Agree with you both.

Its not just about leaving tails on, but breeding for the correct tail.

Thats why some breeders have retired from breeding their breed.

Not because they just dont like tails, but because they (some) are to old to start again.

I know a few old breeders (age wise) that dont have the heart for a new concept of breeding, they say "leave it to the young"!

Given that those who own legally docked gundogs are already allowed to show their dogs at 95% of champ shows, it's highly unlikely that adding Crufts and one or two other Champ Shows to that list is going to make any difference. I have yet to meet anyone who shows an unworked and undocked gundog that has expressed a dislike of their dogs tail and I've met a lot of show gundog people, not just a couple or a few. Gundogs are docked for working purposes, it has nothing to do with aesthetics (although of course in many breeds it once did) as much as some people would like to believe otherwise.

Having a belief is fine. Wanting to prevent the law being changed based purely on a belief, without any evidence to back it up is ridiculous, but then that's your choice in life I suppose.

*One Thousand and Thirty Two*

Oh wait, are we not doing this anymore?!
Just wanted to add aerolor - I'm still waiting for the kennel name of this friend of yours that has been breeding docked show Spaniels that aren't worked. I'd like to investigate it, if you'd rather PM me the name then I'm more than happy with that.

Nobody breeds docked show spaniels!

People breed spaniels, they may show them themselves or sell them to people who show them, or they may both work and show them and/or sell them to people who do either or both.

In any case if they wish to have their dogs docked there is no illegality involved. A vet requires certain criteria is met, this can consist of only seeing a shotgun licence, so if I have a shotgun licence and I have bred a litter of spaniels, I can have them docked, end of.

This is the law.........

In order for the relevant dogs (spaniels, terriers and HPRs) to be legally docked in the UK the following criteria needs to be met:

he dog will have to be less than 5 days old and the veterinary surgeon will have to certify that he or she has seen specified evidence that the dog is likely to work in specified areas. Puppies being docked must be microchipped, either at the time of docking or when the vet considers they are old enough.

Puppies from certain working dogs may be docked if evidence is provided to the vet that it is likely to be worked in connection with law enforcement, activities of Her Majesty’s Armed Forces, emergency rescue, lawful pest control, or the lawful shooting of animals. It is accepted that in a litter, not all puppies docked will be found suitable for work.

The owner of the dog, or person representing the owner must make a signed statement that, the dam of the puppies to be docked is of a type which can be certified as previously stated , the date on which the puppies were born and that it is intended that they will be used, or sold, for one of the working purposes set out in the regulations.

The vet must sign a declaration that the requirements of the regulations have been satisfied i.e. that he has been given the necessary declaration by the owner or person representing the owner and has seen the evidence required.

The vet must have a completed statement, signed and dated by the owner of the dog (or by another person whom the veterinary surgeon to whom it is presented reasonably believes to be representing the owner), made in the form set out in the regulations. The vet must see the dam of the dog and a further piece of evidence such as:

a current shotgun or firearm certificate issued to the owner of the dog, or to the agent or employee of the owner most likely to be using the dog for work in connection with the lawful shooting of animals OR

a letter from a gamekeeper, a land occupier (or his agent), a person with shooting rights, a shoot organiser, a club official, a person representing the National Working Terrier Federation, or a person engaged in lawful pest control, stating that the breeder of the dog whose tail is to be docked is known to him and that dogs bred by that breeder have been used (as the case may be) on his land, or in his shoot, or for pest control.

Just wanted to make sure you knew which post I was replying to originally as aerolor has stated there's someone breeding litters of show Spaniels without working them. It may not be illegal, but I certainly think it's deceiving to dock without planning to work them as docking for aesthetic reasons is illegal.

Being in Spaniels for many years, I'm sure I will know this person from their kennel name if they do genuinely show their dogs.

But even if this WAS the case, nothing can be done about it because no laws have been broken.

The motive behind the docking is irrelevant and immaterial, if the dogs have been docked by a vet, it is all above board!

Nobody can PROVE that one or more of a litter was definitely NOT going to be worked, so I am afraid I really cannot see why you are pursuing this line other than being vindictive?

Because I'm interested.

Originally Posted by Ripsnorterthe2nd
Just wanted to add aerolor - I'm still waiting for the kennel name of this friend of yours that has been breeding docked show Spaniels that aren't worked. I'd like to investigate it, if you'd rather PM me the name then I'm more than happy with that.

I am sorry Rip. but I don't think it would be wise of me to give names so you can investigate. I have no wish to cause any trouble, and as I do not know you, I would not feel comfortable passing her name on to you. You will just have to take my word for it that what she has said to me is true. The person I am speaking of has never worked her springers, she breeds only for showing, but she is in partnership with another breeder and maybe that is how it is done if her partner works her dogs. I did add that the last litter of pups I saw were not docked, perhaps because it is more difficult for her now that the docking ban has been in force for a while. I am sorry I cannot pass names on and I hope you will believe that I am genuine in what I have said.

Then I'm afraid without a name I can't just take your word for it - you could be lying purely for the sake of argument. That's why I pushed for a name tbh, nothing to do with investigating - I just don't believe you. Sorry.

Good decision, you never know who you are passing information on to.

For what its worth I believe you.

rune