Pam, I can only describe the process I go through after I've snapped pictures. First I download the pictures onto the software that came with the camera, which I loaded onto my computer when I got it. My camera is a Cannon PowerShot SD1000 Digital Elph, a real small camera that fits easily into my pocket. Then I edit the pictures - I can increase the sharpness, increase or decrease the brightness, color saturation, and contrast, and I can trim the picture to a smaller size and add text, as in giving the picture a name. I get Photobucket to make my pictures the size, whatever that is, that's recommended for message boards, which is basically what this forum is, I think. I don't edit my pictures on Photobucket. I've never heard of "save for the web" but then there's a lot of info on the Photobucket site that I've never read. Photobucket gives a pretty easy URL - I guess that's what you call it - to use to imbed your pictures, and that's what I usually use. I probably should use the clickable thumb nail URL, but that's so long to type up! I'm not at all computer savvy, just try to put one foot in front of the other, so to speak. :) I don't think you should use an image program - Photobucket will do those things for you. Sherry

Your statements are so ethologically incorrect that it's laughable. Everyone, apparently, is an expert. The different between what I go by and what Handymac goes by is everything I write can be sourced and backed up by up-to-date research and is covered in ethological journals and other publications, while Handymac has either watched a television show or two, or has been reading some very outdated information. Think the 80's or by similarly uniformed self proclaimed experts. I don't see what foxes, or wolves, have to do with this woman's dog. I don't see anyone telling this woman to treat her dog like a human, nor did I see this woman indicate that that was what she was doing. So where's the relevance of this statement?? Domestic dogs do NOT form packs. They do have social structure but not packs. Ethologists have studied feral populations of domestic dogs around the world and have found that they form loose, shifting groups of small numbers, usually 2-3 individuals and they only come together in large numbers over communal resources, such as garbage heaps and sources of water, then they disperse again. They were not found to hunt, rear young and protect a communal territory as a stable group. Boitani, Francisci, Ciucci, and Andreoli, (1995) Which is the ethological definition of a pack. Domestic dogs do not participate in organized hunting, where each takes up a different job. At best, they hunt individually or in chaotic en-mass but not in different roles comprising an organized hunt like wolves, lions, painted dogs, and other social undomesticated predators do. It is VERY rare for males and previous offspring to participate in rearing young. And females are found to mate with several males during a single heat cycle. As stated before, loose, shifting groups of few members don't compose a stable group, nor do they protect territories when they congregate in large numbers to utilize a resource and then disperse again. Forcing dogs to live together in our homes or backyards does not constitute a stable group or pack. Nor are dogs such dumb beasts that they perceive us to be dogs. No. Even if they did form packs, they don't think that we're fellow dogs, or vise versa. They are well aware that were are different animals. How in the world is training a lab to point or a whippet to fetch dangerous??? Gads! My poodle is my service dog when that job has traditionally been filled by labs. She must be some kind of dangerous monster! There are no wild pack conditions for DOMESTIC dogs. There are FERAL conditions and as stated, they do not form packs. The human is obviously the boss at feeding time since the human buys the food and has the opposable thumbs to dish it out. Do you have some kind of ego issues? You seem very concerned that we're all very aware how much in charge you are and that you're the boss! Good for you? Being that dogs were domesticated and almost every breed was developed to serve mankind, is that supposed to be some kind of rare feat or come as a surprise that dogs look to us for direction? The dominant dog? The submissive dog? Dominant and submissive in regards to what resource?? Dominant and submissive are NOT personalities traits! How are you allowing your dog to become "too dominant" and how are you dominant over your dog?? You clearly don't understand the concept of social dominance. An animal can only be dominant in regards to a valued resource. Food, mates, safe and comfortable resting places, etc. And even this changes from resource to resource, day to day, and from method to method. Fluffy dominates Spot by shoving Spot out of the way when it comes to treat time. While later in the day, Spot snarls at Fluffy and wins the preferred resting spot. Tomorrow they switch as each resource changes in importance. Next week, the new puppy wins the rawhide by licking at Fluffy's mouth to get her to give it up. Regarding packs: http://www.associationofanimalbehaviorprofessionals.com/glossary.html http://www.4pawsu.com/dogpsychology.htm http://www.kathysdao.com/articles/Forget_About_Being_Alpha_in_Your_Pack.html http://4pawsu.com/pmdominance.htm http://www.jeandonaldson.com/jeans-blog-mainmenu-51/64-are-dogs-pack-animals The links go on and on, you can find many more by Googling. Find out what social dominance is and what it isn't: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/animal-emotions/201202/social-dominance-is-not-myth-wolves-dogs-and http://drsophiayin.com/philosophy/dominance/?/dominance.php Again, there are just too many articles and other material addressing these two topics for me to list everyone here. They are all easily found on your own. No REAL behaviorist will insist that dogs form packs and that dominance or submission are personality traits. REAL behaviorists are those with the behavioral science degree to BACK UP the title Behaviorist. There are Veterinary Behaviorists, Clinical Applied Animal Behaviorists, Associate Clinical Applied Animal Behaviorists, and that's it. A person CAN up and hang a shingle calling them self a behaviorist but unless they have that degree, they're not a behaviorist.

Saltidawg, during my research on the subject, long ago when preparing to begin a home cooked diet, I learned that the correct proportion is 1 1/2 teaspoons of calcium per 6 cups meat. I found this information from several sources, but I couldn't name them now. It was awhile ago. For instance if you cooked 12 cups of meat, you would add 3 teaspoons of powdered calcium or baked ground eggshell. As far as the ratio of phosphorous to calcium: it is easy to make this more complicated than it needs to be. Phosphorus is found in the meat and tissues of an animal while calcium is found in the skeleton. If you follow the equation: 1 1/2 teaspoons of calcium to 6 cups of meat (aka the phosphorus found in 6 cups of meat) you will have the correct proportion. If meat is the primary main ingredient, as it should be when feeding a carnivore, the phosphorus content of your food is taken care of. The key is to add calcium in the right proportion to the phosphorus in the meat. Those feeding a raw prey diet just feed the entire animal, for instance a whole chicken, and the bones and meat, aka calcium and phosphorus, are in correct proportion naturally. Those of us cooking dog food have two choices - either add powdered calcium to the meat we cook to replace the bones, or use a pressure cooker to cook an entire chicken, bones and all, being sure that the bones are cooked to the point they crumble apart when touched with a fork. For me, both feeding raw chickens or using a pressure cooker seem fraught with complications and dangers (although many choose these options with success.) I hope this helps. Also the proportion of every single meal need not be exactly in proportion. It is a guideline. Because, after all, a carnivore doesn't always eat the entire carcass of every animal he kills or scavenges. If you consistently fed meals lacking in enough calcium, eventually you would probably have nutritional problems. I hope this helps.

Sounds like she's really small -- in that case, if you still want to consider a harness, look in the cat-gear department. Really! They make harnesses for cats, too, and that would be a better fit. (I can't tell you how hard I laughed when I first saw a cat being walked in a harness...) Congrats on your "official" dog now. I can't imagine how that dog would've ended up on the loose when you found her. Maybe it got away from its owners who were traveling through the area (but why they wouldn't contact all the vets within a 100 miles -- as I would've done -- is beyond me). Or maybe they just couldn't afford to keep her anymore (but if I were in that situation, I would so want to make sure she went to a good home). Regardless, you all seem to be fitting in well with each other. Many happy walks together!