Reporting Incidents To State Bodies

[canine fun sports]

I think the original post was more about incidents at trials and dogs being punished inappropriately.... not a tap/smack on the bum for eating kitty crumbed sausages in the litter tray. Any physical punishment or handling of a dog at a trial in public land is not acceptable from the dogs welfare and the image of the sport. Regardless of how minor others may think the punishment was, incidents should be reported to have the message to all competitors it is not acceptable. What people do in their own homes is up to them but they should be more careful when out and about.

I think the original post was more about wanting to discuss at what point and under what circumstances should it be reported, or what it the best way to deal with it?

I have outlined above how I would make a judgement on such an incident, but have added that under some situation I might deal with the incident by talking to the owner, or would in other circumstances, report it to an official. In Vickie's initial post, however, although whe was on dogsNSW grounds, she was not at an event. The owner may, or may not have been a member of DogsNSW, may or may not have been 'tresspassing" on DogsNSW grounds (I am assuming that members of Dogs NSW are the only ones who have permission to exercise their dogs there??) and she was not even sure to whom it should be reported.

I do think one useful suggestion has been to use your mobilie phone's camera so that if you do decide to report it (in any situation) you have evidence.

(PS - Correct me if I am wrong about your initial post, Vickie - I do not want to be accused of putting words in your mouth!!!)

Cheers,

[Fred Flintstone]

I find it interesting that some people might say it is Ok to smack a dog in order for it to learn....yes it is learning through fear but in some cases it will still learn. Yet if their partners smacked or hit them to "teach them a lesson" it would be considered abuse?? If a woman is hit by her partner only once it is considered abuse and against the law.....yet it's Ok to do that to a dog??

We do need to use and can use punishment in dog training but it need not be physical or abusive? Punishment needs to fit the crime, be delivered at the time of the crime (just like a reward should be for stuff we like) then we move on and the punishment can be as simple as withholding a reward, isolation from us, a stern voice is often enough to interrupt a unwanted behaviour....

any punishment delivered after the crime is not effective and only destroys the relationship you have with your dog, the same goes if it is too harsh for the dog AND the situation...

I would imagine most incidences at trials etc are a result of the owner/handlers frustration... if so this is not punishment it is abuse...and no amount of trying to justify it as "punishment" will cut it.

No one is saying belting a dog out of frustration is ok.

But the idea that a dog will never understand a smack or it will never work is incorrect.

There is a difference between taking your dog out the back after a show and laying into it, and a short, sharp smack on the rump when you catch the dog with their head in the kitty litter. The latter, if timed correctly WILL punish the behaviour and the dog will associate it with the behaviour you want to deter. The smack doesn't hurt more than discomfort, and serves much more to startle the dog than anything else.

Like I said, I'm not promoting smacking as a be all and end all, it's only really useful in a very small amount of situations, but I disagreed with the notion that a dog will never understand a smack or learn from it, no matter what the scenario.

I'm not disagreeing with you. i also said some dogs will learn via punishment using as you say "a short, sharp smack on the rump" they through fear but they may still learn. In the kitty litter example a stern voice would be just as useful to have the startle affect. either would be effective for some dogs...others dogs may just learn not to do it when you are around as the motivation is too strong to raid the litter tray or the bin....scavenging is normal dog behaviour after all.

I think the original post was more about incidents at trials and dogs being punished inappropriately.... not a tap/smack on the bum for eating kitty crumbed sausages in the litter tray. Any physical punishment or handling of a dog at a trial in public land is not acceptable from the dogs welfare and the image of the sport. Regardless of how minor others may think the punishment was, incidents should be reported to have the message to all competitors it is not acceptable. What people do in their own homes is up to them but they should be more careful when out and about.

Like :-)

[dasha]

I think its all about perception.

I don't compete in sports governed by Dogs NSW. I compete in 3 sheep trials that is covered by a different code of ethics and conduct.

I think that all members of any organisation are aware of the code of conduct etc of their governing body and therefore should be addressed in regards to any behviour that could bring a bad name to the sport/club.

I think that someone belting the crap out of their dog on Dogs NSW grounds should certainly be addressed for it. Regardless of what the dog did.

Its about setting an example to the public about the behaviour of the people involved in the activity as much as it is to promote different breeds.

Even at sheepdog trials, if someone does something that could tar the image of sheepdog sports, it is certainly not left alone.

Even recently, a member of the committee was very flustered with his dog and did treat it inappropriately where people could see it. Another trialler made a complaint as is was done where the public could see and basically it didn't look good. This person was a state representative of the sport. SO WHAT..... There was a special meeting held by the committee to discuss suitable punishment, which included the possibility of a suspension, taken off the team, etc. It was very stressful for all involved but it was felt it couldn't be ignored as the potential for bad publicity was there and it was unjust treatment of the dog.

Recently a friend of mine was trialling her dog and he wasn't listening well so she quit the trial with him and as she walked up to clip him on the lead she "patted him roughly" while talking to him saying he was naughty. She didn't mean anything by it, she was certainly not reprimanding him and the dog didn't flinch, but still another trialler came up to her after and said she shouldn't do that in the ring because from outside we couldn't hear what she was saying and it looked like she was reprimanding him so to be very careful of what her behaviour could represent to observers.

If things start getting reported more regularly, and people are addressed, then the behaviour will improve because it becomes unacceptable. Even if they get let off with a warning, they, and their friends etc will certainly think twice before doing it again as it could land them in hot water.....

[nawnim]

I think its all about perception.

I don't compete in sports governed by Dogs NSW. I compete in 3 sheep trials that is covered by a different code of ethics and conduct.

I think that all members of any organisation are aware of the code of conduct etc of their governing body and therefore should be addressed in regards to any behviour that could bring a bad name to the sport/club.

I think that someone belting the crap out of their dog on Dogs NSW grounds should certainly be addressed for it. Regardless of what the dog did.

Its about setting an example to the public about the behaviour of the people involved in the activity as much as it is to promote different breeds.

Even at sheepdog trials, if someone does something that could tar the image of sheepdog sports, it is certainly not left alone.

Even recently, a member of the committee was very flustered with his dog and did treat it inappropriately where people could see it. Another trialler made a complaint as is was done where the public could see and basically it didn't look good. This person was a state representative of the sport. SO WHAT..... There was a special meeting held by the committee to discuss suitable punishment, which included the possibility of a suspension, taken off the team, etc. It was very stressful for all involved but it was felt it couldn't be ignored as the potential for bad publicity was there and it was unjust treatment of the dog.

Recently a friend of mine was trialling her dog and he wasn't listening well so she quit the trial with him and as she walked up to clip him on the lead she "patted him roughly" while talking to him saying he was naughty. She didn't mean anything by it, she was certainly not reprimanding him and the dog didn't flinch, but still another trialler came up to her after and said she shouldn't do that in the ring because from outside we couldn't hear what she was saying and it looked like she was reprimanding him so to be very careful of what her behaviour could represent to observers.

If things start getting reported more regularly, and people are addressed, then the behaviour will improve because it becomes unacceptable. Even if they get let off with a warning, they, and their friends etc will certainly think twice before doing it again as it could land them in hot water.....

Does it only matter if it can be seen by the general public? Does it not matter if it happens where no-one can see it? Cruelty is cruelty wherever it occurs. Giving a dog a hiding is cruelty.

IMHO

[dasha]

Of course its not only in public.

But you can't police what people do in their own home.

But when it is done on sanctioned grounds, or in the public, no excuse as no matter who sees it, it is not a good image of dog owners.

There is already so much bad press surrounding a lot of breeds, and of course puppy farmers that abuse their dogs, so do you really want to ad proper breeders into that bad press?

By letting them behave like this, is only the start.

Its in other members interests to keep these public displays from becoming even more public.