Chid
-
Content Count
8,883 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Articles
Gun Dealer's and Fieldsports Shop's
Reloading Room
Blogs
Calendar
Store
Classifieds
Everything posted by Chid
-
Id even suspect that something else was in the mix there?. well you suspect wrong
-
here is another one for you to make it a bit clearer... breed 2 merle borders together (so you have merle on both sides so you cant say they threw to the none merle parent) take a black dog/bitch out of that litter and then breed it you wont get merles , why??? cause its either merle or its not they dont carry a merle gene
-
you not think that dog looks like this one morton??? 3/4 grey 1/4 wheaten
-
good cause your wrong and im right .... FACTED
-
I doubt its bred that way also?. why?
-
so tell me this then .. you breed a litter of pups all are merle apart from one .. you shouldnt breed a merle to a merle yet you can breed the none merle pup in that litter to a merle without problems ... dogs are either merle or there not ... FACT bet if you had a close look at snipe you would find a evidence of him being merle
-
http://www.ashgi.org/color/Cryptic_Merles.html
-
snipe must be a phantom merle ... if a dog only had to carry the merle gene as you say to produce merles , dont you think the border collie would be f**cked as a breed as breeding 2 merles together produces bad pups ..
-
yes one of the parents must have the merel gene to produce merels,they dont have to merel in coulour them selfs once they have the gene in them theres a good chance they will throw merel pups. wrong... one of the parents HAVE to be merle ... FACT
-
Dogs ain't stupid they know the difference
-
Like that
-
Snipes mother was merle, The father to snipe his on the left,,, That explains it. Cheers.Snipe must be a phantom merle , if not he wouldn't of produced a merle pup , as only merles will produce merles
-
if you go back to one of my previous posts, i put her name , click it and it will take you to her fb page, and share it from there
-
We have been attacked by a Pitt bull cross with a staffie??. Spot is in emergency vet . Please pray for him. Please share this photo to raise awareness againts this sort of agressive behaviour! they should not be aloud out off their leads, nor be pets and not walked in public places. Dog fighting is againts rules and clearly this dog was set up for it! the owner must take resposibility!! do you know him? I would like to thank the 2 great men that were crucial in saving spot. i don't know your names but your honour and help was essential to my dog's life. please let me know your names so I can
-
Mafalda Clewlow he was with his girlfriend!! the other to men were walkers buy that come running to help me when they heard me screaming! they were great
-
according to the owner , the guy in the hat had nothing to do with the dog or attack he was a passer by who stopped to help not read that she said two lads passing by helped get the dog off hers and save it it was the guy and the girl in the back ground who were with the dog the man with the hat and the man right at the back of the pic were the 2 passers by ...
-
tho owner of the king charles took the pics , as "the guy looked dodgy" ...
-
according to the owner , the guy in the hat had nothing to do with the dog or attack he was a passer by who stopped to help
-
id like to see you try that with a bull .... with no collar on the dog and no break stick in hand bet it was a pain to get that dog off, the paki seems calm enough which tells me he as been in that situation before, needs finding and givin a good kicking imo
-
the owner or a friend of the king charles took the pics.... the staffy/bull and the king charles were both running free in fields . the king charles is alive with just a few puncture wounds ...
-
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/WYRE-VALLEY-MUCK-BOOTS-TRENT-WATERPROOF-NEOPRENE-LINED-/281067093771?_trksid=p3284.m263&_trkparms=algo%3DSIC%26its%3DI%26itu%3DMRU-11450%252BUCI%252BIA%252BUA%252BFICS%252BUFI%26otn%3D21%26pmod%3D310601796143%26ps%3D54
-
uspca over here already uses one
-
how do you know he as a licence? i think to many people in this topic are commenting based on presumptions
-
Elaborate how the farmers actions were legal if the situation was in hand? the dog has been worrying livestock, has not left the vicinity and is not under the control of any person and there are no practicable means of ascertaining to whom it belongs. from section 9 of the animals act 1971 ... not sure where he would stand though using the above as justifying his actions
-
http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/10287607._I_shot_dogs_in_the_head_with_bolt_gun__says_farmer_Simon_Tidswell/
