neutering??
Val
There has been alot of debates about this subject and it is clear that
everybody has different views, so if we want to get this news group up and
running with a friendly atmosphere can I suggest that we leave well alone
for a while???
It would be nice to get going on the group with some nice friendly chat and
advice.
What do you say people???
boxlady.
A Truscott
wrote:
>I would say 8months old is about right..
>There has been alot of debates about this subject and it is clear that
>everybody has different views, so if we want to get this news group up and
>running with a friendly atmosphere can I suggest that we leave well alone
>for a while???
Why don't you come out with what you are really trying to say Val and
that is that you would like all us opponents of barbaric acts such as
tail docking ear cropping spaying and neutering to go away and leave
you cruel minded people to get on with it just like Blair and his gang
of cut throats would like the farmers of this country to stand by
while he slaughters their perfectly healthy animals .
Well I got news for you Val I will not be kept quiet on these issues
and never will be .
Adam .
Malcolm
"A Truscott" <trus...@newshunter.yi.org> wrote in message
news:ihq6bt48b92becc89...@4ax.com...
> opponents of barbaric acts...
> you cruel minded people...
> I will not be kept quiet on these issues and never will be...
> Adam .
That's it. I'm off. Bye.
Val
> wrote:
>
> >I would say 8months old is about right..
> >There has been alot of debates about this subject and it is clear that
> >everybody has different views, so if we want to get this news group up
and
> >running with a friendly atmosphere can I suggest that we leave well alone
> >for a while???
> Why don't you come out with what you are really trying to say Val and
> that is that you would like all us opponents of barbaric acts such as
> tail docking ear cropping spaying and neutering to go away
NO< that's not what I am saying, you are entitled to your opinion as am I
and everybody else. But with a attitude like that it's not surprising the
new's group went quiet.
and leave
> you cruel minded people to get on with it just like Blair and his gang
> of cut throats would like the farmers of this country to stand by
> while he slaughters their perfectly healthy animals .
How dare you compare me with a cruel minded person, you know nothing about
me.
Thought this was a group for dogs not for you to air your political views on
about Blair and the farmers etc..
I do not consider myself to be cruel minded, just because I suggested we
leave well alone for a while, by all means carry on your opinions, but as
Malcolm expressed in his post, the fact about not being able to air views
without being criticised and abused.Surely we should be able to chat for
advice and general enjoyment without people like you jumping down throats
like this!! Is that all your on here for arguement and contraversary???
> Well I got news for you Val I will not be kept quiet on these issues
> and never will be .
> Adam
No, I don't suppose you will, and nobody expects you to, however with a
group of people just getting to together on a new's group why be so
hostile???
boxlady.
Emma Pullen
I live in the middle of one of the worst outbreaks of foot and mouth, and if
you saw what it was doing to people, communities and life in general around
here then you would want it stopped as well.
ALSO
i've not been visiting this newsgroup long and have found mainly the people
to be fairly friendly. Everybody has there opinions but there is no need to
be abusive at the same time.
Emma
Degenerate Bum
news:ihq6bt48b92becc89...@4ax.com...
<snipped>
> Why don't you come out with what you are really trying to say Val and
> that is that you would like all us opponents of barbaric acts such as
> tail docking ear cropping spaying and neutering to go away and leave
> you cruel minded people to get on with it just like Blair and his gang
> of cut throats would like the farmers of this country to stand by
> while he slaughters their perfectly healthy animals .
> Well I got news for you Val I will not be kept quiet on these issues
> and never will be .
While I agree with you Adam that the slaughter of healthy animals is
senseless I see nothing in what Val posted to say she supported such an
action. So why not post a fresh thread under the heading "senseless
slaughter" instead of needlessly and without cause attacking another group
member?
I'm new to this group but I see one or two calls for "no more flamewars" yet
what you posted seems precisely designed to provoke one. If you want one
with me then fine - let's take it to email. Otherwise spaying and neutering,
I feel, should be a topic that can be discussed freely on this forum.
DB
Pat
"Val" <box...@eidosnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bVIs6.219152$Dd3.3...@monolith.news.easynet.net...
I know there is a lot of debate, but when you read everyone letters they are
only putting their view.
I think that is ok.
Does everyone think that's insulting and why the newsgroup does not work.
It is insulting things that are not nice, so please what do you think is
insulting
If I was to ask a question.
I would read them all and if I did not like what I read, would just think it
is their point of view.
As a person is asking a question shouldn't we all answer and let them choose
the answer that they think is correct.
Or am I a confused person.
Pat.
Pat
"Val" <box...@eidosnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bVIs6.219152$Dd3.3...@monolith.news.easynet.net...
I think it is silly to have a uk site and not enjoy it.
After all we all speak the same language, well possible.
I also think that unless people are being really insulting we all have our
own views.
This is not a bad thing.
We are all different and probably all mean well.
What does this group not like is it answers they do not like or do we really
have
horrible people here.
I do not want to upset people as I really want to see this work,and have
been watching this
group stand still for a while.
Pat
Pat
OK I think I see what this group means.
Is this a nasty from out of the woodwork.
Pat
Degenerate Bum
Pat <bonn...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:991rdr$eht$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
<snipped>
> If I was to ask a question.
> I would read them all and if I did not like what I read, would just think
it
> is their point of view.
I think you are right. Some topics are controversial now and opinion quickly
gets polarized so it's either wrong or right, black or white. I think we
just need to be careful how we express ourselves in these types of debate -
try not to be rude and not get personal. The middle ground is normally where
a debate is to be found but namecalling and rudeness pushes a debate to the
edges where the extremes of opinion are found.
> As a person is asking a question shouldn't we all answer and let them
choose
> the answer that they think is correct.
> Or am I a confused person.
Definately not :)))
DB
A Truscott
wrote:
>As a person is asking a question shouldn't we all answer and let them choose
>the answer that they think is correct.
>Or am I a confused person.
>Pat.
that is the top and bottom of it ,say anything against tail docking
spaying and neutering and if we are including the USA in this
ear cropping and all hell brakes loose .
Yet we are supposed to be a nation of animal lovers and here we are
subjecting our pets to the stress and pain of surgical operations that
are not needed chasing the beautiful fox with packs of dogs until it
drops from exhaustion chasing wild hares again with dogs just for the
fun of it .
Some nation of animal LOVERS we are I must say .
Adam .
Lisa
> Pat most people in this country do not like to hear the truth
> that is the top and bottom of it ,say anything against tail docking
> spaying and neutering and if we are including the USA in this
> ear cropping and all hell brakes loose .
> Yet we are supposed to be a nation of animal lovers and here we are
> subjecting our pets to the stress and pain of surgical operations that
> are not needed chasing the beautiful fox with packs of dogs until it
> drops from exhaustion chasing wild hares again with dogs just for the
> fun of it .
> Some nation of animal LOVERS we are I must say .
> Adam .
consider tail-docking and speying as separate issues. I regard speying as
something that I have done out of concern for my pets, but docking as purely
cosmetic. I know there is the argument that it is done to prevent future
tail damage, but statistics do not bear this out.
Lisa
A Truscott
<bridget...@nospamhotmail.com> wrote:
>While I recognise that we all have different opinions, I must ask that we
>consider tail-docking and speying as separate issues. I regard speying as
>something that I have done out of concern for my pets, but docking as purely
>cosmetic. I know there is the argument that it is done to prevent future
>tail damage, but statistics do not bear this out.
So you are so full of concern for your pets that you will subject them
to a shot of a potential killer I refer to the anaesthetic given,
don't take my word for this any qualified vet will tell you the same
unless he/she is a money grabber of course. This also applies to
humans only difference being the human has a choice whether to have an
operation or not a dog dozen't .
Adam .
Lisa
> So you are so full of concern for your pets that you will subject them
> to a shot of a potential killer I refer to the anaesthetic given,
> don't take my word for this any qualified vet will tell you the same
> unless he/she is a money grabber of course. This also applies to
> humans only difference being the human has a choice whether to have an
> operation or not a dog dozen't .
> Adam .
accuse me of not caring for my animals! I will no longer discuss this, or
any other topic with you, as you are incapable of sensible discussion.
DB
<snipped>
> Pat most people in this country do not like to hear the truth
> that is the top and bottom of it
Adam - I believe what people don't like to hear arguments put in a rude or
forceful way. It is clear that you care passionately about the welfare of
animals but the tone of your post seems to put anyone who does not agree
entirely with your views in the 'other' camp - ie. they must be people who
hate animals.
> Yet we are supposed to be a nation of animal lovers and here we are
> subjecting our pets to the stress and pain of surgical operations that
> are not needed chasing the beautiful fox with packs of dogs until it
> drops from exhaustion chasing wild hares again with dogs just for the
> fun of it .
This appears to lump people who have their dogs spayed or neutered in the
same category as those who hunt for fun. Do you really believe this? Is
someone who has their domesticated dog spayed because they do no want to run
the risk of her getting 'caught' in their backyard the same as someone who
deliberately sets out to torture and kill a wild animal?
I really don't think they are the same but I can see how someone who chooses
to spay/neuter would find your post deeply offensive. I can't see how
offending people like that is going to make them receptive to your views or
modify opinion.
I think most people would agree you have a right to express your views. I
myself do not necessarily disagree and would enjoy a sensible debate on the
"gray" area I mentioned in my email to you. I just ask you to couch your
opinion in gentler terms so that the debate can continue with less heat.
DB
tottenham_pyrenean
tottenham_pyrenean
"DB" <degener...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:993ahj$q5h$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
> I think most people would agree you have a right to express your views. I
> myself do not necessarily disagree and would enjoy a sensible debate on
the
> "gray" area I mentioned in my email to you. I just ask you to couch your
> opinion in gentler terms so that the debate can continue with less heat.
The guy is behaving like a troll, and from way back I believe that if
it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and has feathers then it IS
a duck, and I have a dead simple solution for trolls, I plonk them
which is exactly what I've done to his posts.. right in the killfile..
No one has to be contentious and bloody minded in open discussion,
those that chose to be that way inclined get the order of the boot..
Cheers,
Cliff
boxlady
"tottenham_pyrenean" <non...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:994dpc$33i$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
good one cliff, if we all do that then, maybe it may go away!!!
boxlady
>
>
>
DB
news:994dpc$33i$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
> Hi DB,
Hey Cliff :)
> The guy is behaving like a troll, and from way back I believe that if
> it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and has feathers then it IS
> a duck, and I have a dead simple solution for trolls, I plonk them
> which is exactly what I've done to his posts.. right in the killfile..
Ok. I understand that and I salute your duck recognition methods - probably
wholly effective :) I probably wouldn't have reposted calling for restraint
if I hadn't received a well-written and well-argued email from Adam. In that
he still uses emotive language and it is clear that this issue is very dear
to his heart but it's well constructed and doesn't seemed designed to offend
me as a person who, perhaps, has a different view to his. Given that I know
he can argue without being confrontational I thought another plea might be
worth it - you can't debate a killfile.
And I think there is a real debate to be had here - the rights of dogs as
individuals vs. the responsibilites of humans to husband dogs as a
domesticated breed. Adam's position is that we have no right to choose
surgery for a dog that isn't needed to preserve life/cure illness and that
this encompasses speying/neutering. He speaks for the right of a dog as an
individual and if you accept the "principle" then it becomes difficult to
argue against.
I think there are practical arguments for intervention though. Here's a few
I thought of -
1) We have to contend with sad fact that there are more dogs than there are
people willing to home them and that populations need to be controlled.
2) Some people would not be willing to home a dog without a guarantee their
would be no puppies. Given the need for good homes should we preclude these
people as owners?
3) My dog, for one, is treated like a child. It would not be stretching the
point to say that I consider my duty to my dog to be akin to that of a
parent to a child. Responsible parents make decisions *for* their children
and sometimes choose that they have preventative surgery or even cosmetic
surgery. Can we not, in all conscience, do that for our dogs too if we
consider the risk to be in the dog's best interest? I'm thinking of Pat
here; concerned to prevent cancer in later life, or other owners who wish to
reduce their dog's aggressiveness (another example given by Pat).
Just my arguments you understand? I promise not to compare you to a Nazi if
you have the temerity to disagree with me :)))
Have a good one,
DB
tottenham_pyrenean
> tottenham_pyrenean <non...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:994dpc$33i$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
> > Hi DB,
>
> Hey Cliff :)
> > which is exactly what I've done to his posts.. right in the killfile..
>
> Ok. I understand that and I salute your duck recognition methods -
probably
> wholly effective :) I probably wouldn't have reposted calling for
restraint
> if I hadn't received a well-written and well-argued email from Adam. In
that
> he still uses emotive language and it is clear that this issue is very
dear
> to his heart but it's well constructed and doesn't seemed designed to
offend
> me as a person who, perhaps, has a different view to his. Given that I
know
> he can argue without being confrontational I thought another plea might be
> worth it - you can't debate a killfile.
If the guy is capable of acting with restraint in a private e-mail then he
is
capable of doing so in a public debate.. His choice not to.. and his choice
got him killfiled..
> And I think there is a real debate to be had here - the rights of dogs as
> individuals vs. the responsibilites of humans to husband dogs as a
> domesticated breed.
Yup there is a debate, but not a bleeding non stop abusive argument:-)
I consider my dogs to be members of my household, as faithfull retainers
and as such I have a responsibility to ensure their welfare is catered for,
as
I would for any human in my service.. Probably more in fact, since I have
little liking for many humans, but have yet to actively dislike any
animal:-)
As such the dogs are fed even if I go hungry, are walked/exercised whatever
the weather and whatever I may 'feel' like.. Even if I feel out of sorts,
and
where far to many of us would toodle off to see the local quack, my dogs
come
1st..
When it comes to vets there is a problem, one of lack of knowledge on
the part of those untrained in vertinary medicine, but one has to use one's
own
judgement as to the fittness of a vet to deal with ones pets..
I've binned more than one vet, simply because as an owner I discovered that
I knew more about my breed of dog than did the vet, and found the lack of
knowledge to have been dangerous to my dog, if a vet exihbits a willingness
to learn the problems associated with a particular breed, then the get to
try
again [under close supervision] if not, the are binned and I find a vet who
will
take the time to read up on the breed..
But I will not lump every vet into the same gategory without bothering to
check and see if they belong in the money before animal class..
>Adam's position is that we have no right to choose
> surgery for a dog that isn't needed to preserve life/cure illness and that
> this encompasses speying/neutering. He speaks for the right of a dog as an
> individual and if you accept the "principle" then it becomes difficult to
> argue against.
My pyrrie had what might be called surgery, he had a micro chip implanted
without any anesthesia, and it does nothing to immediatley contribute to his
health, but it may in the future, rabid anti treatment isnt any better for
the
animal than slavish obediance to some clueless vet.. He's also had
shots for parvo etc.. I have had shots of TABT and of other types
far more times than a can recall.. And my wife used to be a SRN,
and so now both of us have some medical knowledge, of the human
spicies, but animals are biological entities and some things are common
to all such lifeforms, give anyone a shot agaisnt tetnus lets say, and then
dont bother again, the next time that they injure themselves outside
after the intitial innoculation has worn off, they run a high risk again
of getting tetnus unless they had a booster, or are again innoculated.
Anyone around this NG seen what happens to someone with
lockjaw? Not pretty, not pleasant, yet there are plenty of us
who refuse to have any such treatment..
Thats fine its our lives, but if we are to treat our animals likewise
and they then contract parvo? because WE dont like the idea..
its not on.
If there is a valid treatment or preventitive for such
illness then its our duty to ensure that those we are repsonsible
for have it.. If its medically proven or even significantly mooted
that continuing to administer booster shots has a negative effect
then by all means stop after you are sure your animal is
immunised to whatever it is that the innoculation is for.
But to say no in the 1st place just because of a personal foible, when
there is stong evidence that untreated animals are at high risk is not
something I would condone.
> I think there are practical arguments for intervention though. Here's a
few
> I thought of -
>
> 1) We have to contend with sad fact that there are more dogs than there
are
> people willing to home them and that populations need to be controlled.
There trouble here is controlled how? by nutering any animal regardless of
circumstances?
There is certainly a case for prteventing unwanted litters, but then how
much of a particular
part of the species gene pool is lost? Taking blanket action may well in the
long run prove
counter productive.. What it all boils down to in the end is cost... money
is the determining
factor in what policy is implemented:-(
> 2) Some people would not be willing to home a dog without a guarantee
their
> would be no puppies. Given the need for good homes should we preclude
these
> people as owners?
Then it is actually up to THEM to so guarantee, not anyone else if they are
unwilling
to supervise the animal closely enough to prevent casual breeding, are they
willing
to actually look after them properly? And its quite possible these days if
you find
that a pet has become pregant to have a termination.. there is a treatment
for both
human and animals these days:-)
> 3) My dog, for one, is treated like a child. It would not be stretching
the
> point to say that I consider my duty to my dog to be akin to that of a
> parent to a child. Responsible parents make decisions *for* their children
> and sometimes choose that they have preventative surgery or even cosmetic
> surgery.
All pet animals seem child like, but thats probably the 'animism' in us
we attribute human characteristics to our pets..
They actually follow their own inbuilt patterns, we modify these to suit
US, sometimes this is of benefit to both species, sometimes not..
Humans as pack leaders only works if the pack leader is worth a damm
to the pack. And I have seen all too often that humans have NO idea of
what a human pack leader should do in leading 'their' pack.. I've had
in the past to help excercise a couple of big cats.. The sort
that take a casual swipe at a handlers leg and end up putting
a gash requiring 50 or 60 stitches in the leg, without even
being aware that what they were doing didnt contitute a playful
pat.. One needs to be aware that we make judgements based
on what we 'think' is reality, not sometimes on actual reality:-/
A dog may become agressive for some reason that is
nothing to do with HUMAN reality.. Smell, atitude of
another animal, or where that animal is.. All animals
are territorial.. if we lead our pets into the belief that
anywhere they/we are is part of their/our territory we
ask for trouble:-/ All animals display signals..we
far to often ignore them..or make no effort
to recognise them for what they are..
The number of times I see tiny children out excercising a dog
that is quite capable of pulling an adult off their feet, if the dog
is hurt or spooked in some way..
Added to that we have the noise factor.. dogs dont hear in 'our'
range, they hear well beyond it, and sudden high pitched noise
can startle and sometimes trigger a violent 'threat' response in a dog..
And what members of human society have the highest
pitched voices, and a tendancy to scream? Children:-(
Yet I constantly see people touted as responsible who
allow kids to exercise their pet dog unsupervised..
Every breed from jack russels to GSD's and larger
breeds.. Then when the pet dog is triggered by
some childs scream and goes for them? Put the
dog down, push legislation through parliaiment etc..
Every time I hear of some kid being savaged by a pet
or someone elses pet.. I wonder if anyone was actually
in charge ie leading the pack and maintaining discipline
within it, and most times it turns out not:-(
>Can we not, in all conscience, do that for our dogs too if we
> consider the risk to be in the dog's best interest? I'm thinking of Pat
> here; concerned to prevent cancer in later life, or other owners who wish
to
> reduce their dog's aggressiveness (another example given by Pat).
The incidence of canine cancer is problematic, and cause for concern
But lets consider this more deeply, does it run in specific types of dog?
Does it run in one particular line of breeding more than another?
If so then it would seem that the odds are stacked in favour
of a particular animal contracting such a cancer..
So the owner/pack leader needs to consider their options
carefully.. and check up and see what sort of odds
are prevelant.. In the case of someone who has found
by prior experience that a particular line or breed is
likely to be at risk then the risk factor of an operation
must be weighed against the risk factor of the pet contracting
cancer.. An individual descision, not a group one..others
simply lack the knowledge to make an informed judgement.
As for aggression, that is down in a good many cases to
discipine within the pack..
Castration/spaying may or may not be the answer..
It would not be my choice for that reason alone, if there
were no other reasons to have such action taken.
> Just my arguments you understand? I promise not to compare you to a Nazi
if
> you have the temerity to disagree with me :)))
In my view the human race is more akin to a lethal viral infection than
most virii:-) We regularly put our personal 'comfort' and convienience
before anything else.. To the detriment of both animal species and the
planet in general..
However I see no reason to have myself put down just yet:-)
and I use a car, eat animal meat, and do other things that
perhaps I shouldnt if I wish to 'save' the planet.. I'm just as prone
to human failings as the rest of the species.. And having spent a
long time in the forces, I probably just have a low opinion of
a species that has religions that say turn the other cheek, and
then bless the implements of war:-/
Cheers,
Cliff
DB
<Loads of good stuff - all snipped>
Hi again Cliff,
Great post and one which I agree with more-or-less in its entirety. I
started out addressing each of your points but our points of view didn't
differ enough to merit it (yeah, yeah ... a weasly excuse for snipping it
all).
I think you may have misconstrued my analogy between dogs and children
simply as a habit of "spoiling" them or perhaps misreading their behaviour.
I may be a little guilty of both but I made the comparison largely to
illustrate the weight, or seriousness, we should give to the decisions we
make for our dogs.
To try to summarise:
We wouldn't make a decision to give, or conversely withhold, preventive
surgery/treatment to our children without taking pains to find out about the
problem, the procedure, and the risks involved. We owe it to our dogs to be
just as responsible and knowledgeable when we make the same decisions for
them and my opinion is that we shouldn't tolerate a higher level of risk
because "it's only a dog."
The simple principle to adhere to is to take responsibility for looking
after the best interests of the dog. Surgery on its own is not right or
wrong (as some seem to be arguing). It is the context in which surgery is
given. I, like you, believe that some "preventative" surgery such as
speying/neutering is fine provided the owner has performed the risk analysis
(gathered the necessary advice regarding the problem, the procedure, and the
risks) to enable them to decide it is in their dog's best interest.
To pick up Adam's principal of "no surgery unless it saves life" and pose
two questions.
1) The point at which Adam thinks we should intervene seems arbitrary. Why
intervene only when life is threatened? Why not perform a preventative
procedure during puppyhood? Once the principal of intervention is accepted
isn't "when" a matter for best practice rather than principal?
2) Why only limit the principal to surgery? Innoculations, as Cliff points
out, are widely given as preventative treatments. These pose some risk to
the dog, certainly involve discomfort. Opinions anyone? Are we cruel to
choose to innoculate?
Oh! I remembered I do have one question for you Cliff, now I've been and
gone and snipped your post. You mentioned feeding your dog even when you
yourself are going hungry. I just wondered to what extreme you, as a
military man, would take this principal? Just curious. I'm afraid for me, if
it came down to a simple choice between starvation and my dog, the dog would
go in the pot every time (sorry Bryn). Hopefully it will never come to that
and I would, of course, eat someone else's dog before I ate Bryn.
<ducks behind laptop screen to avoid the barrage> >:))
Take care,
DB
A Truscott
wrote:
>To pick up Adam's principal of "no surgery unless it saves life" and pose
>two questions.
>
>1) The point at which Adam thinks we should intervene seems arbitrary. Why
>intervene only when life is threatened? Why not perform a preventative
>procedure during puppyhood?
Any procedure where an anaesthetic is to be given poses a danger in
its own right regardless of the procedure to be carried out and any
qualified vet will tell you that a spay is a very invasive procedure
not to be undertaken like a pinch of salt has some of you like to give
the impression it is . Why do you think it that you have to search far
and wide these days to find a dental practice who will administer an
anaesthetic to remove a tooth?? ,my nearest is fifteen miles away the
reason is far to many people have died in the dentist chair over the
years not from the removal of the tooth but due to the anaesthetic
!!!. We are talking here about ripping a dogs guts out not just a
little tooth .
>2) Why only limit the principal to surgery? Innoculations, as Cliff points
>out, are widely given as preventative treatments. These pose some risk to
>the dog, certainly involve discomfort. Opinions anyone? Are we cruel to
>choose to innoculate?
Let me ask you a question on this subject do you still get your
regular boosters for measles hooping cough and all the rest of the
inoculations that you had as a child if not why not what is good for a
dog must be good for humans .
>Oh! I remembered I do have one question for you Cliff, now I've been and
>gone and snipped your post. You mentioned feeding your dog even when you
>yourself are going hungry. I just wondered to what extreme you, as a
>military man, would take this principal? Just curious. I'm afraid for me, if
>it came down to a simple choice between starvation and my dog, the dog would
>go in the pot every time (sorry Bryn). Hopefully it will never come to that
>and I would, of course, eat someone else's dog before I ate Bryn.
We have two weeks supply of food for our dogs in the house at the
moment and 1 days supply for ourselves this situation will be
rectified
tomorrow :)))))) .
Adam .
tottenham_pyrenean
>
> tottenham_pyrenean <non...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:995c9d$qah$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
> Great post and one which I agree with more-or-less in its entirety. I
> started out addressing each of your points but our points of view didn't
> differ enough to merit it (yeah, yeah ... a weasly excuse for snipping it
> all).
Well it sure saved a load of space:-))))))
> I think you may have misconstrued my analogy between dogs and children
> simply as a habit of "spoiling" them or perhaps misreading their
behaviour.
> I may be a little guilty of both but I made the comparison largely to
> illustrate the weight, or seriousness, we should give to the decisions we
> make for our dogs.
Well maybe, but if my kids did owt on the order of magnitude of misbehaving
my pooches have, I'd have tanned their hides:-) But I do see your point:-)
[snipped]
> problem, the procedure, and the risks involved. We owe it to our dogs to
be
> just as responsible and knowledgeable when we make the same decisions for
> them and my opinion is that we shouldn't tolerate a higher level of risk
> because "it's only a dog."
The problem it seems to me lies in between the quote's.. if one is
a responsible owner of any animal its NEVER 'just a x/y/z' its a living
creature that whomever it is has total responsibility for protecting and
looking after..
> The simple principle to adhere to is to take responsibility for looking
> after the best interests of the dog. Surgery on its own is not right or
> wrong (as some seem to be arguing).
Agreed, there are cases for an against.. depends on the animal and type
of surgery involved..
> It is the context in which surgery is
> given. I, like you, believe that some "preventative" surgery such as
> speying/neutering is fine provided the owner has performed the risk
analysis
> (gathered the necessary advice regarding the problem, the procedure, and
the
> risks) to enable them to decide it is in their dog's best interest.
Yup, and in order to do so they need to be wide awake, its far to easy to
read in some paper or maybe on a web site that X is either the best thing
since sliced bread, or that Y is going to bring about the end of animal life
as we know it.. A lot depends on the judgemental ability of the 'owner'
lets hope that an increasing number are actually able to sort out the
wheat from the chaff that abounds these days..
> To pick up Adam's principal of "no surgery unless it saves life" and pose
> two questions.
>
> 1) The point at which Adam thinks we should intervene seems arbitrary. Why
> intervene only when life is threatened? Why not perform a preventative
> procedure during puppyhood? Once the principal of intervention is accepted
> isn't "when" a matter for best practice rather than principal?
Well again its dependant, pyrries have a characteristic that isnt common,
they have double dew claws on the hind legs.. Now in some animals these
can pose a problem.. in others not. My latest vet asked me if I wanted to
have them removed as he thought they posed a possible future risk to
the dog.. I said no, leave them 'as is' and 'if' they prove to be a problem
health wise, the problem can be delt with at that time, and he accepted
my desicsion and made no attempt to pressure me in to correcting what
he saw as a potential problem.. Thats one reason he's still my vet:-)
And some pyrries do have to have them removed, they catch them on
either the opposite foot or something else and they get torn and infected..
And the vet had bothered to check up on pyrries before mentioning it.
Those double dew claws are there to ensure the dog keeps its hind legs
well apart.. in the wild that stance is needed in combat, and the breed
are guard dogs, breed to help shepherds and drovers guard flocks
and herds from wolves and bears.. They need a balanced stance in
a fight, so its a 'survival' characteristic.. and I will not interfere with
that type of characteristic unless its needed.
There may be other attributes of other breeds that do require intervention
in order to ensure a decent quality of life for the animal.Some animals have
been so bred as to increase some pretty lousy traits that affect the life
of the animal, dogs that cannot even breath without effort, others that
have fur which virtually blinds them and causes eye problems if not
continually clipped or where hair has become ingrown and may need
intervention in order to stop infection and suffering..
So in the end it all comes down to WHAT animal and WHY..
> 2) Why only limit the principal to surgery? Innoculations, as Cliff points
> out, are widely given as preventative treatments. These pose some risk to
> the dog, certainly involve discomfort. Opinions anyone? Are we cruel to
> choose to innoculate?
> Oh! I remembered I do have one question for you Cliff, now I've been and
> gone and snipped your post. You mentioned feeding your dog even when you
> yourself are going hungry. I just wondered to what extreme you, as a
> military man, would take this principal? Just curious.
The dogs are to use a term picked up from a quite well known novel,
'hammamoto'
in my household, they have the right to bear weapons[tooth and claw] in my
presence
and to guard my household as best they can..
As such I in turn have a duty to them to feed and tend to their wellfare as
I would that
of my wife or children.. ie before myself.
>I'm afraid for me, if
> it came down to a simple choice between starvation and my dog, the dog
would
> go in the pot every time (sorry Bryn). Hopefully it will never come to
that
> and I would, of course, eat someone else's dog before I ate Bryn.
My dogs would be dissmissed my household to fend for themselves if it came
to that..
And if circumstaces were that 'tight' I would not lack for human food, I
would simply
'take' it from anyone who could not best me in combat for it.. And in most
cases that
would be almost any civillian I met:-)) there is also pleanty of meat on my
next door
neibours:-)) Enough to last for some months, but I'm unsure if my dogs would
like it,
so they would have to hunt for themselves if they didnt:-)
> <ducks behind laptop screen to avoid the barrage> >:))
Large 'predatory' grin...
Cheers,
Cliff
A Truscott
<non...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>I said no, leave them 'as is' and 'if' they prove to be a problem
>health wise, the problem can be delt with at that time,
before they have arisen and anyone who advocates spaying and neutering
" just in case" they my get cancer are fools, wait and see if they do
get cancer before starting to cut bits off here there and everywhere .
Adam .
DB
<lots snipped, context destroyed>
Hi again,
> Well it sure saved a load of space:-))))))
So brevity is the soul of storage solutions?
> The problem it seems to me lies in between the quote's.. if one is
> a responsible owner of any animal its NEVER 'just a x/y/z' its a living
> creature that whomever it is has total responsibility for protecting and
> looking after..
Agreed. Was I sounding too regimented? DB's system for caring for your dog
through rote and logic? It's possible - I do like nice snappy summaries.
> Yup, and in order to do so they need to be wide awake, its far to easy to
> read in some paper or maybe on a web site that X is either the best thing
> since sliced bread, or that Y is going to bring about the end of animal
life
> as we know it.. A lot depends on the judgemental ability of the 'owner'
> lets hope that an increasing number are actually able to sort out the
> wheat from the chaff that abounds these days..
I agree but that is pretty much a problem in all areas of life - information
overload. The problem as I see it is that the web is readily accessible and
easy to publish to. Much of the material on it is not peer reviewed. When I
started out as a complete novice as Staffie owner more than 15 years ago I
floundered for a day then went out and bought some books. Not just one
book - several. The material in books is subjected to an editorial process
and it is usually possible to obtain peer reviews for a book so you can
gauge
the quality of the material. This is often not the case for web-based
material.
Of course I'm *not* saying everything found on the web is rubbish - just
that you do need filtering skills to separate the wheat from the chaff you
mentioned. I found my habits as a "reader" help but younger people who've
grown up with the web as their prime reference source may not necessarily
develop the same skills or, indeed, realise they need them.
> > To pick up Adam's principal of "no surgery unless it saves life" and
pose
> > two questions.
> >
> > 1) The point at which Adam thinks we should intervene seems arbitrary.
> > Why intervene only when life is threatened? Why not perform a
> > preventative procedure during puppyhood? Once the principal of
> > intervention is accepted isn't "when" a matter for best practice rather
than
> > principal?
> Well again its dependant, pyrries have a characteristic that isnt common,
> they have double dew claws on the hind legs.. Now in some animals these
> can pose a problem.. in others not. My latest vet asked me if I wanted to
> have them removed as he thought they posed a possible future risk to
> the dog.. I said no, leave them 'as is' and 'if' they prove to be a
problem
> health wise, the problem can be delt with at that time,
Best practice then. Don't do it unless it proves necessary. Your knowledge
tells you the claws are not a problem for all animals so the "just in case"
approach isn't the right one.
> and he accepted
> my desicsion and made no attempt to pressure me in to correcting what
> he saw as a potential problem.. Thats one reason he's still my vet:-)
Yep. I've been with the same practice a long time too. As I said in my post
earlier - they're not the cheapest nor are they the most expensive in my
area. One reason (among many) I've been with them for over 15 years is they
have never tried to sell me something I didn't think I needed.
> And some pyrries do have to have them removed, they catch them on
> either the opposite foot or something else and they get torn and
infected..
> And the vet had bothered to check up on pyrries before mentioning it.
> Those double dew claws are there to ensure the dog keeps its hind legs
> well apart.. in the wild that stance is needed in combat, and the breed
> are guard dogs, breed to help shepherds and drovers guard flocks
> and herds from wolves and bears..
(I know ... big buggers ... I've seen 'em on the telly :) ... "it's the
wol-f, it's the wol-f" ... "I'm a comin' Lambsy" ... that one?)
> They need a balanced stance in
> a fight, so its a 'survival' characteristic.. and I will not interfere
with
> that type of characteristic unless its needed.
>
> There may be other attributes of other breeds that do require intervention
> in order to ensure a decent quality of life for the animal.Some animals
have
> been so bred as to increase some pretty lousy traits that affect the life
> of the animal, dogs that cannot even breath without effort, others that
> have fur which virtually blinds them and causes eye problems if not
> continually clipped or where hair has become ingrown and may need
> intervention in order to stop infection and suffering..
>
> So in the end it all comes down to WHAT animal and WHY..
... a conscious gathering of information/knowledge, evaluation of risk, and
action taken where appropriate :)
> The dogs are to use a term picked up from a quite well known novel,
> 'hammamoto'
(not read it - Gitta Sereny at the moment)
> in my household, they have the right to bear weapons[tooth and claw] in my
> presence and to guard my household as best they can.. As such I in turn
have
> a duty to them to feed and tend to their wellfare as I would that of my
wife or
> children.. ie before myself.
>
> > I'm afraid for me, if it came down to a simple choice between starvation
> > and my dog, the dog would go in the pot every time (sorry Bryn).
> > Hopefully it will never come to that and I would, of course, eat someone
> > else's dog before I ate Bryn.
> My dogs would be dissmissed my household to fend for themselves if it came
> to that.. And if circumstaces were that 'tight' I would not lack for human
food,
> I would simply 'take' it from anyone who could not best me in combat for
it..
> And in most cases that would be almost any civillian I met:-)) there is
also
> pleanty of meat on my next door neibours:-)) Enough to last for some
months,
> but I'm unsure if my dogs would like it, so they would have to hunt for
> themselves if they didnt:-)
Hah! Another weasel (like me). I don't recall giving you the luxury of
eating your neighbours. I said "simple choice" - you or the dog.
"Uninhabited lump of lava with no independant means off" kind of scenario.
Do you prolong your life, and so increase your chance of rescue by a
third-party, by eating the dog or do you huddle up and die together?
> > <ducks behind laptop screen to avoid the barrage> >:))
> Large 'predatory' grin...
Yeah ... well while you're grinning like that I'm developing a good
defensible
position and I haven't eaten the dog yet! :)))
Change of subject ... how are foot and mouth restrictions affecting your
exercise regime? Pyrries must need many, many miles.
DB
margo
individually.
Up to present we have only had dogs neutered on medical advice. One westie
bitch at 10 years old with a life threatening bad uterus infection, and our
present German Shepherd after numerous tests for prostrate trouble. Both
having their lives saved by this procedure.The other dogs we have had have
been left entire and happily so.
One friend had her dog castrated because he was a overly sexed, an absolute
nuisance to them and anyone else who called. After surgery he made a lovely
dog and companion, far happier and contented.
I'm afraid some dogs are so highly sexed that they are completely miserable
whenever there is a bitch in season in the neighbourhood going off their
food etc. I don't think that this frustration makes for a happy dog. As said
before I think that every decision has to be made individually,the pros and
cons weighed up carefully, and not a blanket decision.
Margo
DB <degener...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:995u3c$pc1$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
Pat
Adam,
There is probably a good side to you somewhere?
You do not talk to anyone you just go on about the same old thing.
Perhaps you may be suited to another site(Pit Ball) perhaps.
You could do some good there.
Or fight in an American one ,
You will be IGNORED here if any one has any sense.
Please try to talk about something else.
You MUST know something else.
Pat
PS Please let us see the other side of you, as all people with animals
seem to be nice people.
Emma Pullen
A Truscott
wrote:
>I agree with the points given here. Each case has to be decided
>individually.
>Up to present we have only had dogs neutered on medical advice. One westie
>bitch at 10 years old with a life threatening bad uterus infection, and our
>present German Shepherd after numerous tests for prostrate trouble. Both
>having their lives saved by this procedure.The other dogs we have had have
>been left entire and happily so.
My God at last someone with a bit of sense and not in the least knife
happy .
Adam .
A Truscott
>whenever there is a bitch in season in the neighbourhood going off their
>food etc. I don't think that this frustration makes for a happy dog. As said
>before I think that every decision has to be made individually,the pros and
>cons weighed up carefully, and not a blanket decision.
Margo .
Adam .
tottenham_pyrenean
> tottenham_pyrenean <non...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:99707n$5e3$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com...
>
> through rote and logic? It's possible - I do like nice snappy summaries.
Nah, I like to wander around a bit:-))
[snip]
> book - several. The material in books is subjected to an editorial process
> and it is usually possible to obtain peer reviews for a book so you can
> gauge the quality of the material. This is often not the case for
web-based
> material.
Its not just web based info, its far too often word of mouth:-) Mainly
bulldust.
> grown up with the web as their prime reference source may not necessarily
> develop the same skills or, indeed, realise they need them.
Massive decrease in thinking skills along with the lack of reading
ability:-)
[snip]
> > health wise, the problem can be delt with at that time,
>
> Best practice then. Don't do it unless it proves necessary. Your knowledge
> tells you the claws are not a problem for all animals so the "just in
case"
> approach isn't the right one.
Everything comes down to an individual judgement doesnt it?
[snip]
> area. One reason (among many) I've been with them for over 15 years is
they
> have never tried to sell me something I didn't think I needed.
Thats what counts along with abilty to do the job.
> > and herds from wolves and bears..
>
> (I know ... big buggers ... I've seen 'em on the telly :) ... "it's the
> wol-f, it's the wol-f" ... "I'm a comin' Lambsy" ... that one?)
Pass, never seen any program with content resembling that.. but big yup,
daft yup, fighters if needed yup:-)
> > The dogs are to use a term picked up from a quite well known novel,
> > 'hammamoto'
>
> (not read it - Gitta Sereny at the moment)
Shogun:-) 16th century japanese term for armed retainer with extended
privilages:-)
> > but I'm unsure if my dogs would like it, so they would have to hunt for
> > themselves if they didnt:-)
> Hah! Another weasel (like me). I don't recall giving you the luxury of
> eating your neighbours. I said "simple choice" - you or the dog.
Not a simple choice really, animals in the wild seldom get to eat every day,
and humans can do without for quite a long time.. the point really is who
gets
to eat whom isnt it:-))
> "Uninhabited lump of lava with no independant means off" kind of scenario.
> Do you prolong your life, and so increase your chance of rescue by a
> third-party, by eating the dog or do you huddle up and die together?
latter if you cant swim or whatever:-)
> > > <ducks behind laptop screen to avoid the barrage> >:))
> > Large 'predatory' grin...
>
> Yeah ... well while you're grinning like that I'm developing a good
> defensible position and I haven't eaten the dog yet! :)))
you NEED that dawg, its the only thing keeping you alive:-)
> Change of subject ... how are foot and mouth restrictions affecting your
> exercise regime? Pyrries must need many, many miles.
No problems with F&M here, I'm in north london, no stock around here
and plenty of open space. but PMD's have a slow metabolic rate, dont
need the excericise a staff does, mainly they laze around all day doing
their 'guarding' thing:-) And mouthing off at anyone who uses the street:-)
Cheers,
Cliff
DB
The cancer prevention issue is somewhat different to removing dew claws.
Cancer is usually life-threatening and difficult to treat. An infected dew
claw is far less likely to threaten the dog's life and is easier to treat.
Waiting until a dog gets cancer before opting for a *preventative* treatment
(like neutering) would seem to me to be pointless. Speying and neutering
have been shown to reduce the risk of cancer. For my dogs I do not consider
that the risks associated with the anaesthetic and operation are worth the
reduced risk of cancer. I respect the right of another person, however, to
perform the same risk assessment and choose to spey/neuter their dog -
circumstances differ as does perception of threat.
I feel that our obligation is to act in the best interests of our dogs. I do
not subscribe to your view of intervening medically only when the dog is ill
or its life is threatened. This seems to me somewhat arbitrary.
DB
A Truscott
wrote:
>I feel that our obligation is to act in the best interests of our dogs. I do
>not subscribe to your view of intervening medically only when the dog is ill
>or its life is threatened. This seems to me somewhat arbitrary.
know just how many females in this country alone would be willing to
undergo a double mastectomy or an hysterectomy operation unless it
was proved that cancer was present . And the same goes for the male
population how many would have their testicles removed unless it was
proved testicular cancer was present .
The rest of the arguments about unwanted litters and lessening
aggression in males etc just does not hold water with me unwanted
litters can be prevented without having to resort to invasive surgery
to achieve it . Aggression in males can be minimized by socializing
a dog when still a pup .
Surgery should only be undertaken when needed not just to prevent
unwanted litters or reduce aggression or has I have stated many times
JUST IN CASE .
Adam .
DB
<snipped according to whim>
> > I do like nice snappy summaries.
> Nah, I like to wander around a bit:-))
Meandering isn't *always* efficient but it often puts one in a better
position to sniff out a skunk right?
> > grown up with the web as their prime reference source may not
necessarily
> > develop the same skills or, indeed, realise they need them.
>
> Massive decrease in thinking skills along with the lack of reading
> ability:-)
Except for *our* kids?
> > (I know ... big buggers ... I've seen 'em on the telly :) ... "it's the
> > wol-f, it's the wol-f" ... "I'm a comin' Lambsy" ... that one?)
> Pass, never seen any program with content resembling that.. but big yup,
> daft yup, fighters if needed yup:-)
I was referring to an old cartoon I remember from my "yoof" in NYC. I'm sure
it was shown in the UK and the re-runs on one of the Sky channels are
popular with my daughter now.
> Shogun:-) 16th century japanese term for armed retainer with extended
> privilages:-)
Aaah. Not read it.
> > Hah! Another weasel (like me). I don't recall giving you the luxury of
> > eating your neighbours. I said "simple choice" - you or the dog.
>
> Not a simple choice really, animals in the wild seldom get to eat every
day,
> and humans can do without for quite a long time.. the point really is who
> gets to eat whom isnt it:-))
Yeah but I think we're likely to figure that out before they do which ought
to give us the edge ;)
> > "Uninhabited lump of lava with no independant means off" kind of
scenario.
> > Do you prolong your life, and so increase your chance of rescue by a
> > third-party, by eating the dog or do you huddle up and die together?
>
> latter if you cant swim or whatever:-)
Ok. I'd eat the dog. I'd feel bad about it but ...
> > > > <ducks behind laptop screen to avoid the barrage> >:))
> > > Large 'predatory' grin...
> >
> > Yeah ... well while you're grinning like that I'm developing a good
> > defensible position and I haven't eaten the dog yet! :)))
>
> you NEED that dawg, its the only thing keeping you alive:-)
Hmmmm.
Wouldn't want to rely on a Staffie to keep me alive unless it was just dogs
attacking me. Staffie vs. Pyrrie? I'd back the Pyrrie every time. I'm a firm
believer in the truth of the old saying that "a good big 'un will always
beat a good lil' 'un."
> > Change of subject ... how are foot and mouth restrictions affecting your
> > exercise regime? Pyrries must need many, many miles.
>
> No problems with F&M here, I'm in north london, no stock around here
> and plenty of open space. but PMD's have a slow metabolic rate, dont
> need the excericise a staff does, mainly they laze around all day doing
> their 'guarding' thing:-) And mouthing off at anyone who uses the
street:-)
Should have guessed North London from the ID. Didn't like to mention it in
case you started spouting about the year ending in "1" :)))
Bryn optimally needs an hour off-lead or a couple of hours on-lead. We're
struggling a little for places to walk here in the Peak District. I have
taught him to retrieve so we spend time (or rather he does) retrieving his
frisbee from the bottom of a deep gully on my property - that's kept him out
of mischief and I've been using the gym a lot more.
Staffies are lousy as guard dogs - or at least both I've had were/are.
They're too "people" oriented. Bryn doesn't even bark when he hears a
noise - though I am working on that as part of his training. Rascal, my
first one made lots of noise when he first heard something but only because
he thought there might be something four-legged and furry about that he
could fight with. If it turned out to be human he lost interest.
DB
Lisa
cancer in the genetic line and my older bitch HAS got cancer. As a result
she has had 3 operations and been under 4 times aged 12 and 13. Had she been
speyed, my vets tell me she would be extremely unlikely to have had this
condition. What conclusion am I supposed to draw from this? (Before I am
accused of anything else, I didn't breed from her, and only got her as a
rescue at 6 years old). Also, I think (any female members of the group, feel
free to disagree) that most women would avoid mastectomy more out of the
psychological damage of loss of a breast that fear of anaesthetic? Despite
this, young women with proven genetic risks DO opt for it.
Lisa ( apparently a heartless fool)
Lisa
should also point out that my male spaniel is intact, but you wouldn't
consider that.
Lisa
DB
Hello Adam,
> >I feel that our obligation is to act in the best interests of our dogs. I
do
> >not subscribe to your view of intervening medically only when the dog is
ill
> >or its life is threatened. This seems to me somewhat arbitrary.
> You see we are back to the same old argument once more I would like to
> know just how many females in this country alone would be willing to
> undergo a double mastectomy or an hysterectomy operation unless it
> was proved that cancer was present . And the same goes for the male
> population how many would have their testicles removed unless it was
> proved testicular cancer was present .
>
> The rest of the arguments about unwanted litters and lessening
> aggression in males etc just does not hold water with me unwanted
> litters can be prevented without having to resort to invasive surgery
> to achieve it.
Yet men (in particular) and women are prepared to undergo surgery to prevent
unwanted human pregnacies. This seems to run somewhat counter to your
arguments.
> Aggression in males can be minimized by socializing
> a dog when still a pup .
What language is that? It looks suspicously like English but it still
*smells* like BS to me. Socializing works for *some* dogs. I've owned
Staffies for many years. My first was very dog aggressive. This was bred
into him and no amount of training and socialization could curb his natural
instinct.
I have no doubt that neutering would have reduced his pugilistic tendencies
but because I had the luxury of a large property and access to lots of
remote walking I elected not to.
Had I lived in a terrace in the middle of town I may well have made a
different decision - in that scenario I feel neutering would have served him
better than running a high risk of a court order to have him destroyed.
Assuming this latter scenario was true; who the hell are you to second guess
me and say I was cruel to make that kind of decision for my dog?
> Surgery should only be undertaken when needed not just to prevent
> unwanted litters or reduce aggression or has I have stated many times
> JUST IN CASE .
All "in your opinion" of course or did someone appoint you world leader when
I wasn't looking?
What a pile of crap.
Take a tour round the shelters nearest you and see how many unwanted puppies
there are.
Examine Lisa's reply, for example, and see how she has assessed the risks
for her dogs and made decisions she clearly believes in all conscience are
in the best interests of *her* dogs.
Note how no-one here is telling *you* what is best for your animals.
Having done all that carry on clinging desperately to your blinkered
delusion you are somehow in a better position to assess what is best for
other peoples dogs than their owners.
I *do* respect your beliefs Adam - I hope they keep you company in my
killfile.
*plonk*
DB
ps. The earth is a sphere you know?
tottenham_pyrenean
> tottenham_pyrenean <non...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:998cn9$k96$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com...
> > Nah, I like to wander around a bit:-))
>
> Meandering isn't *always* efficient but it often puts one in a better
> position to sniff out a skunk right?
gets the possums too:-)
> > Massive decrease in thinking skills along with the lack of reading
> > ability:-)
>
> Except for *our* kids?
Nope mine dont even read comic books:-) But the grand kids are getting
prizes for their reading ability, bar one who has some problems akin to
dyslexia, but she seems to do damm well with computers for some reason:-)
> > Pass, never seen any program with content resembling that.. but big yup,
> > daft yup, fighters if needed yup:-)
>
> I was referring to an old cartoon I remember from my "yoof" in NYC. I'm
sure
> it was shown in the UK and the re-runs on one of the Sky channels are
> popular with my daughter now.
Not seen, the only cartoon I've seen was about a PMD called Bella? and was
I think French in origin.. But that was years ago.. And I dont use Sky, no
decent reception in my area due to tree's blocking line of sight between
dish and sat..
> > and humans can do without for quite a long time.. the point really is
who
> > gets to eat whom isnt it:-))
>
> Yeah but I think we're likely to figure that out before they do which
ought
> to give us the edge ;)
Nope it gives the pooch the edge, you think its not gonna get you 1st:-)
> > latter if you cant swim or whatever:-)
> Ok. I'd eat the dog. I'd feel bad about it but ...
Not as bad as the dog:-)
> > > defensible position and I haven't eaten the dog yet! :)))
> >
> > you NEED that dawg, its the only thing keeping you alive:-)
> Hmmmm.
> Wouldn't want to rely on a Staffie to keep me alive unless it was just
dogs
> attacking me. Staffie vs. Pyrrie? I'd back the Pyrrie every time. I'm a
firm
> believer in the truth of the old saying that "a good big 'un will always
> beat a good lil' 'un."
Depends on quantity as well as quality.. but one on one yup the biggie
usually
has it..
But even pyrries used to be used in packs.. not so much these days,basque
farmers seemingly have lost the ability to work with them:-/
> > No problems with F&M here, I'm in north london, no stock around here
> > and plenty of open space. but PMD's have a slow metabolic rate, dont
> > need the excericise a staff does, mainly they laze around all day doing
> > their 'guarding' thing:-) And mouthing off at anyone who uses the
> street:-)
>
> Should have guessed North London from the ID. Didn't like to mention it in
> case you started spouting about the year ending in "1" :)))
The address often says it all:-)
> Bryn optimally needs an hour off-lead or a couple of hours on-lead. We're
> struggling a little for places to walk here in the Peak District. I have
> taught him to retrieve so we spend time (or rather he does) retrieving his
> frisbee from the bottom of a deep gully on my property - that's kept him
out
> of mischief and I've been using the gym a lot more.
Unless I find a totally enclosed space, my dawg stays on the lead, he runs I
run:-)
Its to much of a problem telling a pyrrie not to do something at long range,
they
just look at you and carry on:-) And they lie:-) Keep on pretending they
dont
understand english.. but then let themselves get caught out at it..
Last PMD I had called Sam, used to do that as well, util one day we went
visiting a friend at a camping site outside London, friend had a Newfie,
so we went for 'walkies' with both dogs..
I'd assumed there were no dangerous roads with much traffic on in the
vacinity,
but there were and in order to avoid them we had to turn to 'our' left about
25 yards
up a pathway..
Dog was well past the junction when I shouted at him that he was going the
wrong
way, we were going to go LEFT at the crossways of the paths..
Blighter turned around went to the junction and turned to 'his' right.. our
left..
When that path took a turn to the left again he followed it, but we were
going
to cross some fields over a stile, again he responded in the same way when
told
he was going the wrong way, and returned to the stile and waited for us, he
wanted a boost over it:-))
> Staffies are lousy as guard dogs - or at least both I've had were/are.
> They're too "people" oriented. Bryn doesn't even bark when he hears a
> noise - though I am working on that as part of his training. Rascal, my
> first one made lots of noise when he first heard something but only
because
> he thought there might be something four-legged and furry about that he
> could fight with. If it turned out to be human he lost interest.
Mine woofle at the sound of a letter comming through the letterbox:-)
At every movement outside and at anyone who stops to chat to them..
Although my x-breed cant see, her hearing is acute.. Ears like radar
dishers, swivel to track any sound:-) but I cant walk her when there
are other animals around, she's a little paranoid about her lack of
sight with other animals, thinks they are in attack mode, so she
launches a pre-emptive strike at any animal in range other than Sid.
So she gets excercised with Sid at 0500hrs then stays indoors
for the rest of the day, shes 13 now and likes it that way:-) Sid
wants out more often, so gets his trogs 2 to 3 times a day, once
with her, the rest on his own.
Cheers,
Cliff
tottenham_pyrenean
> A Truscott <trus...@newshunter.yi.org> wrote in message
> news:ummfbtoapmb2t7h4i...@4ax.com...
> > On Tue, 20 Mar 2001 19:27:14 -0000, "DB" <degener...@bigfoot.com>
> killfile.
> *plonk*
Had to happen, like I posted, if it walks,quacks etc..
Cheers,
Cliff
DB
Wonder if ducks are *that* single-minded? Are we doing them an injustice by
making a comparison? :)))
DB
DB
<snipped>
> > I was referring to an old cartoon I remember from my "yoof" in NYC. I'm
> > sure it was shown in the UK and the re-runs on one of the Sky channels
> > are popular with my daughter now.
>
> Not seen, the only cartoon I've seen was about a PMD called Bella? and was
> I think French in origin.. But that was years ago.. And I dont use Sky, no
> decent reception in my area due to tree's blocking line of sight between
> dish and sat..
You're not missing much. I've tried unsubscribing but found I *do* miss the
football and my wife and daughter complain - I know better than to argue.
> > > the point really is who gets to eat whom isnt it:-))
> >
> > Yeah but I think we're likely to figure that out before they do which
> > ought to give us the edge ;)
>
> Nope it gives the pooch the edge, you think its not gonna get you 1st:-)
Bluff and double bluff :)) A game of intrigue on a lump of lava. Someone
should write a play.
> > Ok. I'd eat the dog. I'd feel bad about it but ...
>
> Not as bad as the dog:-)
You aint smelled him. He probably tastes awful too. I'm sure that would
appeal to his sense of irony (Staffies *definately* have one).
> But even pyrries used to be used in packs.. not so much these days,basque
> farmers seemingly have lost the ability to work with them:-/
Used in packs presumably because they were often up against packs of wolves?
> > Should have guessed North London from the ID. Didn't like to mention it
in
> > case you started spouting about the year ending in "1" :)))
>
> The address often says it all:-)
Touché! LOL
> Unless I find a totally enclosed space, my dawg stays on the lead, he runs
I
> run:-) Its to much of a problem telling a pyrrie not to do something at
long
> range, they just look at you and carry on:-) And they lie:-) Keep on
> pretending they dont understand english.. but then let themselves get
caught
> out at it..
I think it might also be a "dominance" characteristic of big dogs - they
don't seem (to me) as willing to accept you as the alpha. I'm sure they do
subconsciously compare there size and strength to your own - trying to put
their paws on your shoulders is for example. It's markedly apparent to
someone like me who's more used to working with Staffie-sized dogs but who
occasionally works with bigger dogs; most recently with a small-horse of a
German Shepherd who belongs to my in-Laws and is very disobedient (for now).
I'm sure he knows, or suspects, that he has physical strength close to mine
(and I'm 6', 230 lb) so there is always that instinct that causes him to
question or at least test my authority.
> Last PMD I had called Sam, used to do that as well, util one day we went
> visiting a friend at a camping site outside London, friend had a Newfie,
> so we went for 'walkies' with both dogs..
> I'd assumed there were no dangerous roads with much traffic on in the
> vacinity, but there were and in order to avoid them we had to turn to
'our' left
> about 25 yards up a pathway..
> Dog was well past the junction when I shouted at him that he was going the
> wrong way, we were going to go LEFT at the crossways of the paths..
> Blighter turned around went to the junction and turned to 'his' right..
our
> left..
> When that path took a turn to the left again he followed it, but we were
> going to cross some fields over a stile, again he responded in the same
way
> when told he was going the wrong way, and returned to the stile and
waited
> for us, he wanted a boost over it:-))
And someone called them "dumb animals" :)))
> > Staffies are lousy as guard dogs - or at least both I've had were/are.
> > They're too "people" oriented. Bryn doesn't even bark when he hears a
> > noise - though I am working on that as part of his training. Rascal, my
> > first one made lots of noise when he first heard something but only
> > because he thought there might be something four-legged and furry about
> > that he could fight with. If it turned out to be human he lost interest.
>
> Mine woofle at the sound of a letter comming through the letterbox:-)
> At every movement outside and at anyone who stops to chat to them..
That's what I want from Bryn. Just a warning someone's there. He "speaks" to
command now so our next step is to get him to associate hearing the
whatever-it-is outside and "speaking".
> Although my x-breed cant see, her hearing is acute.. Ears like radar
> dishers, swivel to track any sound:-) but I cant walk her when there
> are other animals around, she's a little paranoid about her lack of
> sight with other animals, thinks they are in attack mode, so she
> launches a pre-emptive strike at any animal in range other than Sid.
Don't blame her. Rascal (my first Staffie) was like that even before his
sight started to fail. We could walk more than a mile after seeing another
dog but his first instinct when I finally let him off the lead was to turn
round and head back along our route at a leasurely trot.
> So she gets excercised with Sid at 0500hrs
The best time of the day. I'm usually getting abroad with Bryn around then
and in the summer months I'll take advantage of the coolness and make it our
main walk of the day because he doesn't cope with the heat well.
> then stays indoors
> for the rest of the day, shes 13 now and likes it that way:-) Sid
> wants out more often, so gets his trogs 2 to 3 times a day, once
> with her, the rest on his own.
We have a lunchtime stroll and one in the evening which sometimes is
extended into a good long walk. I take him for a run last thing at night
because he keeps up better in the dark - I think he doesn't want to lose
sight of me!
We have 6 inches of snow on the ground at the moment and Bryn loves it. He
gets to come to work with me because my offices are only short way from my
house. He's watching the snow and whining to go out in it. We will in a bit.
Take care,
DB
Malcolm
> tottenham_pyrenean <non...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:99a1vs$384$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
>
> <snipped>
>
this conversation on in private. After all, you left neutering behind ages
ago!:O)
tottenham_pyrenean
> tottenham_pyrenean <non...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:99a1vs$384$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
> > decent reception in my area due to tree's blocking line of sight between
> > dish and sat..
>
> You're not missing much. I've tried unsubscribing but found I *do* miss
the
> football and my wife and daughter complain - I know better than to argue.
providers
are trying to force subscribers into their more expensive digital
services:-/
[snipped
> > Nope it gives the pooch the edge, you think its not gonna get you 1st:-)
>
> Bluff and double bluff :)) A game of intrigue on a lump of lava. Someone
> should write a play.
> You aint smelled him. He probably tastes awful too. I'm sure that would
> appeal to his sense of irony (Staffies *definately* have one).
probably:-)
> > But even pyrries used to be used in packs.. not so much these
days,basque
> > farmers seemingly have lost the ability to work with them:-/
> Used in packs presumably because they were often up against packs of
wolves?
Even pyrries would have a problem one on one with a bear:-) and yup I
suppose
wolf pack need dog packs, theres a site somewhere in France that has a very
early painting of dogs including a pyrrie fighting something I think was a
wolf..
Trouble is I cant remember what the site was, some sort of museum of hunting
in a chateau that had its own web site..
[snipped]
> > long range, they just look at you and carry on:-) And they lie:-) Keep
on
> > pretending they dont understand english.. but then let themselves get
> > caught out at it..
>
> I think it might also be a "dominance" characteristic of big dogs - they
> don't seem (to me) as willing to accept you as the alpha. I'm sure they do
> subconsciously compare there size and strength to your own - trying to put
> their paws on your shoulders is for example.
Yup, thats at the root of it and its perfectly normal for a dog to be that
way:-)
in packs a dog will always push his luck, trying to be top dog.. And get his
ear
chewed for his pains or a quick nip to a leg or flank.. its the way packs
work
'when' they are packs lead by another dog.. Something 'humans' have to be
aware of, and that its not on to 'over' react.. A dog pack leader doesnt,
just
puts the offender back in place, too many humans treat the challange as a
life and death thing, and mistreat the dog as a result:-/
> It's markedly apparent to
> someone like me who's more used to working with Staffie-sized dogs but who
> occasionally works with bigger dogs; most recently with a small-horse of a
> German Shepherd who belongs to my in-Laws and is very disobedient (for
now).
Sounds like a typical big dawg, but I'll bet its also daft as a brush:-)
> I'm sure he knows, or suspects, that he has physical strength close to
mine
> (and I'm 6', 230 lb) so there is always that instinct that causes him to
> question or at least test my authority.
Probably, and of course its often a play challange rather than a real one
for pack leadership..and as you say a 'test'.. But in that the dog isnt to
bright, I'll lay you any odd's you like that you are physically a lot
stronger than the dog.. and could quite easily pick him up by
holding him around his middle the next time he puts a paw on each
shoulder:-) Thing is you would need to be carefull not to hurt him..
dogs can be quite fragile in some ways..
[snip]
> > when told he was going the wrong way, and returned to the stile and
> waited for us, he wanted a boost over it:-))
>
> And someone called them "dumb animals" :)))
Not so dumb:-) just voiceless..
[snipped]
> That's what I want from Bryn. Just a warning someone's there. He "speaks"
to
> command now so our next step is to get him to associate hearing the
> whatever-it-is outside and "speaking".
Needed one chatterbox eh?
> > sight with other animals, thinks they are in attack mode, so she
> > launches a pre-emptive strike at any animal in range other than Sid.
>
> dog but his first instinct when I finally let him off the lead was to turn
> round and head back along our route at a leasurely trot.
Shes quite cunning, lets an animal come within 'sniffing' distance
then goes for it, lots of poor pooches left leaping back for their lives:-/
> > So she gets excercised with Sid at 0500hrs
>
> The best time of the day. I'm usually getting abroad with Bryn around then
> and in the summer months I'll take advantage of the coolness and make it
our
> main walk of the day because he doesn't cope with the heat well.
Yup, Pyrries are double coated so like cool weather too. And Sid
sheds rain like a brolly:-) Doesnt actually seem to get past his guard fur.
> > wants out more often, so gets his trogs 2 to 3 times a day, once
> > with her, the rest on his own.
>
> We have a lunchtime stroll and one in the evening which sometimes is
> extended into a good long walk. I take him for a run last thing at night
> because he keeps up better in the dark - I think he doesn't want to lose
> sight of me!
Sounds like a dog I know :-)
> We have 6 inches of snow on the ground at the moment and Bryn loves it. He
> gets to come to work with me because my offices are only short way from my
> house. He's watching the snow and whining to go out in it. We will in a
bit.
I tried taking Sam to work with me:-/ After jumping all over everyone in
sight
he got bored and wanted to go out of the offices.. Fine up to my having to
let him out of the van when I was out on the job, then it was all stop and
go
as passers by wanted to pet him.. And I certainly couldnt take him into
a customers home or office..So he ended up at home during the day but by
that time he was old enough to be comfortable with it..
These days I'm at home pretty much all the time so Sid has me for
company when the computer doesnt:-)
Cheers,
Cliff
tottenham_pyrenean
> tottenham_pyrenean <non...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:99a26e$3jd$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
> > news:999ud0$43a$1...@neptunium.btinternet.com...
> > > A Truscott <trus...@newshunter.yi.org> wrote in message
> > > news:ummfbtoapmb2t7h4i...@4ax.com...
> > > > On Tue, 20 Mar 2001 19:27:14 -0000, "DB"
<degener...@bigfoot.com>
> > > I *do* respect your beliefs Adam - I hope they keep you company in my
> > > killfile.
> > > *plonk*
> >
> > Had to happen, like I posted, if it walks,quacks etc..
> Wonder if ducks are *that* single-minded? Are we doing them an injustice
by
> making a comparison? :)))
Yes, make that a duckbilled platypus? the oddest creature to come out of
oz in many a millenia:-)
Cheers,
Cliff
DB
tottenham_pyrenean <non...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:99atjl$mqk$1...@uranium.btinternet.com...
> > Used in packs presumably because they were often up against packs of
> > wolves?
> Even pyrries would have a problem one on one with a bear:-)
Of course but the deterrent value would be there. A flock of sheep or goats
with no protection is fair game for the bear if it can get close enough. A
flock of sheep or goats accompanied by a tooled up Pyrrie is a different
proposition - the "price" of the meal is increased considerably.
> and yup I suppose wolf pack need dog packs, theres a site somewhere in
> France that has a very early painting of dogs including a pyrrie fighting
> something I think was a wolf.. Trouble is I cant remember what the site
was,
> some sort of museum of hunting in a chateau that had its own web site..
Maybe I'll do a search sometime. I could be wrong but I think it was in
caves in France where they found the first paintings of man using dogs to
hunt.
> > I think it might also be a "dominance" characteristic of big dogs - they
> > don't seem (to me) as willing to accept you as the alpha. I'm sure they
do
> > subconsciously compare there size and strength to your own - trying to
put
> > their paws on your shoulders is for example.
> Yup, thats at the root of it and its perfectly normal for a dog to be that
> way:-) in packs a dog will always push his luck, trying to be top dog..
And
> get his ear chewed for his pains or a quick nip to a leg or flank.. its
the way
> packs work 'when' they are packs lead by another dog.. Something 'humans'
> have to be aware of, and that its not on to 'over' react.. A dog pack
leader
> doesnt, just puts the offender back in place, too many humans treat the
> challange as a life and death thing, and mistreat the dog as a result:-/
I know what you're saying. When I'm working with dogs the time I use to
exert *my* dominance is when we're playing. Then they get to feel my
strength, and also learn the fact that I have arms and hands and a
(supposedly) quick mind with which to control them. The point is to make
sure it stays fun.
I've seen dogs "trained" with force and brutality. I personally don't think
it's pretty to have a dog obey because it's frightened.
When I'm working or training I only use my tone of voice to rebuke the dog
when it starts to "misbehave." When verbal rebukes stop having an effect I
take it is a sign to stop that particular session and maybe even isolate the
dog (so it gets bored and wants to resume).
> Sounds like a typical big dawg, but I'll bet its also daft as a brush:-)
He is daft in that he's friendly with the people he knows. He is
over-territorial though - a big dog that has been allowed to *think* it
rules the roost.
> > I'm sure he knows, or suspects, that he has physical strength close to
> > mine (and I'm 6', 230 lb) so there is always that instinct that causes
him to
> > question or at least test my authority.
>
> Probably, and of course its often a play challange rather than a real one
> for pack leadership..and as you say a 'test'.. But in that the dog isnt to
> bright, I'll lay you any odd's you like that you are physically a lot
> stronger than the dog.. and could quite easily pick him up by
> holding him around his middle the next time he puts a paw on each
> shoulder:-) Thing is you would need to be carefull not to hurt him..
> dogs can be quite fragile in some ways..
Oh yes I know I'm stronger and I could easily pick him up. I take your pount
though, dogs really aren't meant to be manhandled like that - they don't
understand it and it can come as a shock to them. In my experience when you
surprise a dog like that you have to be prepared for (and accept) almost any
reaction. The paws on the shoulder thing I generally deal with by lifting
them off with a firm "No" (the first command all my dogs learn :))) )
> > That's what I want from Bryn. Just a warning someone's there. He
"speaks"
> > to command now so our next step is to get him to associate hearing the
> > whatever-it-is outside and "speaking".
>
> Needed one chatterbox eh?
You got it. I don't mind dealing with the whatever's - I just want to know
they're there.
> > > sight with other animals, thinks they are in attack mode, so she
> > > launches a pre-emptive strike at any animal in range other than Sid.
> >
> > dog but his first instinct when I finally let him off the lead was to
turn
> > round and head back along our route at a leasurely trot.
>
> Shes quite cunning, lets an animal come within 'sniffing' distance
> then goes for it, lots of poor pooches left leaping back for their
lives:-/
LOL. Great mental picture and a wonderful comparison to Rascal. He very
quickly learnt to be docile and quiet on the lead in the presence of other
dogs in the hope that he might either fool the old man into take his nice
placid Rascal closer, or the other dogs into coming over to investigate this
polite stranger :))
> > > So she gets excercised with Sid at 0500hrs
> >
> > The best time of the day. I'm usually getting abroad with Bryn around
then
> > and in the summer months I'll take advantage of the coolness and make it
> > our main walk of the day because he doesn't cope with the heat well.
>
> Yup, Pyrries are double coated so like cool weather too. And Sid
> sheds rain like a brolly:-) Doesnt actually seem to get past his guard
fur.
Staffies have a short single-coat so are not keen on either extreme. Bryn
has a much bigger problem losing heat than he does in gaining it. I'm not
sure why.
> > > wants out more often, so gets his trogs 2 to 3 times a day, once
> > > with her, the rest on his own.
> >
> > We have a lunchtime stroll and one in the evening which sometimes is
> > extended into a good long walk. I take him for a run last thing at night
> > because he keeps up better in the dark - I think he doesn't want to lose
> > sight of me!
>
> Sounds like a dog I know :-)
Reassuring aren't they? Watching Bryn when my wife joins us on our hikes is
great fun. He's far more attentive - bloody sexist mutt! With me he does
range about but it's far more for his own interest. When my wife is with us
he ranges predominantly ahead and he places himself between my wife and any
other people or animals we happen to meet. His body language isn't
aggressive - a notch back from "the point" - but he is very clearly letting
me know about the threat and also letting the "threat" know he's there. He's
a good lad!
> > We have 6 inches of snow on the ground at the moment and Bryn loves it.
> > He gets to come to work with me because my offices are only short way
> > from my house. He's watching the snow and whining to go out in it. We
will
> > in a bit.
>
> I tried taking Sam to work with me:-/ After jumping all over everyone in
> sight he got bored and wanted to go out of the offices..
Naturally :)
> Fine up to my having to let him out of the van when I was out on the job,
then
> it was all stop and go as passers by wanted to pet him..
Again ... naturally :) I would. Can take or leave people but show me a dog
...
People seem polarized by Staffies. 1/2 will cross the street to pet him -
the other 1/2 cross to get out of the way because they believe all the bad
press.
> And I certainly couldnt take him into a customers home or office..So he
> ended up at home during the day but by that time he was old enough to be
> comfortable with it..
Bryn creates some surreal moments when I have visitors at work. My office is
a converted mill that has essentially been gutted and had a series of
platforms suspended from high beams to create seperate areas and rooms. It's
cavernous so sounds carry through the building. We can be sat quietly round
the meeting table when all of a sudden Bryn, who my guests don't know is
sleeping in a sunny spot in one of the higher areas, will decide he's going
to stretch out and wriggle round on his back making stupid grunting noises.
I like to sit back and watch them as they all exchange looks. At over times
there'll be a rhythmic bouncing sound as his ball bounces slowly down the
steps ... closely followed by Bryn who generally glances in as he passes!
Ten minutes later he'll return with his ball and deposit at a visitor's feet
then look at him hopefully.
> These days I'm at home pretty much all the time so Sid has me for
> company when the computer doesnt:-)
I realise I'm lucky to be able to merge my working and home environment
while retaining enough space between the two to keep them nominally
separated. The walls and fences round the house and the mill are
Staffie-proof so Bryn can poddle between the two as he likes. I've even
started to get him to understand that the shrubs haven't been put there for
his personal amusement!
Have a good one,
DB
DB
Malcolm <m...@droit.ac.dc> wrote in message
news:99aipn$7ni$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
And another thing ... we may have wandered off-thread but we're still
talking about dogs so we're within the remit of the group :) Be sure to let
us know when we don't even have that desperate technicality to cling to ;p
Cheers,
DB
DB
news:99aipn$7ni$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
You have a point but there's naff-all else going on here! :)
DB
tottenham_pyrenean
"Malcolm" <m...@droit.ac.dc> wrote in message
news:99aipn$7ni$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
> this conversation on in private. After all, you left neutering behind ages
> ago!:O)
Whats that got to do with it? The chatter is about dogs, thus within the
remit of this NG..
irrespective of what the thread started out as...
Let the moderator side take a bit of a rest:-)
Cheers,
Cliff
Pat
"Val" <box...@eidosnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:VQLs6.219807$Dd3.3...@monolith.news.easynet.net...> news:ihq6bt48b92becc89...@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 17 Mar 2001 12:42:37 -0000, "Val" <box...@eidosnet.co.uk>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >I would say 8months old is about right..
> > >There has been alot of debates about this subject and it is clear that
> > >everybody has different views, so if we want to get this news group up
> and
> > >running with a friendly atmosphere can I suggest that we leave well
alone
> > >for a while???
> > Why don't you come out with what you are really trying to say Val and
> > that is that you would like all us opponents of barbaric acts such as
> > tail docking ear cropping spaying and neutering to go away
>
> NO< that's not what I am saying, you are entitled to your opinion as am I
> and everybody else. But with a attitude like that it's not surprising the
> new's group went quiet.
>
>
> and leave
> > you cruel minded people to get on with it just like Blair and his gang
> > of cut throats would like the farmers of this country to stand by
> > while he slaughters their perfectly healthy animals .
>
>
> How dare you compare me with a cruel minded person, you know nothing about
> me.
>
>
> Thought this was a group for dogs not for you to air your political views
on
> about Blair and the farmers etc..
> I do not consider myself to be cruel minded, just because I suggested we
> leave well alone for a while, by all means carry on your opinions, but as
> Malcolm expressed in his post, the fact about not being able to air views
> without being criticised and abused.Surely we should be able to chat for
> advice and general enjoyment without people like you jumping down throats
> like this!! Is that all your on here for arguement and contraversary???
>
>
> > Well I got news for you Val I will not be kept quiet on these issues
> > and never will be .
> > Adam
>
> No, I don't suppose you will, and nobody expects you to, however with a
> group of people just getting to together on a new's group why be so
> hostile???
> boxlady.
>
>
> Hi Boxlady,
How are you today, and all the group.
I have added some more photos to my website if you are intertested.
Has anyone else got a website ,love to look at them.
Pat
>
boxlady
> >
> >
> > Hi Boxlady,
> How are you today, and all the group.
> I have added some more photos to my website if you are intertested.
> Has anyone else got a website ,love to look at them.
> Pat
I am fine thanks, dogs all okay.
Sorry Pat but I don't seem to be able to find your web site could you remind
us of address please.
I am working on mine at the moment and hopefully it wont be to long before
it's ready, will keep you all up to date on progress.
boxlady.
> >
>
>
Coleen Taylor
I have posted about foot and mouth earlier today - but I do have a web site
in fact I have two. Not greedy - just essential!"
Hope some of it makes you smile.
Coleen
http://www.seaville.freeserve.co.uk/
http://www.seaville.freeserve.co.uk/bones.htm
boxlady <box...@eidosnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Vnuu6.234087$Dd3.3...@monolith.news.easynet.net...
Pat
"Coleen Taylor" <col...@seaville.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:99fum7$e73$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
My website for you ,if you visit would love you to
sign it please.
Thanks. http://animalcrackers.homestead.com/Index.html
How is the dog walking going.
It has not stopped raining here .
Muddy and horrible,the park is so bad mind you the dogs do not care.
Rosie meet some other dogs yesturday and rolled on her back
I went out with a black Lab and came home with a brown Lab
Pat
> >
>
>
DB
news:99gmas$6qr$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com...
Hi Pat,
> Thanks. http://animalcrackers.homestead.com/Index.html
> How is the dog walking going.
> It has not stopped raining here .
> Muddy and horrible,the park is so bad mind you the dogs do not care.
> Rosie meet some other dogs yesturday and rolled on her back
> I went out with a black Lab and came home with a brown Lab
> Pat
LOL my Staffie is brindle brown ... unfortunately with white bits. He finds
something to roll in *every* time we go out. His name his Bryn but we're
thinking of rechristening him "Stench the Stinkie Staffie".
I don't have a website of my own but there are pictures of Bryn on the Yahoo
Staffordshire Bull Terrier club -
http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/staffordshirebullterrier
and the same ones are also on the Yahoo Staffordshire Bull Terrier email
group that I help to moderate -
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Staffordshire_Bull_Terrier
You need a free Yahoo id to see both properly but it may well be worth it as
there are many dog clubs and groups. Have a doog weekend :)
DB