The aim though is not to torture dogs, it is to help other dogs in the future by using better procedures to heal a break. There are laws requiring certain ethical treatment of the research animals and the second article showed that the researchers are abiding by them.

Hi! I'm Kendalyn and I have a 2 year old black lab mix named Buck, a hamster named Clover and a beta named Clifford! Nice to meet you :-)

My question would be, do these research students have homes for the five dogs? What do they plan to do with them once they are "saved"? If they have five people lined up to integrate a dog into their home who has never lived in a home environment and will need a lot of training and socialization, then great! But if the researchers won't agree to release the dogs AND they don't even have homes than I don't see the point. If they really want to help five dogs, they can go to the local shelter and do so after these are euthanized. I guess it sounds harsh but why waste so much time on five dogs that probably can't be saved when there are so many that can?

[quote]the counties can handle it, the same way they handle rabies vacs...if you dont get your dog rabies shots, the county comes after you BIG time[/quote] How do they come after you? Here the only way animal control would find out is if your dog were involved in an incident where animal control was needed. Probably only a biting incident or if someone complained about your dog for something. They don't go door to door checking for tags. I really don't think they have the resources to do this. [quote]If the dog is involved in a biting incident, and he is not tagged, then the owner gets a HUGE fine and possibly jail time. same as if they are breeding without a license[/quote] A fine yes but I'm not comfortable with putting more people in already crowded jails who are clearly not dangerous to society. As a tax payer it is just too expensive to pay for these people to sit in jail and have the added possibility of losing their job or even children and therefore going on welfare and medicaid. Two more things taxpayers pay for. Yes, maybe the bite ratio would go down, simply because less people are owning dogs and as a consequence there are less dogs period. A vast majority would be put to sleep by animal control. Mandating obedience training kind of irks me because I've been to obedience classes before and they were awful. In fact, I would say probably detrimental to someone who knew nothing about training a dog. I know there are good and bad ones around, but if there are only classes that directly conflict with someone's style of training, why should they be forced to attend? I have never taken Buck to formal obedience training and wouldn't unless he had a behavioral issue that I couldn't handle on my own. I can see mandating it maybe for first time dog owners, or maybe if there were a way to "test out" of it. I don't think everybody should be mandated to do it for every dog they own.

That is very strange! Her owner must not have known she was in heat. :roll: Wait... I thought that dogs had to usually be spayed or neutered in order to be allowed into most dog parks...? Maybe not so in this case.

Not all cases of spongieform encephalopathy are caused by beef or ingesting infected meat. There are many types of spongieform encephalopathies caused by prions besides CJ disease. A prion is simply a disease causing protein. They are very mysterious so far and the mechanism of disease is not well understood. However, it is known that diseases caused by prions can arise spontaneously (may be caused by a mutated homozygous gene that causes greater susceptibility without infection) and can also be hereditary. In the case of heredity, Mendelian transmission is shown where the prion is an autosomal and dominant trait. Many people believe that ingesting meat from an animal infected with BSE is the only way to develop the disease. It's not the case.

Courtnek Wrote: [quote]Now for my opinion...I think anyone who wants to own a dog, and cannot pass a basic muster on dogs and training, should be REQUIRED to take the dog to formal obedience classes. No exception, no matter what kind of dog. this goes for mixes as well as purebreds.... second, ALL breeders should be required to be licensed. And unless you are a LICENSED breeder, or can prove you are showing the dog, it should be required to be neutered. I may get flamed for it...but I think this will help keep the number of "mutt" Pit Mixes down, so the media can find something else to waste their time on.... [/quote] Do you think that this will be enforceable? Animal control currently can't keep dogs from being starved to death, dumped on the streets, and abused. It would be nearly impossible for them to check that everybody's dog is spayed and neutered and is not being bred without a license. And what do you do when people are discovered to own a dog who isn't spayed or neutered and hasn't been to obedience class? Do you take the dog away? Well, now you have more dogs in the custody of animal control who will be put to sleep if they can't be adopted out. I agree something needs to be done though. I would rather start with education, education, education. I don't think forcing someone to go to obedience classes would work. You have to make it something they want to do. They would also have to be fairly inexpensive. Same thing with spaying and neutering. You would have to give people an incentive to do it. Maybe some obedience trainers would agree to get together and hold large very basic obedience classes for free every few months. With a lot of attention by the local media I bet a lot of people would come. But you cannot make it compulsory. People have to want to do it. The fastest way to effect changes in the attitude toward dog ownership is by making it socially unacceptable to have a dog that is not "fixed" or does not have basic manners. Obviously, this is a lot harder to do than making blanket legislation, but I believe it would work better.

[quote]However, I'm really uncomfortable with often well meaning legislation when so many apparently unenforcable laws regarding animal cruelty and neglect already exist[/quote] I completely agree HF! I think that quite often laws are too hastily created. If you think it's hard to get a law made, try getting a law unmade! [quote]I worry that, since so many people love the look of altered (docked/cropped) dogs, if it became illegal, they would only resort to doing it at home[/quote] Excellent point.

So what do you guys think about dew claw removal? I would think that if someone was against cropping and docking that they would also want the dog to keep their dew claw. I really have no idea why it is done. My guess would be maybe because it could get caught on something and ripped off. But I question that as a good reason as Buck has his dew claws and another dog of mine had hers also. They were never a problem.

I'd think that the royal family could afford to hire a behaviorist to help these dogs...

I don't believe cropping and docking should be illegal mainly because I get nervous about any new law in general. I feel legislation gets out of hand sometimes and I don't think it is cruel. Animal protection services already have enough to worry about. But I would encourage people not to do it. I don't understand dew claw removal either and so far nobody has said anything about the rightness of that. Dew claw removal and docking are usually done at the same age. Here's an undocked and uncropped Boxer: [img]http://www.cdb.org/images/10004.gif[/img]