We Have Been Betrayed

[yarracully]

Since when has "quail finding" be an ANKC sanctioned event?

You need to look outside Group 2 a bit more often Dougie. It's called Field Trialling and quail are central to the sport. :)

And just how many of the previously docked breeds are from group 3

And since field work is restricted to group 3 dogs I don't see how they would affected.

But just out of curiousity, what percentage of the dogs that compete in ANKC trials suffer tail damage that requires amputation?

It wouldn't matter if it were a previously docked breed. If any dog of any breed had to have tis tail shortened due to damage etc it will not be able to compete. So a labrador could get its tail damaged and have it surgically shortened, but then it will not be able to compete. End of story.

This isn't about docking of breeds that used to be docked its about any and all breeds and any and all competitive disciplines.

[Sheridan]

Since when has "quail finding" be an ANKC sanctioned event?

You need to look outside Group 2 a bit more often Dougie. It's called Field Trialling and quail are central to the sport. :)

And just how many of the previously docked breeds are from group 3

And since field work is restricted to group 3 dogs I don't see how they would affected.

But just out of curiousity, what percentage of the dogs that compete in ANKC trials suffer tail damage that requires amputation?

Rather a lot of terriers are workers and were traditionally docked. I've never owned a dog with a full tail.

It wouldn't matter if it were a previously docked breed. If any dog of any breed had to have tis tail shortened due to damage etc it will not be able to compete. So a labrador could get its tail damaged and have it surgically shortened, but then it will not be able to compete. End of story.

This isn't about docking of breeds that used to be docked its about any and all breeds and any and all competitive disciplines.

Unless there is news that this motion was passed by a majority, by 'will' I think you mean 'may'.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Sheridan

[yarracully]

Since when has "quail finding" be an ANKC sanctioned event?

You need to look outside Group 2 a bit more often Dougie. It's called Field Trialling and quail are central to the sport. :)

And just how many of the previously docked breeds are from group 3

And since field work is restricted to group 3 dogs I don't see how they would affected.

But just out of curiousity, what percentage of the dogs that compete in ANKC trials suffer tail damage that requires amputation?

Rather a lot of terriers are workers and were traditionally docked. I've never owned a dog with a full tail.

It wouldn't matter if it were a previously docked breed. If any dog of any breed had to have tis tail shortened due to damage etc it will not be able to compete. So a labrador could get its tail damaged and have it surgically shortened, but then it will not be able to compete. End of story.

This isn't about docking of breeds that used to be docked its about any and all breeds and any and all competitive disciplines.

Unless there is news that this motion was passed by a majority, by 'will' I think you mean 'may'.

No I mean exactly what I typed. At this point in time its all theory BUT if the motion is successful then it will be "Will". There will be no May in it. Under the motion the dog WILL NOT be able to compete.

[Rebanne]

This isn't about docking of breeds that used to be docked its about any and all breeds and any and all competitive disciplines.

[BlackJaq]

It wouldn't matter if it were a previously docked breed. If any dog of any breed had to have tis tail shortened due to damage etc it will not be able to compete. So a labrador could get its tail damaged and have it surgically shortened, but then it will not be able to compete. End of story.

This isn't about docking of breeds that used to be docked its about any and all breeds and any and all competitive disciplines.

Unless there is news that this motion was passed by a majority, by 'will' I think you mean 'may'.

No I mean exactly what I typed. At this point in time its all theory BUT if the motion is successful then it will be "Will". There will be no May in it. Under the motion the dog WILL NOT be able to compete.

This is disturbing. So if my dog were to harm her tail on a shoot and needed it to be amputated to any degree then she would be ineligible to compete in any ANKC sanctioned event?

Obviously the loss of the tail would not affect the dog's ability to work, just a the loss of some toes would not affect it, so I do not understand the need to include all events? Surely conformation events would be the only where the tail would make any difference?

Also, inclusion of ALL breeds, even previously undocked ones, you have got to be kidding!

Amazing, the impact the show world has on all other aspects of dog ownership! Other countries are at least allowing exceptions to the docking law for genuine working reasons, i.e. in Germany Weimaraners that are destined for working homes may still be docked and since the majority of pedigree Weimaraners are destined for working homes, most of them are still docked. GWP and GSP fare similarly and working bred Vizslas as well so I wonder why there are no such allowances made here? Although I suppose the number of genuine working gun dogs in Australia would have to be minuscule compared to parts of Europe

Edited February 6, 2013 by BlackJaq

[Wundahoo]

I wrote a few scenarios in a previous post as to why this has come up, Wundahoo. My personal belief is that it's not chinese whispers, that they're acting on evidence they've received (the examples are quite specific and none are 'This dog was born in WA when docking was still allowed). Given it's coming out of Victoria where dog laws are quite draconian in some regards, it's to scare people or to show they're acting before the authorities do. The motion doesn't have to succeed if the aim is to scare people into acting legally. It's a guess on my part but it's a better one than the ones suggesting the guy is a undercover AR crazy.

Yes I did read them.

Is this a "guess on your part" or do you have some hard evidence to that?

If it is designed to scare people who are working outside the rules and the law then I doubt that it will have any effect. If you feel that it an attempt at a "scare" then why do it so secretly ? Or do you also believe that the leak was deliberate as well ?? Qiute a conspiracy theory I think and a strange way to go about it.

All it has done is upset honest people and cause a huge controversy.

Whatever the reason for this motion I feel that it is ill conceived. It's now placed all people who have legally docked dogs under the same cloud of suspicion as those that are the apparent target.

If they have specific details and have proof, why do they not act upon this via the rules and regulations that already exist, or simply go to the state authorities or RSPCA ??

I doubt that there are large numbers of breeders deliberately harming puppies in order to obtain a "legal" tail docking procedure. IF this is happening then I personally think that it would be very few.

From my own experience with kinked tails I believe that there is probably a high percentage of legitimately occurring kinked tails in certain breeds and bloodlines. It is a complex genetic situation and a difficult one to address for a serious breeder that has over a long period of time developed and refined a top winning bloodline only to find that they have a genetic bottleneck regarding tail conformation which previously was not needed to be considered because they were docked !

People often choose to think the worst of others especially when the politics of competition arises.

Cruzzi, read (and attempt to understand) the definition of "chinese whispers".

See the bit where I said 'It's is a guess on my part'? That means it's a guess on my part.

Thanks for that ! Perhaps you base your beliefs on guesswork. I like to base mine on evidence.

[Wundahoo]

(Chinese whispers....)

Send three and fourpence, we're going to a dance ....

Yes exactly.

We are dancing a dangerous tango.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Wundahoo

[Bisart Dobes]

It does seem a remarkable coincidence that the breeds most affected by the dreaded tail breakinjg syndrome are those of the previously docked variety however.

Perhaps this is why traditionally docked breeds were docked originally ???

[WreckitWhippet]

It's not the ANKC's job to "frighten" anyone into doing the right thing.

It's not illegal to show a docked dog and all the ANKC need do to be seen to be doing the right thing is make sure that those exhibiting , show only "lawfully" docked dogs and puppies.

Again, it's up to the RSPCA and the like to police any laws under POCTA. If vets suspect that a client is deliberately harming a dog or litter, so as to have the tail removed, then they need to report it.

For the ANKC to retain creibility it shouldn't "encourage" members to break the law by turning a blind eye to it either.

Anyone who is a showie would have heard chinese whispers similar to the allegations made of deliberate tail breaking to enable a "legal" operation to take place.

The more the people whispered the louder it became.

This proposal is the reaction of one delegate to the noise.

It remains to be seen if others think the same way.

It does seem a remarkable coincidence that the breeds most affected by the dreaded tail breakinjg syndrome are those of the previously docked variety however.

"Chinese whispers" is often invoked as a metaphor for cumulative error, especially the inaccuracies as rumours or gossip spread, or, more generally, for the unreliability of human recollection.

Would ANKC retain any credibility if it acted each time there was a wave of "chinese whispers" circulating within the dog world ?

As a long time enthusiast of a breed affected by the change in docking laws I can tell you that there is high degree of heritability of kinks and bends in tails. I believe that this is actually one of the numerous reasons that my breed was docked originally, not just the "injury during work" argument. I also believe that these kinks are polygenic and that there is not just a single gene responsible for it. This makes it hard to breed away from.

I have one particular bloodline which will always produce one or two puppies in a litter with kinks or deviations in the tail. I still retain that bloodline because of the many other desirable points within it which I believe are more valuable to the breed than possessing a perfectly straight tail. Since the change in docking laws I have needed to dock only 2 tails because of severe kinks that would lead to problems. However I can see how certain breeds, and bloodlines within those breeds, may have reached a point genetically where there was a large number of puppies born with kinks that would be a problem in adult life.

The current tail docking laws retain the ability for these pups to be docked legally ie theraputically.

It's quite possible that the supposed "large numbers" of dogs still appearing in the rings have come from quality bloodlines that do regularly produce a heritable form of kinked tails. In days past, this would not have been a problem because these tails would have been tradionally docked. With the current situation breeders and those who wish to obtain a quality dog would be faced with the possibility of moving away from those bloodlines and attempting to breed tails that are perfectly straight. Not an easy task if the gene pool for that breed is heavily saturated with the gene(s) which produce the undesirable trait.

Also contributing to the percieved "large numbers" of docked dogs still appearing in the rings is the fact that the docking laws in Western Australia have only recently been changed (mid 2010) to remove the reference to prophylactic docking. Until that point there were many breeders all over Australia taking the option of prophylactic docking in W.A.

Dogs that were prophylactically docked in that state would only now be reaching their prime as show dogs and I assume that they will still be appearing in the rings all over Australia for many years to come.

I do believe what you believe is incorrect. Rubbish actually.

But let's get one thing quite clear , I am pro tail docking.

However I cringe at the inane excuses put forward that tail docking is a necessary for anything other than a medical emergency.

A whole litter of puppies? Give us a break.

Puppy has a crooked tail? Bad luck. Doesn't cut the mustard

The story of a working dog running loose in a paddock & coming home with a broken tail.

What that has to do with an ANKC registered dog is totally irrelevent.

How many real working dogs actually compete in ANKC sanction events?

If the answer is more than none I would be surprised.

Face the facts people, lame arsed excuses aren't going to fly.

They never have, they never will.

What ever lame excuse you wish to put forward as to why a breed was previously docked is no longer valid.

Reinterate.

IMO this proposal is to distance the ANKC from any controversy regarding docked dogs.

One in, all in.

Or, more to the point.

One out, all out.

And would be too blame for this situation?

Only those who are trying, have tried, have succeed to circumvent the law.

They are the betrayers.

A question.

Have you personally witness a source of a chinese whisper relating to this topic?

I have.

About a year, give or take a month or two after the law was enacted, I attended a show where three baby puppy Swedish Valhunds, all litter mates, were competeing against each other.

All were docked.

The story was the whole litter suffered tail damage & were legally docked.

You just can't help bad luck!

Or they could have been born tailless, but the truth is never as exciting as the chinese whispers

[Salukifan]

About a year, give or take a month or two after the law was enacted, I attended a show where three baby puppy Swedish Valhunds, all litter mates, were competeing against each other.

All were docked.

The story was the whole litter suffered tail damage & were legally docked.

You just can't help bad luck!

Or they could have been born tailless, but the truth is never as exciting as the chinese whispers

And of course the breeder of that litter would no longer be around to defend herself now would she? That's not bad luck, its just being a bad gossip.

This thread so far off track it's hopeless.

[Steve]

Go ahead blow yourselves up - who needs animal rights?

[Meea]

Yeah to be boringly ON topic - has anyone heard the result of the NSW vote today?

[WreckitWhippet]

So where are all these people that have illegally docked dogs, that have been charged for it ? If the people illegally docking exist in such numbers, that results in a proposal being put forward to the ANKC, surely there's some evidence to back up the claims ?

[WreckitWhippet]

The NSW delegates will be voting against the motion, as per the board meeting

[espinay2]

So so far it seems SA, QLD and NSW are voting against?

[FHRP]

So so far it seems SA, QLD and NSW are voting against?

And ACT :)

[Salukifan]

So so far it seems SA, QLD and NSW are voting against?

And ACT :)

And every other state that has voted to date. So much for the widespread hyperbole about "betrayal" of members.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Haredown Whippets

[RallyValley]

So so far it seems SA, QLD and NSW are voting against?

And ACT :)

:thumbsup:

[cruzzi]

So where are all these people that have illegally docked dogs, that have been charged for it ? If the people illegally docking exist in such numbers, that results in a proposal being put forward to the ANKC, surely there's some evidence to back up the claims ?

As I said earlier,

The accusation has been made.

Put up or shut up.

Someone needs to be held accountable.

For the action or for the accusation.

[cruzzi]

Go ahead blow yourselves up - who needs animal rights?

Sounds like a chant at a P.E.T.A rally

Which brings us back to an opinion...... does a dog have the right to have a tail or not.

If the dogs could have a vote on it, I wonder who they would vote to have blown up?