I think it is a little different for the breeds where the show specimens still live a lifestyle that involves the same risks as their working counterparts. Ie same tail action, same excercise environments.

That's what I mean, a dual-purpose dog and owner/breeder would suffer under the new law, e.g. not being able to show at certain events etc.

But a single purpose dog - show dog, pet dog, working dog wouldn't be affected as much (as a working dog can be docked with special permission)

I wasn't referring to duel purpose dogs I was referring to show and pet dogs. Many live in the country and are exposed to the same risks on their daily exercise.

I don't think it's so much upset at not being allowed to continue in two activities with the same dog, but more to do with the effects this will have on genetic diversity, and ultimately the long term health of the dual purpose breeds.

Many of the numerically small breeds do already have small gene pools, and to effectively divide these even further by making it more unlikely that dogs will perform a dual pupose, can only lead to degeneration IMO.

Just so I can understand this properly (as my brain still thinks its Monday)...

Do you mean that a dual purpose breed could be bred for both working and show purposes, but with the ban, may only be bred for one of those purposes, so effectively that line would die out of the "other" purposes?

Not saying they would be bred only for one purpose no.[edit: haven't worded that very well but I'm sure you'll know what I mean ]... but to divide the two diciplines, as the new Act will do, would create two distinct populations, as has already happened in working breeds that are not generally recognised as having dual purpose individuals eg Labradors and Cockers.

In those breeds it has lead to two very distinct types with the show people reluctant to use workers because they don't conform in showring appearance, and the workers reluctant to use showdogs because they don't have the same working ability.

Effectively the gene pool has been reduced because there are two separeate poulations with very little exchange between.

Thank you for clearing this up! Surprising how little one's brain works after a bank holiday!

I realise now what you're on about! The people next door to us have a working cocker spaniel, and it looked so different from the other cockers I've seen, that I didn't recognise it as a cocker...

I'm not sure I understand all the dual purpose arguments. You cannot show a dog which has been docked after the deadline - but what's to stop people using a working dog (with a docked tail) on a show bitch (with an undocked tail) or vice versa? This would then keep the lines going as 'dual purpose'. e.g. If I had a HPR (for working) with a docked tail and wanted to use a show dog with an undocked tail as the stud dog for my litter, why can't I then have the puppies docked? I would be able to 'prove' they would be worked so could have them docked legally. Similarly, if I wanted to use a working docked dog on my show bitch (undocked) I could also have the tails docked legally with proof of intent to work (or not if they were going in the show ring). Why do the two lines have to be exclusive?

Debs

What the new law does is make it impossible (except for the possible loopholes) to have individual docked dogs which are dual purpose. What that effectively does is isolate one discipline from the other so breeders who are currently involved in both are more likely to choose one or the other than carry on with both.

And no, you're quite right, this doesn't stop anyone using stud dogs from the other population but it does make it much less likely to happen because fewer breeders will be 'dual purpose' and docked working dogs will no longer appear in the showring. Show breeders will not get the chance to see workers unless they make an effort to keep in touch with the working side.

No doubt some will make the effort to keep in touch with both diciplines but if the other breeds are anything to go by, once a split has occured, they are likely to get further and further apart in type as time passes.

JMO, I may be completey wrong on this..... and I do hope I am!

Well I certainly hope breeders from both sides of the coin DO keep abreast of both sides. If I was into working a breed affected by the docking law as well as showing them I'd certainly do my best to keep the two lines together. That might mean having some dogs for working and some dogs for showing but if people are REALLY interested in dual purpose lines then there's no excuse for not taking an interest in both is there

Debs