We Have Been Betrayed

[Christina]

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!

Appauling ? Oh dear that rather makes that sentence irrelevant. :)

Which is totally off topic & nothing to do with the matter in this discussion.

Honestly with what is going on re the laws & rules being brought in that will affect registered breeders so badly I think it is best to stop worrying about docked tails & consider if the whole dog of all breeds will even exist in the future. Importing dogs will be a thing of the past unless you are a licensed puppy farm you will be lucky to be allowed to breed or even own an entire dog.

[Wundahoo]

I feel that I need to point out that it is NOT illegal in this country to dock tails of neonatal pups. It can still be done but only by a vet and ONLY for theraputic purposes.

I have a 4 month old puppy which was BORN with a severe deviation of its tail. This puppy had 2 severe kinks in its tail. Within several days of its birth, it was clear that as it grew, it would never be able to posture correctly and lift its tail away when defecating. This pup was one of a litter of seven. All other pups in the litter had normal tails.

At a few days of age, the puppy was docked within the law and it has been carefully documented via a statement from the veterinarian who did the procedure as well as accompanying photographs. The tail has also been preserved in formalin and has been kept in case of any future issues or questions from "authorities". All this has been done to protect both the veterinarian and myself from wrongful accusations. However, it seems that no matter how careful we have been to accurately document the situation we cannot fully protect ourselves from inuendo and unsubstantiated false claims !! I guess that now it will be presumed that I must have done "something" to the tail to deliberately damage it so that it could be docked !!

I feel that it is quite wrong for people to make claims about deliberate damage to tails without proof..... the rumour mill always seems to run riot in the dog world.

As to the motion that has brought about this discussion, I'm astounded at its content and the accusations that accompany it. It seems to me that the person who has proposed this motion is not very smart nor do they have a fair and reasonable understanding of the requirements of investigation. If such accusations were to be put to a controlling body in the form of a formal complaint against a member, it would be thrown out because of a complete lack of ANY evidence. However, because this person is a Director of the ANKC it seems that they can say whatever they wish about fellow exhibitors (without naming names) and not have to offer a scrap of proof. Making such unsubstantiated claims and using them as an argument for the need of such a ruling should not be permitted.

Obviously this ruling if accepted, will have major ramifications for the many breeds in this country that have a need to import quality dogs from countries where docking is still legal.

It will be just one more thing that will make it harder to increase the genetic diversity of the purebred dogs in this country.

It is probably just the tip of the iceberg and we can expect more and more knee jerk regulations to come.

Christina, dont bank on compulsory sterilisation. Things may swing in the opposite direction if a particular quarter of the animal rights activists have their way..... in numerous European countries it's ILLEGAL to sterilise dogs unless there is a medical reason to do so. It's said that the procedure is done for the convenience of owners and is a manipulation of natural behaviour which prevents dogs from interacting in a normal way with members of their own species.

[BJean]

Why can't people just accept that it is not legal to chop portions of the tail off healthy dogs, or any other body part. Guess it would be hard to prove if someone deliberately broke or injured a tail. One could assume if it was a regular occurrence but if this is enough to prosecute I don't know ?

If people want to show imports from other countries they have to choose a puppy & say do not dock the tail. Its not complicated.

If they already have a dog here that is docked they can still breed from it but not show.

There are actually far more stupid & unfair rules in the dog world than this.

Some people are very sick & will do all sorts of awful things so it may be true that this has happened. If it is only once it is one time too many.

Thanks for the learned advice Christina.

[TessnSean]

Why can't people just accept that it is not legal to chop portions of the tail off healthy dogs, or any other body part. Guess it would be hard to prove if someone deliberately broke or injured a tail. One could assume if it was a regular occurrence but if this is enough to prosecute I don't know ?

If people want to show imports from other countries they have to choose a puppy & say do not dock the tail. Its not complicated.

If they already have a dog here that is docked they can still breed from it but not show.

There are actually far more stupid & unfair rules in the dog world than this.

Some people are very sick & will do all sorts of awful things so it may be true that this has happened. If it is only once it is one time too many.

Thanks for the learned advice Christina.

Is that a serious reply or sarcasm? Overseas breeders dock a few days after birth. When did you last select your show dog at less than 1 week of age?

[exkiwi]

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!!

[cruzzi]

Why can't people just accept that it is not legal to chop portions of the tail off healthy dogs, or any other body part. Guess it would be hard to prove if someone deliberately broke or injured a tail. One could assume if it was a regular occurrence but if this is enough to prosecute I don't know ?

If people want to show imports from other countries they have to choose a puppy & say do not dock the tail. Its not complicated.

If they already have a dog here that is docked they can still breed from it but not show.

There are actually far more stupid & unfair rules in the dog world than this.

Some people are very sick & will do all sorts of awful things so it may be true that this has happened. If it is only once it is one time too many.

Thanks for the learned advice Christina.

Is that a serious reply or sarcasm? Overseas breeders dock a few days after birth. When did you last select your show dog at less than 1 week of age?

Those that import make application for a puppy from their selected breeder before the litter is even conceived.

Any wonder topics wander from the topic.

[yarracully]

Why are we still having comments re the import of Legally docked dogs, with members asking why are they still importing dogs' than cannot be shown ? as we speak it is still legal under Australian law to have a dog with a docked tail, and currently it is still able to be shown, It is only members of our hallowed dog bodies that are trying to stop LEGALLY docked dogs being shown NOT the government. We can all think of various things in the dog world that we all dont' agree with ,but for God's sake be united in something that although it may not affect you it might be to the benefit of the overall dog showing scene.

Get into your state body and TELL them how you feel about this peanuts' motion.

Yes Klink under Australia law it is legal to import a dog that has been legally docked in its country of birth, but this proposal will mean that this same dog will NOT be able to compete in any ANKC events. This motion is an attempt to stop people importing said legally docked dog and therefore limit the potential of expanding the breeds gene pool.

[yarracully]

Why can't people just accept that it is not legal to chop portions of the tail off healthy dogs, or any other body part. Guess it would be hard to prove if someone deliberately broke or injured a tail. One could assume if it was a regular occurrence but if this is enough to prosecute I don't know ?

If people want to show imports from other countries they have to choose a puppy & say do not dock the tail. Its not complicated.

If they already have a dog here that is docked they can still breed from it but not show.

There are actually far more stupid & unfair rules in the dog world than this.

Some people are very sick & will do all sorts of awful things so it may be true that this has happened. If it is only once it is one time too many.

Thanks for the learned advice Christina.

Is that a serious reply or sarcasm? Overseas breeders dock a few days after birth. When did you last select your show dog at less than 1 week of age?

Those that import make application for a puppy from their selected breeder before the litter is even conceived.

Any wonder topics wander from the topic.

Yes application may be made but final decision on which particular pup is made well after whelping. And not many breeders would put off docking a litter of pups to allow you to choose one then run the risk of having to get rid of the rest of the litter with tails when other breeders in that country can provide docked.

As an example we had a litter of pups here shortly after the docking laws came in. You would be amazed at the number of people that asked "oh they're not docked?" "No we are not allowed to dock them anymore." "Oh but I wanted one that was docked."

[yarracully]

In regard to everyone going on about spelling etc. The document I have seen does not have all the speliing errors that the first post on this topic has. I suspect when whoever scanned it and included it in their post their computer did not perform its OCR correctly.

The one I have seen is on the DogsVIC letterhead and stamped as recieved by the ANKC.

[Steve]

In regard to everyone going on about spelling etc. The document I have seen does not have all the speliing errors that the first post on this topic has. I suspect when whoever scanned it and included it in their post their computer did not perform its OCR correctly.

The one I have seen is on the DogsVIC letterhead and stamped as recieved by the ANKC.

My word program does this - looks to me that they copied it and pasted it . In all honesty the spelling is the least of the problems and now this document is out in the public arena whether the vote is a yes or no there will be repercussion not necessarily obvious now, way into the future.

[oakway]

In regard to everyone going on about spelling etc. The document I have seen does not have all the speliing errors that the first post on this topic has. I suspect when whoever scanned it and included it in their post their computer did not perform its OCR correctly.

The one I have seen is on the DogsVIC letterhead and stamped as recieved by the ANKC.

My word program does this - looks to me that they copied it and pasted it . In all honesty the spelling is the least of the problems and now this document is out in the public arena whether the vote is a yes or no there will be repercussion not necessarily obvious now, way into the future.

Yes, correct, copied and pasted.

For gods sake who cares how the the spelling is, it's the words that will cause the problem not the spelling.

[Mjosa]

The gene pool does not necessarily have to suffer, instead of importing a dog, there is also the frozen semen route to bring in new bloodlines.

This is the way I do it now, rather than risk the life of a dog on the long haul flights, lost one going to the UK about eight years ago, would never ever do that again.

[cruzzi]

Why can't people just accept that it is not legal to chop portions of the tail off healthy dogs, or any other body part. Guess it would be hard to prove if someone deliberately broke or injured a tail. One could assume if it was a regular occurrence but if this is enough to prosecute I don't know ?

If people want to show imports from other countries they have to choose a puppy & say do not dock the tail. Its not complicated.

If they already have a dog here that is docked they can still breed from it but not show.

There are actually far more stupid & unfair rules in the dog world than this.

Some people are very sick & will do all sorts of awful things so it may be true that this has happened. If it is only once it is one time too many.

Thanks for the learned advice Christina.

Is that a serious reply or sarcasm? Overseas breeders dock a few days after birth. When did you last select your show dog at less than 1 week of age?

Those that import make application for a puppy from their selected breeder before the litter is even conceived.

Any wonder topics wander from the topic.

Yes application may be made but final decision on which particular pup is made well after whelping. And not many breeders would put off docking a litter of pups to allow you to choose one then run the risk of having to get rid of the rest of the litter with tails when other breeders in that country can provide docked.

As an example we had a litter of pups here shortly after the docking laws came in. You would be amazed at the number of people that asked "oh they're not docked?" "No we are not allowed to dock them anymore." "Oh but I wanted one that was docked."

Breeders don't import purely for show, neither do many actually travel to personally choose their puppy.

They import primarily for breeding purposes & rely on the honesty & integrity of the breeders.

If showing is a requisite they need only to request an undocked puppy & keep their fingers crossed the same as they do for a docked puppy.

IMO your argument is very weak & lacks credibility as a valid argument to overturn the tail docking laws, as does the dog will hurt it's tail claim.

I am more concerned about the loss of popularity of some of the previously docked breeds & fear they face virtual extinction because a the ridiculous law foisted upon us by people who don't even like dogs.

[oakway]

The gene pool does not necessarily have to suffer, instead of importing a dog, there is also the frozen semen route to bring in new bloodlines.

This is the way I do it now, rather than risk the life of a dog on the long haul flights, lost one going to the UK about eight years ago, would never ever do that again.

This is NOT about importing semen it is about a letter to be tabled at the ANKC that if passed "could" be the start of the end of some our breeds.

(Some of us can pay as much to bring in semen as it nearly does to bring in the dog.

The cost involved may be too great to pay all the costs involved and end up with only one pup in the litter and that may be only pet quality and have to go as a pet.

In some cases it's far wiser to import the dog and use it when ever you have a bitch available).

[Steve]

The laws are in and chances of them ever being overturned are remote - the issue is not the law its the bloody rednecks in the ANKC who want to bring in regs which outlaw more than the laws do.The fact that the law which treats people who get a dog legally docked somewhere else by a qualified vet as criminals if it isnt done in their state if they take it to a dog show is unbelievable already without this.It has huge potential ramifications.

[oakway]

The laws are in and chances of them ever being overturned are remote - the issue is not the law its the bloody rednecks in the ANKC who want to bring in regs which outlaw more than the laws do.The fact that the law which treats people who get a dog legally docked somewhere else by a qualified vet as criminals if it isnt done in their state if they take it to a dog show is unbelievable already without this.It has huge potential ramifications.

Could this contravene the Trade Practices act or the freedom of trade between countries. ?

[yarracully]

Why can't people just accept that it is not legal to chop portions of the tail off healthy dogs, or any other body part. Guess it would be hard to prove if someone deliberately broke or injured a tail. One could assume if it was a regular occurrence but if this is enough to prosecute I don't know ?

If people want to show imports from other countries they have to choose a puppy & say do not dock the tail. Its not complicated.

If they already have a dog here that is docked they can still breed from it but not show.

There are actually far more stupid & unfair rules in the dog world than this.

Some people are very sick & will do all sorts of awful things so it may be true that this has happened. If it is only once it is one time too many.

Thanks for the learned advice Christina.

Is that a serious reply or sarcasm? Overseas breeders dock a few days after birth. When did you last select your show dog at less than 1 week of age?

Those that import make application for a puppy from their selected breeder before the litter is even conceived.

Any wonder topics wander from the topic.

Yes application may be made but final decision on which particular pup is made well after whelping. And not many breeders would put off docking a litter of pups to allow you to choose one then run the risk of having to get rid of the rest of the litter with tails when other breeders in that country can provide docked.

As an example we had a litter of pups here shortly after the docking laws came in. You would be amazed at the number of people that asked "oh they're not docked?" "No we are not allowed to dock them anymore." "Oh but I wanted one that was docked."

Breeders don't import purely for show, neither do many actually travel to personally choose their puppy.

They import primarily for breeding purposes & rely on the honesty & integrity of the breeders.

If showing is a requisite they need only to request an undocked puppy & keep their fingers crossed the same as they do for a docked puppy.

IMO your argument is very weak & lacks credibility as a valid argument to overturn the tail docking laws, as does the dog will hurt it's tail claim.

I am more concerned about the loss of popularity of some of the previously docked breeds & fear they face virtual extinction because a the ridiculous law foisted upon us by people who don't even like dogs.

True breeders don't import for show only but you would find very few dogs imported that are not used in some form of competition to prove thier value. Why would you spend thousands of dollars to bring a dog in and then not use them in competition to assess their value and to allow others to see the potential the new bloodlines could add to the dog.

Who said anything about a valid argument for overturning docking laws. You can forget that ever happening. My point is as follows:

If I were a breeder in the US or Canada or Asia and I had a litter of ten pups born today with the possibility of one of those ten going to Australia. Now at two or three days of age it would be impossible to determine which pup is a likely prospect to send. So I have a dilemma.

1. Do I not dock the entire litter and therefore run the risk of being stuck with nine pups that have full tails yet demand in my country is for docked dogs. I may not find homes for them for this reason. Remembering that some states in USA and Canada do have limits on number of dogs to be kept.(have had experience in this from when NSW bought in Docking laws but other states had not)

2. Do I dock the entire litter and say to the potential Australian buyer "Bad luck you can still get the dog but you won't be able to show it to prove its value and thus by not being in the ring other breeders will not see the benefit of this new bloodline".

3. Do I leave one pup undocked and hope it turns out worthy of the buyers money they are putting in to importing it. Bearing in mind if they get the dog and it is not a good example for whatever reason my reputation as a breeder is at risk.

4. Choose a pup too leave undocked and then later have the intended purchaser pull out of the deal and I am then left with a dog that may be difficult to find a home for as all other breeders in my country are offering docked dogs which Joe Public thinks is right for the breed.

In this situation as a breeder in a country that allowed docking I would probably go down the path of option 2. This as the breeder would be the safest and less stressful way. However that is not the answer the people wanting to imort would want to hear.

I too am concerned about the future of previously docked breeds as I happen to breed/train and exhibit such a breed.

However I am also in the process of importing another breed to add to our pack and after a few emails with potential breeders in certain countries that we have been in discussion with for over three years, the above are some of the concerns these breeders are having should this ruling come into being.

Also it needs to be considered how would the ANKC prevent a dog from being exhibited. If the rules developed out of this motion require all dogs banned by this motion put on a limited register then there goes the possibility of even using the dog to breed with. So again a good opportunity to expand the gene pool is lost.

Edited February 4, 2013 by yarracully

[Smurf1]

Surely if this letter has been tabled then there is opportunity for members and specific breed bodies to submit their own response to the letter before a decision is made. A strong (and well reasoned) backlash against it should have at least some influence on the decision.

[Steve]

Surely if this letter has been tabled then there is opportunity for members and specific breed bodies to submit their own response to the letter before a decision is made. A strong (and well reasoned) backlash against it should have at least some influence on the decision.

Electronic motions allow no debate.The ANKC guidelines for out of session motions state.

3.. Motions will be circulated to all ANKC directors advising a date of 60 days for response.

6.A resolution in writing shall be deemed to have been passed when signed by the regulate number of directors required for the validity of the resolution, even if this occurs prior to the date determined in 3.

This motion may have actually already been voted on and ANKC Directors are able to ignore if they so wish instructions from their state board on how to vote and to do whatever they wish, With all voting details kept private.

Edited February 4, 2013 by Steve

[Steve]

The laws are in and chances of them ever being overturned are remote - the issue is not the law its the bloody rednecks in the ANKC who want to bring in regs which outlaw more than the laws do.The fact that the law which treats people who get a dog legally docked somewhere else by a qualified vet as criminals if it isnt done in their state if they take it to a dog show is unbelievable already without this.It has huge potential ramifications.

Could this contravene the Trade Practices act or the freedom of trade between countries. ?

No you can still trade with them and haven't been restricted in that - you can also exercise your property rights and take your dog to another state or country and have a vet legally dock its tail - but if you then take it to a dog show you are guilty of a criminal act in Victoria - even though you have not committed any act of cruelty and it was done by a vet and as it is your property you have every right to take it to another place for vet treatment.