We Have Been Betrayed

[cruzzi]

Read your code of ethics.

At least the "unverified" parentage are thought to be the same breed. What breed is involved in the current controversy?...wolfhounds?

And aren't the ethical breeders against it?

If progeny of a registered pure breed mated with an unregistered pure breed of the same breed wont be registered how can you justify the progeny of a boxer x corgi being registered. Now that really is ridiculous.

As soon as the x was made the pedigree lines of both the dogs involved effectively ceased....according to our code of ethics.

We are either breeding pure breeds or we are not.

Alternatively, at least the criteria for a new breed application should been made & the standard rewritten to include a definitive description of the tail.

For e.g. The tail to extend straight & no farther than the 3rd (4th) vertebae.

This to be observed to occur, without a miss, for 5 generations.

I have seen one "bobtail" puppy with a tail that looked like it was set by someone with the D.T's weilding a curling wand.

How many "failures' would you think don't get to see the light of day?

[Steve]

Like it or not - Fact is these dogs are recognised ,they are considered purebred by your system - if they were not those who own them and bred them would have never gone near them.

[cruzzi]

Like it or not - Fact is these dogs are recognised ,they are considered purebred by your system - if they were not those who own them and bred them would have never gone near them.

The fact is.....I don't like it.

Maybe i'm just old fashioned because I think when you cross two different breeds you get a mongrel.

MONGREL

n animal esp a dog of mixed breed.

Obviously those who own them & breed them don't have dictionaries.

Then again, dictionaries may not be all they don't have.

Edited February 5, 2013 by cruzzi

[Sheridan]

Like it or not - Fact is these dogs are recognised ,they are considered purebred by your system - if they were not those who own them and bred them would have never gone near them.

The fact is.....I don't like it.

Maybe i'm just old fashioned because I think when you cross two different breeds you get a mongrel.

MONGREL

n animal esp a dog of mixed breed.

Obviously those who own them & breed them don't have dictionaries.

Then again, dictionaries may not be all they don't have.

A discussion for a different thread perhaps.

[WreckitWhippet]

There's a few simple things that the ANKC could adopt

1. Imported docked dogs/puppies can be exhibited, providing they have a vet certification from their country of origin, stating that they have been docked prior to leaving their country of origin (providing it's legal to dock in that country). ANKC papers will be issued with "docked"

2. If a dog leaves this country with a full tail and is imported back into the country, the same applies as above

3. Any "Australian bred" dog/puppy that is to be exhibited or partake in sanctioned events, that has been docked, the owner must supply a vet cert stating that the dog/puppy has been docked for therapeutic reasons and the ANKC pedigree paper work will be amended to say somewhere on it "docked"

It's not the ANKC or the State CC's job to police the tail docking laws, that's the job of the RSPCA or any other body responsible for policing POCTA. What the ANKC can do is be seen to be doing the right thing and encouraging only those with dogs/puppies that have been lawfully docked to exhibit or participate in sports.

[Steve]

There's a few simple things that the ANKC could adopt

1. Imported docked dogs/puppies can be exhibited, providing they have a vet certification from their country of origin, stating that they have been docked prior to leaving their country of origin (providing it's legal to dock in that country). ANKC papers will be issued with "docked"

2. If a dog leaves this country with a full tail and is imported back into the country, the same applies as above

3. Any "Australian bred" dog/puppy that is to be exhibited or partake in sanctioned events, that has been docked, the owner must supply a vet cert stating that the dog/puppy has been docked for therapeutic reasons and the ANKC pedigree paper work will be amended to say somewhere on it "docked"

It's not the ANKC or the State CC's job to police the tail docking laws, that's the job of the RSPCA or any other body responsible for policing POCTA. What the ANKC can do is be seen to be doing the right thing and encouraging only those with dogs/puppies that have been lawfully docked to exhibit or participate in sports.

Agreed.

[cruzzi]

It would be better for all concerned to just repeal the no docking laws.

From memory, it's was illegal to transport a pregnant bitch, registered & resident in a non docking state to a state where it was legal, whelp, dock the puppies & then return home.

Said puppies were still banned.

I would imagine the same would apply to flying them out of the country & back. Which would also bring animal cruelty into the equation.

Isn't 16 weeks the minimum age to "export" puppies?....maybe it's 12? What ever, pain is a factor.

Silly idea anyhow.

[Sheridan]

It would be better for all concerned to just repeal the no docking laws.

From memory, it's was illegal to transport a pregnant bitch, registered & resident in a non docking state to a state where it was legal, whelp, dock the puppies & then return home.

Said puppies were still banned.

I would imagine the same would apply to flying them out of the country & back. Which would also bring animal cruelty into the equation.

Isn't 16 weeks the minimum age to "export" puppies?....maybe it's 12? What ever, pain is a factor.

Silly idea anyhow.

Given the docking laws won't be repealed its pointless even bringing it up.

[Airedaler]

Read your code of ethics.

At least the "unverified" parentage are thought to be the same breed. What breed is involved in the current controversy?...wolfhounds?

And aren't the ethical breeders against it?

If progeny of a registered pure breed mated with an unregistered pure breed of the same breed wont be registered how can you justify the progeny of a boxer x corgi being registered. Now that really is ridiculous.

As soon as the x was made the pedigree lines of both the dogs involved effectively ceased....according to our code of ethics.

We are either breeding pure breeds or we are not.

Alternatively, at least the criteria for a new breed application should been made & the standard rewritten to include a definitive description of the tail.

For e.g. The tail to extend straight & no farther than the 3rd (4th) vertebae.

This to be observed to occur, without a miss, for 5 generations.

I have seen one "bobtail" puppy with a tail that looked like it was set by someone with the D.T's weilding a curling wand.

How many "failures' would you think don't get to see the light of day?

this has nothing to do with the topic being discussed. It is another matter all together.

[Steve]

It would be better for all concerned to just repeal the no docking laws.

From memory, it's was illegal to transport a pregnant bitch, registered & resident in a non docking state to a state where it was legal, whelp, dock the puppies & then return home.

Said puppies were still banned.

I would imagine the same would apply to flying them out of the country & back. Which would also bring animal cruelty into the equation.

Isn't 16 weeks the minimum age to "export" puppies?....maybe it's 12? What ever, pain is a factor.

Silly idea anyhow.

Given the docking laws won't be repealed its pointless even bringing it up.

Yep - the laws will stand and Victorian laws prevent anyone taking a dog which has been living in that state even for a minute to another place and having it docked with out the necessary Victorian council approval and taking it to a dog show.

[oakway]

Copied and pasted from another list.

Unfortunately the new Board of Dogs Queensland wasted about five minutes of

their time voting on whether or not they would second Mr Treacey's motion.

There was no request or need for a seconder.

As a Director of ANKC Limited, Mr Treacey is quite entitled to put any

matters he sees fit before the Board in the form of a Motion for

consideration without a seconder. (Confirmed by legal advice July 2011)

This is exactly what he has done on this occasion.

The motion now rests for voting in the hands of the 11 Directors to vote on,

and to be passed, it needs to be agreed to by a majority of the 11 Directors

who represent a majority of the 8 Member bodies. i.e by 6 Directors

representing five Member Bodies.

On this occasion I personally perceive this is not happening!!!

[Sheridan]

Who wrote this??

[cruzzi]

Read your code of ethics.

At least the "unverified" parentage are thought to be the same breed. What breed is involved in the current controversy?...wolfhounds?

And aren't the ethical breeders against it?

If progeny of a registered pure breed mated with an unregistered pure breed of the same breed wont be registered how can you justify the progeny of a boxer x corgi being registered. Now that really is ridiculous.

As soon as the x was made the pedigree lines of both the dogs involved effectively ceased....according to our code of ethics.

We are either breeding pure breeds or we are not.

Alternatively, at least the criteria for a new breed application should been made & the standard rewritten to include a definitive description of the tail.

For e.g. The tail to extend straight & no farther than the 3rd (4th) vertebae.

This to be observed to occur, without a miss, for 5 generations.

I have seen one "bobtail" puppy with a tail that looked like it was set by someone with the D.T's weilding a curling wand.

How many "failures' would you think don't get to see the light of day?

this has nothing to do with the topic being discussed. It is another matter all together.

This directly related to the topic since Jed introduced it.

I am of same opinion that the docking laws won't be repealed.

However mentioning is no more ridiculous than the post it was in answer to.

I am not a lawyer, but I can see where the proposal to ban all docked dogs from an ANKC sanctioned events is coming from.

Given the no docking laws, the ANKC could possibly face charges of aiding & abetting a crime by allowing illegally docked dogs to participate in their events.

Also given the apparently dubious reasons for some dockings it easier ( & safer) to just place a blanket ban on all docked dogs.

Edited February 5, 2013 by cruzzi

[LisaCC]

I haven't read all this thread, but not only will this rule prevent docked dogs being shown, it also will prevent imported dogs who are legally docked being shown; and it will stop bob tail boxers being shown.

No matter what anyone thinks about bobtail boxers, they were sanctioned in the UK, and allowed and registered by the ANKC; and allowed in other countries.

People who have put a lot into bobtail boxers (not me) will be up the creek without a paddle.

There is a fairly big and apparent difference between importing a dog, and importing semen. If the dog is docked, this rule would prevent it being promoted to its full potential, and perhaps stop important and beneficial lines being disseminated Australia wide.

A very retrograde and backward motion imho.

Just wondering but can Bobtailed boxer puppies be verified some how? I know with Australian Shepherds a lot of breeders advertise that their NBT pups will come with a verification certificate. The breeder I will hopefully be getting mine off does this as well, she mentioned vets do it.

I have also heard of DNA tests for the NBT gene, surely if DNA tests can prove that the dog isn't docked than it wouldn't be subjected to this rule?

[oakway]

Who wrote this??

As far as I am aware the President of Dogs NSW.

[Sheridan]

Who wrote this??

As far as I am aware the President of Dogs NSW.

Isn't he the bloke who said he wasn't voting for the motion? So, why would he say 'unfortunately'?

[Topoftheheap]

I think people need to accept that there is NO WAY IN H*LL that the tail docking laws are going to be repealed, it's been brought up as an issue multiple times on this thread - it aint going to happen. Im not for or against docking, im neutral, but I do think we all need to adhere to the laws that govern our dogs.

I also think that people need to calm down a bit - I can't see how stopping tail docking will "be the ruin" of any breed. It just takes a bit of time to get used to seeing some breeds with a tail - I know for me personally I found seeing Rotties with tails really wrong, but they have sort of grown on me now.

Am I right in saying that the only circumstances that a dog should appear in the ring with a shortened docked appearing tail are situations of naturally occuring bob-tails, and tails that have been accidentally injured in some way either at birth or during adult hood?

If I am right, I cannot believe that we all accept that all the dogs that are still being shown with docked tails meet that requirement?

Also, I think the motion could not of been passed the way it was, so suspect that maybe it was just the ANKC trying to frighten people into doing the right thing.

Just curious, if the motion had said that locally bred dogs with docked tails could no longer be shown, but if you could prove that your dog came from a country were docking is legal, or if you had documented proof from a vet that the tail had to be removed, then it could be excluded from the rule and allowed to be shown, would of that been acceptable to people?

[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.

[angelsun]

No one has commented on the grammar or spelling of the letter first posted...Unless someone has retyped this and has not checked it...it's appauling! This type of letter, should it be original and correct, should never be submitted for consideration to ANY major organization based simply on the lack of professionalism shown.

Now...apart from that:

I am pro docking (and pro cropping) I have currently TWO imported dogs with docked tails, and am in the process of bringing another one....why? Not because they have short tails...but for their bloodlines. For me, it's a bonus to have a docked tail, BECAUSE I LIKE HOW IT LOOKS! AND it's true to my breeds heritage which I protect....sue me for doing this sort of thing, but to ME, it's as important as keeping IN SIZE and not having the wrong features as written in the breed standard and our historical records.

The arguement from some is that mediocre docked dogs are winning over better natural tailed ones. BLAME JUDGES...(and those that blindly follow their decisions)

May I point out Angelsun that while you criticise the spelling in the original letter,you yourself are guilty!! The correct spelling is appalling,not Apauling!!

What about the breeds that have the bobtail gene? Do we rule out a puppy for future simply because of the lack of tail by a genetic quirk? What if the dog is in fact a fine specimin for the breed....will the ban of exhibition of docked or shortened tails, evolve into a ban to use them for breeding? Give it time, and let the breeders and showies fight amongst themselves long enough, and you can be sure it will come to pass. How to police this sort of thing? Anyone remember 'Breed masters' (known by many other names around the world) who are responsible for assessing dogs in litters and deciding IF they are eligible for registration or not based on deformities or faults.

It's not about if you are pro docking or anti docking....for many of you, you say you don't care because it doesn't apply to your beloved breeed....but do you honestly feel you are safe? What if mandatory eye testing becomes a criteria for showing/breeding, and you own a Golden Retriever who has retinal folds? (considered not acceptable for breeding by N.A. eye testing standards) What about you Sharpei breeders/fanciers with pedigrees full of dogs that have had eyes tacked from as young as 4 weeks....you could be in the target next and not permitted to show or breed with a dog that has had this done.

Others argue that docking isn't the same as the above..that it's nasty, cruel and simply wrong. You have the right to say that. I also have the right to say that when I have banded tails, the pups are still wet and are nursing and make no indication of anything happening to them. They COMMUNICATE with their peers just fine thanks, compared to their full tailed friends, and I am currently in the process of waiting for genetic testing to see if my breeding dogs carry the bob tail gene.

May I point out Angelsun that while you criticise the spelling in the original letter,you yourself are guilty!! The correct spelling is appalling,not Apauling!!

Gee...sue me....or should I say soo me? one spelling slip compared to how many in the OP? jeeze...(is that how you spell that?)

The POINT BEING.....a letter lobbying a major organization with such issues.....reminds me of the many overseas scams starting with "I am the wife of recently murdered king blah, blah

[lils mum]

.....Gee...sue me....or should I say soo me? one spelling slip compared to how many in the OP? jeeze...(is that how you spell that?)

The POINT BEING.....a letter lobbying a major organization with such issues.....reminds me of the many overseas scams starting with "I am the wife of recently murdered king blah, blah

I think as people have mentioned previously this is apparently a scanned document, with some words corrupted in the scanning process.

The issue however is 'the issue' rather than the presentation surely?