This is a forum for the discussion of the
proposed Shambala Bill and other legislative issues concerning animal ownership.
Please keep your debates civil, and do not post material which is
knowingly inaccurate. Anti private ownership entities monitor this BB,
so be careful about posting personal information. Known offenders
or trolls will not be allowed to post here.
* If your post consists of only the
subject line, place "n/m" (no message) in
the message box, or your post will not appear
on the board.
I would like to respond to the message Ms. Terrill wrote about EagleWolf Foundation. Ms. Terrill started contacting EagleWolf back in November of 1998. She wrote that she would be interested in adopting a wolfdog. Ms. Terrill originally contacted EWF about two other animals that already had been adopted out. After talking to Ms. Terrill EWF came to the conclusion that she would get along nicely with a low content male rescue named Alaska. Alaska had been brought to EWF by his previous owner in hoping to board him at the facility. After 6 months went by with no
connection made by the previous owner(many attempts were made by EWF also)and the owner having signed over any and all rights having to
do with Alaska, EWF was under the impression that Alaska had been abandoned. EWF made it very clear to Ms. Terrill that transportation of the said
animal was her responsibility. EWF spent many months trying to assist Ms. Terrill in any
way to get Alaska to her home....with no luck. Ms. Terrill could not pool together enough money for the shipping or for gas money.
In responding to the $100.00 donation Ms. Terrill DONATED to EWF, this money was to get Alaska ready to go to his new home as per Ms. Terrill's instructions. The Health certificate cost $50.00, the required vet visit cost $25.00, the shots that would be needed in the near future cost $35.00. This exceeds her $100.00 donation.
The pictures are matter all themselves. We sent them out from our local post office. There had been problems in the past with the quality of
our mail carriers but there is no explanation to why Ms. Terrill never received our pictures.
The reasoning Ms. Terrill came to say that she wonders if Alaska ever really existed is very demoralizing to the good people at EWF. EagleWolf Foundation consists of many caring individuals that want nothing more than to see the wolfdogs that can be adopted out go to the best home available. All of Alaska's paperwork is kept in the EWF files and the USDA paperwork shows the transfer to his new home.
EagleWolf Foundation did everything in their power to help find Ms. Terrill a suitable wolfdog after Alaska was no longer available. We gave
many names and numbers to Ms. Terrill of Wolfdogs that needed homes and was the type of wolfdog she needed. EWF also contacted Candy Kitchen and asked if they had any adoptable
wolfdogs that would be all right for Ms. Terrill. They indeed did but ms. Terrill did not want to help any other wolfdogs other than the one who
already had a home.....Alaska.
This was a very unfortunate situation for Ms.
Terrill or EWF to be in. We are very sorry to hear that she is so upset. We hope that she will find
it her heart to help other less fortunate wolfdogs, for there are many out there who need homes. We would like to report that Alaska is doing wonderful in his home. His people(the status of why they had not kept in contact is kept confidential in EWF files to protect privacy) Were so overjoyed to see his again and Alaska felt the same way.
Again we are sorry for the misunderstanding between Ms. Terrill and EWF. If she has any questions or comments she should refer to her signed contract with EWF or contact us personally. For our new Address and phone number please E-Mail the Secretary at:
wolflady@hoopeston.com
Sincerely,
Jill Baker- Secretary EWF
per Theresa E. Gilchrist- President EWF
My friends,
I consider each of the three respondents in this discussion to be good breeders in their own rights. I would like to think that the animated discussions are because each of you have worked very hard to develop and maintain acceptable animals and each have your set of rules that dictate the quality to your prospective owners. Collectively, you could set the expectation for a wolfdog but you need to bring the conversation up a notch for folks like me.
Clearly, there is a difference in the expected behaviors and training of a near-pure animal, and a line bred F1,F2, or F3. As an owner, I have had a different expectation at each level and I'm sure your observations have been the same. Perhaps what really needs to be said is - "this is what you can expect"... instead of focusing on how you are going to achieve it. If you can agree at each level on what is expected, it is easy to frame that with HOW you expect to achieve it.
If you can bear with me on expectations for near pures, I'd like to explain my experience.
I have animals from Suzanne, a Gabe Davidson animal, and Tennesee Game Farm animals so I have a variety to compare.
The important thing to me is that the animal can be handled readily, is calm natured, takes food gently, and minimizes the jumping and mouthing. If they don't it does not make them unacceptable as near-pures but clearly points out the differences depending on the wolves that were used.
The animals I got from Suzanne all meet my expectation on behavior. Do they sit, stay, lay down, etc? They will if I do; they will with hands on. Does that mean that every one produced will have that nature? Probably most but not always all.
The Gabe Davidson is a whiner. She'll whine after you and expect to be the central point of attention but she's real snappy with food, hateful of every other female on the place, and will argue with you about hands on. Does this mean all Gabe Davidsons are like this? Of course not, but if I were going to breed, she would be my last choice to use unless I put her with a couch potato and culled anything that didn't meet my expectations. Behaviors like both of the above types are genetic and do get passed down.
The near-pure Tennessee Game Farms are atypical of wild wolves. They're shy, elusive, will not allow contact unless tightly confined, and must be darted to be treated. Again, this is a genetic pre-diposition. They're a very good show-n-tell animal for education but would never make an acceptable pet or companion. Should they ever be bred, even if they're gorgeous? Of course not.
I can say this because all babies were hand-raised from 10-12 days and raised in the house until they were 6 months old. No one was treated any differently and expectations were the same for all.
I've heard good things about each of you but for me, the expectations are very simple and very measurable on near-pures because I've had the chance to view some differences. It shouldn't be so hard to come to a concensus on basic expectations. How about trying it again?
There has been "discussion" for a long time now about a "bad breeder" list and the possibility of making it public on the Internet but this cannot happen due to the threat of lawsuits from these type breeders, so the next thought would be a "good breeder" list.
Could we WD breeders who are honest and responsible breeders set a code of standards for ourselves that we would agree to abide by and print this list on a web page? Is it feasible to include a guest book of some sort that people can file complaints against the treatment they have received from undesirable breeders? I am also really tired of the term "breeder" being treated as a nasty word and many people looking down on all that do any breeding, and I think that we should address the rights of the breeder and what he expects from a buyer too.
I am resistant to the idea of trying to turn the WD into just another AKC type dog breed that demands a training certification as a breeding requirement especially with the higher content animals. We all know they can be "trained" but I feel the extent of this training is up to the individual owner, not all WD owners are into this type lifestyle with their animals and neither are all owners of AKC dog breeds. Health screens such as OFA is a good idea but certainly not the whole answer by any means. I am far more interested in a breeder’s contract that guarantees a replacement or a refund if an animal proves to have genetic problems.
I would also be very willing to help with such a web page.
I couldn't agree with your post more!
I am going to attempt to post a picture at the bottom of this message....
Animal on left traced back to George Hurst on fathers side, need I say more?
Animal on the left is from documented parents.
Look at the difference of these two animals, that is why I believe that everyone "should" be doing research BEFORE they make a purchase discission.
Had I known there were registries and lineages could be traced and/or verified, I probably would not have purchased the animal on the left. But at the time I was not aware that this could be done.
The internet is a very good tool for educating people, but at the time I didn't even have a computer.
For those people seeking breeders who do not have internet access, most are going to look in the newspaper to find a breeder, or by word of mouth. Let's face it, until you have made that first purchase most don't know about registries, magazines/publications to find the "good" breeders/kennels.
I agree that posting ads in the local newspaper to counter the bad/unreputable breeders can help deter people from making this kind of a purchase, but not going to reach everyone before they make a mistake. I know of several people who are not even breeders who place these kinds of ads.
I don't know the solution but I always try to tell people that what ever breeder they buy from to make sure that the animals can be verified through a "reputable" registry. Then I tell them which registries I believe to be reputable.We all know that there are more bad registries than good, so all of this is much deeper than everyone thinks.
Maybe we should all work on a frequently asked questions page? List what you should be looking for in a breeder, how to verify lineages, what information should be in the contract, etc.
I know Stormy had some very good information on her website, before the computer crash. Maybe if we all pulled together and gave this type of input we could have one site to send everyone to learn about these issues.
Maybe we could list, some pictures of good documented animals vs "reported" animals. I'm sure just about everyone has purchased an animal that could not be verified. How many on this list would be willing to do this?
I would be wiling to write the webpage(s) and post pics to the site. We have all got to pull together on this issue as a group because everyone doing this one on one is apparently not enough.
Ok, crossing fingers that posting this picture will work.
Kathy
as an organized group set up a list on the internet, but as I recall, many 'claimed' responsible breeders were against internet advertising of breeders (and it leads to selling their litters). I have no problem with internet advertising of these breeders as long as they are responsible and do the right thing.
If there ever was another wolfdog registry, it should have more strict regulations than the ones that exist. (Option: those that exist can change too). All they need is one registry to set a good example,(temperament testing or training certification, and health screening) and the others have to follow or get out of the way. Some may ask why, but I say why not? It is better to have wolfdogs that have the best temperament, the best confirmation, the best health, and the best breeders/owners. Since the wolfdog is in legal jeopardy because of some bad animals from poor breeding and irresponsible owners, owners/breeders have to work harder to prove their animals and set an example for the rest of the wolfdog community.
HOW do you stop it? If you've got some ideas, I, for one, would be happy to hear them.
Even AKC purebred breeders haven't managed to stop the irresponsible puppy mills and BYB of many popular dog breeds.
Education is one way, and the growth of the Internet has helped increase awareness, but it's slow. It takes time for people to assimilate information, and pass it on. Eventually that may make a difference, but in the meantime, you can look in the newspaper ads of anytown and probably find "wolf hybrids" for sale (as well as almost any breed of dog).
How many people who get dogs actually do ANY research before they bring home that puppy? Look on the rec.pets. newsgroups and any number of other places and they're filled with people needing help &/or complaining.
You can try to force legislation on people. Although I support responsible owner laws, I cannot and will not support any kind of breed (or type) specific legislation, for a number of reasons. What other choices are there?
So, meanwhile, quite a few of us spend considerable time, one way or another, trying to help people learn and deal with problems that arise, on and offline.
Surely am proud to hear it, Suzanne. The thing read like BS to me anyway.
Maybe in Jan. 2000, they will be too busy putting out the Y2K fires to even think about wolfdogs, but I'd make it a point to keep in touch with that gal from legislative affairs anyway.
I am seeking information here, not awar of words. I have been to the Kugsha URL and left with feelings that these animals are not being portrayed as wolfdogs and then that they are, depending on what portion of the website you are in. The Section dealing with the 4 "lines" being used for this "breed" leads one to believe that the the Kugsha dog does have wolf blood in it.
Noreen or Jeff, please be more specific in your response than you were to Christine about just what a Kugsha dog is going to be and I really wish an explanation on the "blue eyed" statements and pricing. To get right down to it, whats the point of it?
REMEMBER that I am asking for information, NOT casting stones. Please be mindful of this in your response. We're trying to understand and asking questions of you so that we can. Thanks.
I am for establishing a breed standard that takes into consideration all aspects of what a good wolfdog should be.
If animals are bred with consistancy then percentages won't hold, though I will agree that reaching for those standards will take a huge amount of work by those involved. In the developement of domestic dog breeds are the percentages of the what breeds of dog stated somewhere in the lineage of the each animal, until such a time as breeding consistancy is established?
However, with registeries already in place and using percentages as a base to catagorize animals, I don't believe it's ever up to the organization to retrieve such information, it is most definetly up to the owner looking to register to have this information if they are serious in the first place. I am for seeking help through registries when one is looking to confirm or confront the lineage of their animal.
There will always be breeders who will lie to buyers. The only thing we can do is offer information to potential buyers and perhaps even potential breeders. How can we do that, by being responsible wolfdog owners and breeders and getting that information to the general public. Advertising during the peak times of puppy season!!! Expensive? Can be!! Breeders advertise puppies for sale, we need to advertise during those times for the buyer to beware when considering a wolfdog as a companion!!
I do my lil part by writing, calling or meeting in person with people during this heavy time of year!!! So far this year, it's going well, the count is 3 spayed females, one male taken off the breeding trail and a litter of pups that are now being placed as low content animals(the pups were advertised at 90% wolf), approach has a lot to do with it and dragging a well breed wolfdog along certainly helps people understand that you get what you pay for when you educate yourself first!!! These types will always be around, but so will my type!!! I spend a lot time during breeding and puppy season out in public educating who ever asks about the dog.
My son even made a poster that is hanging at the local PetSmart. The poster is titled, Buyer Beware!!!, It's that Time of Year Again, Puppy Season is Upon Us!!! below is a picture of one of my old rescues, rather a muttly looking shepherd mix with his supposed percentage of wolf at 85% with a subtitle that reads, For what you will pay for this, you could have bought this, below that is a picture of a well breed wolfdog with the same percentage!! at the bottom is my phone number to call for information. It may not be perfect, but it was his way of doing his part!!! and it's helped alot, I have received a number of phone calls because of that poster. At least its something, and a whole lot better then nothing.
Suzanne,
I can image what a day you've had. It's really hard to convince the uninformed and ill-advised that what they have may be questionable. It all goes back to framing what a wolfdog really is and sticking to that. This is what has not been done as far as I can tell so even long pedigrees can produce the less than ideal image of a wolfdog. I can tell you about breeder 'Y' out of North Carolina. This breeder will breed two wolfdogs and out of the litter will have some that are sold as 50%, some that are sold as 90%. Is this a lie? On paper it is a lie but genetically, it is very feasible to get a pup out of moderate percent animals that just happened to pick up a majority of the wolf genes from its parents. Then you have breeder 'Z' that produces the paperwork 75% that have a neglible amount of wolf, genetically. Its a catch-22. You can go by pedigree and risk the really 'doggy' animals being defined as wolfdogs because they have the paperwork. I'm not saying that pedigree and content don't go hand in hand but I am still a firm believer that until the 'wolfdog' is clearly defined and the genetic base that will be used for the wolfdog is clearly defined, you'll continue to have this same problem no matter what registry it is.
Since I do not belong to these wolfdog lists, Noreen reponded to some post comparing NEDA with the Kugsha dog. This line is actually a rename of the American Husky that Noreen has been developing for 19 years. We had considered using 1 Gordon Smith stud to infuse the line and were very honest in defining that in the breed history. However, due to the assumption that that would make them wolfdogs, we have eliminated this stud from consideration.
I do have some excellent wolfdogs and enjoy them for my personal use but wouldn't even consider using them in anything we are doing with the Kugsha. Thank you for asking.
are dedicated and interested in a type of wolfdog to create a breed, it will be done. It is the law of demand and supplying it. On the other hand, some dog breeds are going out and disappearing because they are too plagued with diseases, there is no need or want of them, or have been used to create other breeds and that new breed/blend takes over.
There are many breeds, but if a wolfdog breed is created, it should have a registry 10 times better than the AKC with strict regulations and never let the breed get out of hand like other popular AKC breeds are allowed to do. AKC will not change, and still register puppy mill and genetically sick dogs. This would separate this new wolfdog breed from other AKC dog breeds, and after this was done I would then ask, Why have any more unregulated AKC breeds accepted? Aren't there enough of them unregulated?
Dogs have lost something in the formula to me. Everyone has a preference for a breed type and to them, that breed is the most beautiful, most magnificent and most intelligent animal around. For the true wolfdog enthusiast, it happens to be the breed for them. There was a picture on the other BB, can't remember the pups name but he was a gray (I would call it a sable), that was truly magnificent. Probably because I have one here that looks like that (an Iowa pup), this is the perfect picture to me of what a wolfdog looks like. They have a beauty and grace you can't find in another breed. Very fluid in their movements but intelligent enough that you can banter with them over the rules since they try to reason you out. People are struck by the beauty of the wolfdog whether they prefer the breed or not. I've looked at lots of pictures of wolfdogs developed in Europe and none of them could hold a candle to a real American wolfdog. Properly developed and promoted, even the Europeans couldn't resist an American wolfdog.
From what I have seen of most northern breeds whether they are husky, malamute, and a lot of other breeds is outside of their 'home' environment, they can be shy since they are very tuned to pack orientation. Once they're out of their 'home', they're in another's territory. Socialization at a very early age helps alleviate this problem in most all the breeds because it produces a false sense of security on where the boundaries lie.
If we focus on high-percentage animals, my experience has been that some do produce what I call a natural genetic shyness that no amount of socialization will correct. I have not seen this in animals that come from parents that have been in a nurturing captivity environment for a number of generations. I believe these animals were bred to promote that 'mellow' and 'calm' feature. The 'wildness' is not bred or culled. These are excellent stock for companion animals. Animals that come from game farms were bred to retain the wildness and shyness because they're hunted for pelt. Only a 'fluke' would produce a calm animal because the wildness is promoted genetically. These are NOT the types of animals that should ever be used to produce a companion.
I believe there is another hidden agenda on not approving the rabies vaccine for the species canus lupus. We participated in the original blood samplings which Nick Federoff had headed up to help resolve this issue. I believe the facts stand for themselves. What is interesting is there is no guarantee that the vaccine works on every breed of dog since each individual breed was not challenge tested. If there was a huge genetic difference between the breeds of dogs and wolves, then offspring would be sterile and they're not.
No one (that I'm aware of) is breeding dogs to wild wolves. It is a fairy tale that people stake their dogs out for the "lone wolf" to come along and impregnate her. Wolves do not breed to strange, unknown animals.
In several states, pure wolves are legal to own with the proper permits. The pure wolves that I have seen in captivity (for the most part) have been socialized to humans and I would not consider them to be a typical "wild animal". Sources for pure wolves have been zoos and game farms prior to 1975 but the genetics are still being used in the wolf dog lines today. Most of the wolf dog breeding being done today is wolf dog to wolf dog and not wolf x dog.
To me, this is the toughest question to answer since there are so many variables involved. Since my wolfdogs are also very high percent, there was never a question about treating them like a labrador. What they have offered me is a great deal more than I can return. They're highly intelligent, reasoning, and accepting of an ugly two-legged wolf into their environment that happens to be the leader and don't challenge them but respect them for their position. I don't think they are for everyone. I firmly believe that people have to change their mindset about canines when dealing with these animals and recognize the differences. Mine give me a great deal of peace and relaxation as if you're sitting with your best friend. They know when I'm happy, they know when I'm sad, they know when I'm hurting and adjust their behavior accordingly. They'll engage me in play, share their food, and rest quietly if I'm tired. I guess for me, it's like having really good children that have great communication skills and are very perceptive about things.
This seems to be a "loaded question". I have only the high content wolf dogs and haven’t had the mid content animals since 1992. IMO, the lower and mid range wolf dogs can and have been trained to do numerous things depending on what the owner chooses to use them for. The higher content animals are quite intelligent and learn very quickly but in all probability are not capable of doing "police work like a GSD". What they "can do" should not be a pre-requisite as to whether a person can own them. We have many AKC breeds that don’t do much of anything except being a companion to their owners as my Standard Poodle. The Standard Poodle was originally bred as a French hunting dog.....has webbed feet like a wolf. However, he is extremely shy of any loud noise and hides under the furniture and shakes like a leaf ....... even when my grandson "cracks" his bubble gum. I cannot imagine that this animal would be capable of hunting under the sound of gunfire......we would never see him again! Compared to the wolf dogs, he is much harder to train but he is a wonderful companion and I will get another one when he is gone.
Do mine eyes deceive me or is this an unmoderated board that is minus one????? Oh NO.......tell me that it isn't true. I go away to Kansas to come home to this?????? <snicker>
The aforementioned <or was it> person is a pleasant missing link. Damned nice to see discussions that are meaningful and actually going somewhere in a positive form and fashion, NOT to mention seeing alot more postings from folks that know what they are talking about and actually can talk about issue and topics.
Good job Suz. Be talkin to ya ll shortly but I have 300+ e-mails to search thru so taa taa for now.
Interestingly enough, my experience has been that it is not the "wolfdog people" that discuss percentages but the "inexperienced dog owner/layman" that have this fixation. You can always tell when little Johnny has his 8th generation wolfdog that is 90%.
Genetically, the only guarantee of percentage is crossing a dog with a pure wolf. You will end up with a 50% cross. No other way to cut it.
Once you cross a wolfdog to a wolfdog, you can't manage the genetics so it is ludicrous to even try. You can go by the standard statistical formula of 1,3,1 which means your chances are 1 dog, 1 wolf, and 3 pretty standard combinations.
My personal belief is an F1 cross is a wolfdog. Anything else is a dog.
1. Why is "content" discussed right out of the chute with wolfdog people, and why is it so important to you? What does it prove how much wolf is in your dog?
Sadly enough, the "percentage game" has been around about as long as people have been breeding/selling wolf dogs. As the percentage escalates, so does the price tag......it’s similar to the horse trader stories that you hear about. IMO, it’s the actual documentation that counts, not just a stated percentage that may or may not be correct. In other words, I would be willing to pay more for a verifiable 25% wolf dog than I would pay for a phenotype 75% wolf dog.
I do think that a wolf dog’s "accurate percentage content" is very important. Most of us have been ripped off as to the percentage of the first wolf dogs that we purchased, only to find out at a later time that we had an animal with little or no wolf content verses the 87% we were told by the breeder. In reality, the knowledge that you thought that you had acquired about the behaviors and care of the so-called 87% were based on a lie so therefore you really had NO first hand experience or knowledge about raising a hi content wolf dog.
The behaviors of a true 25% and a true 90% wolfdog could be compared to the difference in behaviors between different dog breeds. In order to have first hand knowledge about any canine, you must have experience with an accurately represented animal.
more.
Actual Content (not neccessarily percentage) does have a lot to do with what is inherited from the
wolf and the dog. The more wolf content inherited in temperament, the more knowledgeable owner
it needs to be about wolf behavior--- Also physical needs as well (diet) and sensitivity to foods (such as soy). The more generations away from the pure wolf tends to be important determining these factors too.
There is a misperception that content = percentage. This is not necessarily true. There are many who misrepresent percentage and there are poorly bred higher percenters that look doggy. I do not base what I perceive an animal to be on percentage but actual inherited content so percentage does not mean much at all to me. I, like Wolfie, I find the look and temperament more important than calculated mathamatical equations that many times does not represent actual content.
Why I have told people of my animals content (I do not say percentage anymore)have been basically to prove anti-wolfdog people wrong who say they can't be trained, housebroken, or trained to do obedience work, etc. There are many others who say "percentage" for other reasons, and they are numerous.
I don't put a lot of wieght on percentage, to many years fixing other peoples problems, to many people with 98.6% wolfdogs that looked more like your average shepherd mutt. Just got a response today form a message I sent to a person advertising on the web to sell pups, those pups are supposed to be 98.6%.
I would much rather spend some time with an animal and not know what the supposed percentage is, and find out from the animal who they are as an individual, I have see some 25% animals that were more wolfish then the 98% percents.
As I said on the on other board, I am asked constantly how much wolf Zaz is or is that pure, I try to steer the conversation to one of who Zaz is what he is about, if they insist, I simply say enough so that it shows.
Having been through the rescue thing for a long time, I didn't look to buying an animal with a certain percentage or generations from pure, I looked for the best I could get close enough to me to drive. This year Zari comes home, I don't know what percentage she is, I haven't ask, I don't care, I saw things in her line that will improve Zaz's and vise versa. Both are beautiful animals, I will always be plagued by the percentage question, and will always try to turn that to one of education with each individual, one person at a time to change the world, or at least my small part of it.
Wolfie
From my experience, the majority of folks who brag about how much wolf content they have in their animals, usually have misrepresented animals or do not very good working knowledge of these crosses.
For example you also will see behind the 85% will be something like red wolf, or california grey wolf or some such nonsense. These animals can almost never be traced back to verifiable stock.
I think with a well bred animal you shouldn't have to state the content, you should be able to look at the animal and see wolfy features.
I also don't put as much stock into the content of the animals as I do number of gens from a pure. For example, I've seen a lot of 90+% that looked like mixed breed mutts and they are usually many gens away from a pure wolf and most have been poorly bred animals.
I also think that the people who have verifiable animals seem to put the content on their animals to try and educate what a true **% content actually looks like.
There is so much more to base evaluations of animals on beside the reported content IMHO. Questions like who was the breeder, what animals are in the lineage usually will determine whether the animal actually "IS" the reported content.
Neonatal pups do not yet have well developed immune systems. They are born with some maternally dervived antibodies in their systems which provide a small degree of protection durng this period of immunological vulnerability. But most young animals get immunological protection from antibodies found in the mothers milk, specifically in the colostrum. In neonatal animals with poorly developed immune systems, proteins as large as antibodies can pass through the lining of the gut, and can provide functional protection. As the young animal matures, their own immune system develops and can provide protection. At the same time, the gut also matures and proteins such as antibodies can no longer pass through the lining and are digested with all the other proteins.
Bacteria are everywhere, no matter how careful you are. Most of the time they don't cause any problems because our immune systems can keep them in check. My best guess as to what is happening in your bottle-fed pups is that the maternal antibodies they are born with are no longer providing functional protection, and they are not receiving additional protection from colostral antibodies, so they are not able to keep the bacterial population in check until their own immune systems are developed enough to take over. This is just a guess - I don't know in dogs or wolves what the time line is for pups to develope functional immunity.
I also have noticed that pups left with the mother do not seem to become symptomatic and have problems. The bottle fed pups seem to be the ones experiencing difficulty.
Do you think this might have something to do with the enzymes? of the mothers milk killing off the bacteria or keeping it in check?
I've raised two litters, both were raised inside and left on the mother. Weaning started at around 2-3 weeks and by 4 weeks they were totally on food, not mothers milk. Not one of my pups has ever had bacterial problems, now worms that's a different story. We had a terrible time with hooks last year.
I guess I will show my stupidity here and ask if there is a difference between coccidia and coccidiosis as it seems that you are talking about 2 different things.....and I could be nuts too (BG). I have heard that all pups have the bacteria and stress helps to bring it out.
I had a problem for several years....we pulled pups at 14 days and they did fine for a week to 10 days. Then, the stools turned a watery yellow with white chunks that looked like cottage cheese and a few days later there would also be blood. I would take samples into the vet and they tested neg. for coccidia but we always put them on Albon just to be safe. Finally, the vet asked about my formula and it did contain the yolk of raw eggs. He told me to pull the raw egg yolks as he felt that they could not digest raw eggs at this young age. This seems to have solved the problem. If there is any diarrhea at all, I have gotten a drug called SMZ which is a pink liquid and clears it up in less than 24 hours.
Is the bad one. Its definition of wild animal includes "hybrids" of any animal listed in the bill, which does include wolves.
SB1333 includes wolves in the definition of dangerous animals, but does not say anything (as far as I can tell wading through the legislative BS) about "hybrids" of wolves. It does specifically address "hybrids" of lions and tigers.
Toby Goodman, the sponsor of HB2259, is from Tarrant Cty area (Dallas/Ft. Worth). I'll be contacting some friends to see what can be done to encourage him, at the least, to change his definition. The vague way his bill is written could make DOGS illegal...
