We Have Been Betrayed

[cruzzi]

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.

[toshman]

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.

I've been mulling over that, too.

What if, say, a Golden Retriever (first breed with a lovely long tail that popped into my head) damaged its tail and had to have it docked...would it be allowed to be shown?

[lils mum]

I've been mulling over that, too.

What if, say, a Golden Retriever (first breed with a lovely long tail that popped into my head) damaged its tail and had to have it docked...would it be allowed to be shown?

had that regulation been passed, as I read it , no.

Same for situations like the promising Vizsla bitch mentioned in a previous post. If she were born after July 1 2014,and needed her tail amputated she could also not be trialled in Agility, Rally, Obedience, Field, Retrieving Trials etc.

or any other dog with a legitimately therapeutically docked tail

Sure there may be a problem but this was never the right solution

ETA what I find very disturbing is that anyone who should be thinking about all collateral damage ever thought it was.

Edited February 5, 2013 by lils mum

[RallyValley]

I don't think it's so much of a coincidence -any of the dogs docked previously were docked to prevent injuries and now they aren't they get those injuries. Woking dogs and dogs in kennels are much more likely to injure thier tails. I know of one dog that was running around on the farm and came back with a broken tail - the owner did not want to dock but eventually had to choose between her dogs life or loosing the end of its tail.

[Sheridan]

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

It's clearly a bad OCR scan as someone else has already said not actually written like that.

[Wundahoo]

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.

[Sheridan]

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.

[cruzzi]

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!

Edited February 6, 2013 by cruzzi

[RallyValley]

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!

Just where do you think Utility Gundogs find quails if not paddocks on farms? The dog I was talking about is actually a show titled Gundog

[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".

[Sheridan]

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.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Sheridan

[cruzzi]

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!

Just where do you think Utility Gundogs find quails if not paddocks on farms? The dog I was talking about is actually a show titled Gundog

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

[cruzzi]

Wundahoo,

The term Chinese whispers refers to a story whispered from one person to another as it snowballs as everyone adds their little bit to it.

Anything else you'd like to know?

[Alyosha]

Every rule of animal husbandry says when you cross em back to their own breed its a purebred again in 4 generations - how do you equate what you think with whats going on in the UK with open stud books?

When I bred Dairy goats and had Arabian horses, both having appendix or partbred registries - it was a minimum of seven generations. So "every rule" of animal husbandry seems to be different there? Or has it been reduced to four? Sorry - OT!

I've been mulling over that, too.

What if, say, a Golden Retriever (first breed with a lovely long tail that popped into my head) damaged its tail and had to have it docked...would it be allowed to be shown?

It would technically be allowed. But the dog wouldn't fit the standard so would be unlikely to be awarded.

I had a damaged tail in my last Borzoi litter. They normally have a long fringed tail (similar to a goldie), and the standard describes how it should look and be carried etc. So my beautiful pup was never going to be awarded. He could have been a breeding dog yes - but is in a glorious pet home.

It is heartbreaking to lose a quality animal that could otherwise do so much in the showring - but thems the breaks. No different to a dog that loses a leg. They are still a great dog - just not a great show dog.

[Salukifan]

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. :)

[espinay2]

(Chinese whispers....)

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

Edited February 6, 2013 by espinay2

[Diva]

(Chinese whispers....)

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

No advancing here, we are just marching in circles.

[cruzzi]

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?

[FHRP]

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

Nearly all breeds of dog that compete in Utility Field Trials are a traditionally docked breed - Bracco, Brittany, GSP, GWP, Vizsla, Wirehaired Vizsla, Weimaraner, Italian Spinone. The spaniel breeds that can compete in the Spaniel & Retriever field trials are traditionally docked - Cocker, Am Cocker, Clumber, English Springer, Field, Welsh Springer, Sussex.

eta. Docking is not limited to nearly complete removal of the tail. Most of the above gundogs traditionally had 1/4 to 2/3 of their tail removed. Indeed many people I meet do not even realise that my older Vizsla is docked at all, but it makes all the difference.

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

Huh?

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

I couldn't give you a percentage, I doubt anyone could! I'm in the very situation of having a young dog of a previsouly docked breed that is suffering ongoing tail issues which may well require amputation. She was intended to compete in several ANKC sporting events, as well as the show ring. She may not be affected by this motion due to her DOB, but my next dog may well be.

Edited February 6, 2013 by FHRP

[yarracully]

Every rule of animal husbandry says when you cross em back to their own breed its a purebred again in 4 generations - how do you equate what you think with whats going on in the UK with open stud books?

When I bred Dairy goats and had Arabian horses, both having appendix or partbred registries - it was a minimum of seven generations. So "every rule" of animal husbandry seems to be different there? Or has it been reduced to four? Sorry - OT!

I've been mulling over that, too.

What if, say, a Golden Retriever (first breed with a lovely long tail that popped into my head) damaged its tail and had to have it docked...would it be allowed to be shown?

It would technically be allowed. But the dog wouldn't fit the standard so would be unlikely to be awarded. I had a damaged tail in my last Borzoi litter. They normally have a long fringed tail (similar to a goldie), and the standard describes how it should look and be carried etc. So my beautiful pup was never going to be awarded. He could have been a breeding dog yes - but is in a glorious pet home.

It is heartbreaking to lose a quality animal that could otherwise do so much in the showring - but thems the breaks. No different to a dog that loses a leg. They are still a great dog - just not a great show dog.

However if this motion were to be successful that same dog, if whelped after july 1 2014, although docked within the laws of its state and with all required paperwork from vets etc, would not be allowed to compete in any ANKC events or, one would assume, train with any ANKC affiliate. So you would not be able to use it for obedience, tracking, agility herding etc.