CockersOnline Forum
Cocker Specific Discussion => Genetics & Breeding => Topic started by: wrenside on March 23, 2007, 06:31:07 PM
-
Hello everyone, I'm back! My old username was workingcocker and my name is mary.
Some of you will know that I have a little red working cocker bitch called Bella. She has turned into a fine young lady and is a real pleasure to take shooting, she's 2 and a half. I am planning on a litter and the pups will need docking and dew clawing. However, I cannot find a london based vet who will do the procedure. I think that they all assume that london based dogs aren't used for working, which is completely untrue. I would hate to see the pups left undocked and dew clawed because my Bella is very waggy and dives into hard cover very fast, I feel if she hadn't been docked as a pup then her tail would most definitely have been broken many times by now. Also working cockers turn at such speed and so tightly that again, if the dew claws were left intact they'd be sure to tear down the back of the leg and cause a lot of suffering and lameness to the dog.
If anyone knows a London based vet who is experienced and understanding about docking and dew clawing for working dogs, please contact me with their details. This is very important to me because the pups will be top class, driven working cockers. If I can't find a London based vet then I will have to take Bella to whelp up in Cumbria were we have an experienced vet who is happy to do the docking and D/C, however this will be very inconvienient for me and also will be very stressful for bella when she's heavily pregnant.
I have tried to contact the London cockers club working section but have recieved no reply concerning docking friendly vets.
Any advice welcomed
Best wishes Mary
PS: I am only looking so late to find a London based pro docking vet because my usual London vet after having said he'd be happy to dock and dew claw working pups, has now decided that he doesn't want to risk it because he said he finds the docking law so confusing and un clear. I don't blame him, I think it's a terribly confusing and badly written bill.
PPS: This will be our first litter, but we are very well researched, and have other experienced breeders supporting us. Bella has also been eye tested and has had a thorough MOT by our local vet, she is also in her prime and is very toned and fit.
-
Have you contacted the CDB ? They may be able to put you in touch with a vet in London.
http://www.cdb.org/
-
Hi Colin,
you know I've been racking my brains for about a week on how to find a pro docking vet in London and in my searches I've been on the Council for docked breeds website many times and yet I never thought to contact them :005:
Thankyou so much.
I've just sent them an email and hopefully they'll be able to direct me to a nice, local vet who's experienced at this procedure. Just shows a problem shared is a problem halved, and hopefully in this case solved! :blink:
Thanks once again, you're a star
Mary
-
I take it you've got a waiting list of working homes for all the puppies to go to then, otherwise you're unlikely to find a vet willing to do those procedures.
-
and you have to prove they are going to working homes as of 1st april. The council of docked breed website refused to provide any details of a vet to one of my friends whose vet will now no longer do the procedure. I hope you have better luck.
-
The CDB have indicated they will no longer be providing a vet referral service and many of their pro-docking vets have said they will not dock after the new law comes into effect anyway (according to a survey they did)
-
Hello all,
Yes, everyone on our waiting list either shoots regularly, works on shoots as beaters every season or are in the gamekeeping profession. I wouldn't let a pup go to anyone who wasn't going to train them up for a working life.
Could anyone clarify what the evidence I need to gather to prove working homes for the pups would be? What proof is accepted?
Unfortunately DCB can't help me, as Jane said, they are no longer doing vet referral.
The search continues..
Best wishes
Mary
-
The regulations on the docking of working dogs are being reviewed by the Lords on the 27th March. You can find a copy of these Regulations in a pdf file on the CDB website - it includes the evidence a breeder will need to supply to a vet in order for a litter to be docked (assuming these regulations are approved by the Lords this time but they may not be)
-
Thankyou Jane,
I'm sure that I can provide at least 3 of the 8 acceptable types of evidence, so that's made me feel a lot better. Lets hope that the house of lords approves these regulations on the 27th. Now 3 days of anxious waiting to see what happens!
Thanks again
Best wishes
Mary
-
I live on the Hampshire/Surrey border, and have two vets within 10 miles who dock and fully intend to continue docking working gundogs and terriers. The confusion over the docking bill is not confined to breeders, the vets are somewhat confused too.
The CDB have indicated they will no longer be providing a vet referral service and many of their pro-docking vets have said they will not dock after the new law comes into effect anyway
The council of docked breeds have put out some confusing information lately, including a not entirely accurate report that the house of lords was blocking the exemption for working gundogs.. The best source of accurate news at the moment seems to be BASC. http://www.basc.org.uk/content/tail_docking_and_working_
I believe they are also trying to assemble a database of pro-docking vets
Basically the CDB was funded by the show fraternity and will no longer be able to provide financial support for vets threatened with action from the RCVS because their working dog members are not sufficiently numerous
My vet however, is fairly positive that the muddles will be sorted out and the legislation will be workable and not too restrictive. He says the RCVS are in fact climbing down as it becomes clear they can no longer oppose a procedure sanctioned by the government ( ie docking of working dogs) He is also confident you will not have to prove that your puppies will all be worked, only that they are of a type intended for work, and that you work your own dogs. Evidence of that might be a shotgun certificate or statement from a gamekeeper/shoot manager.
Mary
We are about 50 minutes drive from London - if you cannot find a nearer vet (and BASC may be able to help you there) I can put you in touch if you pm me. He may even be willing to drive to you if you reimburse him for his journey.
Pippa
-
Pippa thankyou, I will pm you ASAP.
Mary xx
-
I would hope you DO have to prove that your puppies are all going to working homes, otherwise puppies are having their tails cut off unnecessarily. >:(
-
I would hope you DO have to prove that your puppies are all going to working homes, otherwise puppies are having their tails cut off unnecessarily
I share your sentiments. I for one do not support cosmetic docking at all.
However, as I understand it, the problems here are with the workability of such legislation. The vet cannot guarantee what will happen to puppies once he has docked their tails, only that they are of a type to be worked and that the breeders have given evidence that they are working their own dogs. Even the breeder cannot guarantee what will happen to the puppy once it is sold, however diligent they are in assessing and filtering prospective purchasers.
The only person who could offer any guarantee that a puppy will be worked would be the eventual prospective owner, and at two or three days old when puppies are docked, so many things can change. Even if the whole litter is pre-booked, people sometimes change their mind or their circumstances may change unpredictably. The final owners at eight weeks are not always the exact same people as the prospective owners at three days.
The whole thing is very complicated. Hopefully a workable solution will be arrived at.
Pippa
-
There is also another problem arrising regarding the tail docking of working pups in that when the vet does dock working puppies they have to sign a document stating that they have suffient evidence to prove that they are for working only. In doing this they obviously have identified themselves......The RVC still ban all their vets from doing this and therefore the is big chances of the vet being struck off as they have to be registered with the RCV to practice >:(
-
Hey Tori, indeed a lot of the vets that I've called in the hope that they will dock have said that the reason they're not prepared to dock is because of the RCV and it's persistence at not allowing its vets to dock at all, even though working dogs are supposed to be exempt. Police and army spaniels are still being docked by vets though, so clearly there must be a certain level of hipocracy within the RCV about its views on docking and turning a blind eye.
Anyway, Bella is going to be mated on Sunday and I'm going to have a long chat with the stud owners about where they get their litters docked and what they think I should do etc...
If anyone can recommend a vet to me then please pm or email me, as I'd really appreciate any help and support in this matter.
Thanks again
Mary
-
Is there now a problem with getting dogs dew-clawed too? Or are vets still willing to remove dew-claws?
-
Anyway, Bella is going to be mated on Sunday and I'm going to have a long chat with the stud owners about where they get their litters docked and what they think I should do etc...
If anyone can recommend a vet to me then please pm or email me, as I'd really appreciate any help and support in this matter.
Thanks again
Mary
Praps you should wait and see if the mating is successful first ! and btw I have seen lots of army and police spaniels with natural tails.
-
Hi all,
From what I've gathered dew clawing is becoming less PC with many vets because they believe or susspect that the RCV sees dew clawing in the sameish light as docking, however the RCV has not explicitly expressed this. In my opinion dew clawing will probably be the next thing for the anti docking groups to ban.
Hi Penel, indeed I don't know whether the mating will be successful, fingers crossed it has been!. However, at this uncertain time in regard to docking law and finding a suitable vet, I'm certainly not going to leave finding a vet until 2 to 3 weeks time when we'll be able to verify via a blood test whether Bella is pregnant or not. As far as I'm concerned I want to have everything as well prepared and set up before the immediate use and need arises. This is what all the working cocker breeders I have been in contact with have advised, as they're in much the same boat as me and we're supporting eachother by finding out as much info now as possible and relaying round to everyone so that we're all in a stable position to devote our full attention and time to caring for our bitches and the possible future new born pups. I'm sure you can understand why we are investing a lot of time now in finding a vet.
I didn't know that nowadays a lot of army and police cockers were going undocked, I thought docking was still favoured. You learn something new everyday!
Best wishes
Mary
-
Why do you want dew claws removed ? Hattie's breeder (very well known working cocker / springer / lab guy) doesn't remove dew claws at all as he feels dogs need them. My lurchers unfortunately don't have their - they were probably pulled out at birth - but all my other (gun) dogs have them and have never had an issue with having them.
I also know a gamekeeper in Oxfordshire who has bred working cockers and left them undocked, and has had no issues at all with their tails........
-
Hi all,
From what I've gathered dew clawing is becoming less PC with many vets because they believe or susspect that the RCV sees dew clawing in the sameish light as docking, however the RCV has not explicitly expressed this. In my opinion dew clawing will probably be the next thing for the anti docking groups to ban.
Ah, I didnt realise dew clawing could be an issue...wow!
-
Removing body parts from any animal is an issue really, especially when there are no proven health benefits.
-
It isn't an issue for all vets - one of our vets (a long time opponent of tail docking) is quite happy remove dew claws on puppies and will continue to do (as will the other partners). He sees quite a few dew claw injuries and also cases where owners neglect to trim dew claw nails resulting in nasty infections when the nail grows into the leg tissue. I've seen a number of those myself as a groomer - you can blame the owners but it's the dogs who suffer.
-
Sorry but that is ridiculous - remove dew claws at birth, in case owners forget to trim them - good grief :o of course there will be dew claw injuries, the same as there will be other claw injuries, tail injuries, broken legs, ripped ears, broken teeth. But where do you draw the line................
-
Penel, there are other points of view on this issue besides yours ::) Not everybody sees things in such a black & white way and I'm perfectly entitled to give another view (and the view of a highly experienced vet) without being jumped on >:( I have no intention of letting this thread develop into another "pro" v "anti" argument but thought it only fair that people realise that there are other opinions besides yours ;)
-
I totally accept their are views other than mine, obviously there are ::), but thought it only fair to put across the view that it is not necessary to remove dew claws. Thankfully laws are changing though, and people are becoming more enlightened nowadays. Plenty of dogs have dew claws and never have an issue with them, that was the only point I was making. Why that is a bad point to make I really don't know ::)
-
It must be terribly frustrating for breeders/owners who do wish their dogs to be docked within the law but find it almost impossible because the vets who will do are are forced to go underground :-\
I know this is an emotive topic and I doubt there will ever be a consensus - but it has been democratically debated and the law decided upon - so why can't people who chose to do this be able to do so without fear of retribution and rejection?
By all means campaign for a change in the law - but for the RCVS to "ban" its members from docking means that they are dictating the law, not parliament ::)
The last statement I read from the RCVS stated that they were going to issue their members with new guidance regarding docking - taking into account new legislation and the requirement for Veterinary Surgeons to certify that certain evidence has been produced by the owner to indicate that the dog is likely to be used for work - I assume that this new guidance has not been forthcoming :-\
http://www.rcvs.org.uk/templates/internal.asp?nodeid=95697
-
My vet 'used' to remove dew claws, even though I don't dock, but they now refuse to do them, we tried another couple of vets in our area and they said the same.
Three of my girls have their dew claws and thankfully so far haven't caused any problems.
-
Why that is a bad point to make I really don't know ::)
Come on Penel - it's not the point you were making but how you made it ::) I didn't agree with some of what you posted but didn't feel the need to say "that's ridiculous" even if I may have thought it ;) For the record, we haven't actually decided whether we will continue to remove dew claws on our puppies or not - our anti-docking vet thinks it sensible that we do so (his words not mine) but we will make our own minds up on this, bearing in mind that it remains a perfectly legal procedure and the RCVS have issued no guidance on the subject (even though they have had plenty of opportunity to do so).
-
Sorry for feeling passionately about these matters ::) I find it very hard to write dispassionately about removal of real live animals tails and claws. I truly believe in what I say that's all.
-
Sorry for feeling passionately about these matters ::) I find it very hard to write dispassionately about removal of real live animals tails and claws. I truly believe in what I say that's all.
You certainly don't have the monopoly on passion Penel - we all feel passionate about various subjects but that shouldn't be used as an excuse for rudeness. You can certainly say what you think and what you believe (when have you not?) but you need to turn down the antagonism a notch or two. Try it for a change - you might be pleasantly surprised by how effective reasoned discussion can be in winning hearts and minds ;)
-
My lurchers unfortunately don't have their - they were probably pulled out at birth
Can I just add, that I have never known Dew claws to be removed by pulling them out!
-
My lurchers unfortunately don't have their - they were probably pulled out at birth
Can I just add, that I have never known Dew claws to be removed by pulling them out!
praps you don't know many lurchers that were born in travellers camps then. :-\ It's common practice.
Jane - I don't think I am rude - what is rude about saying it's ridiculous to remove dew claws at birth in case owners forget to trim them ?
-
I would personally go for a dog without dew claws over a dog with if I had the choice, this is after Sammy ripped the end of his dew claw off exposing the quick, I trim his claws fairly regularly :-\.
-
I am 100% sure no one on this forum wether they agree with dew claw removal or not would agree with dew claws being pulled out in the way you described Penel :-\ but that hasn't really got anything to do with a qualified vet doing it properly which is what was originally being discussed.
-
Jane - I don't think I am rude - what is rude about saying it's ridiculous to remove dew claws at birth in case owners forget to trim them ?
I'm sure I don't have to spell it out to someone of your intelligence. All I'm asking is that you modify your tone not stop saying what you think - it's basic good forum etiquette and allows a sensible discussion to flow instead of the usual "I'm right, you're totally wrong" direction these kind of threads often go. I'm guessing most other members would prefer this too ;)
-
... and I'm guessing a lot of other members daren't disagree with the Mods ;) ph34r
-
... and I'm guessing a lot of other members daren't disagree with the Mods ;) ph34r
It's not about agreeing or disagreeing with the mods ( what makes you think we all hold the same opinions ? ) - it's about putting views across in a polite and reasonable manner, rather than being rude and confrontational.
-
... and I'm guessing a lot of other members daren't disagree with the Mods ;) ph34r
I am firmly in the anti-docking camp - but don't feel the need to express my opinion quite so forcefully - and I am rarely accused of being diplomatic ;) I have also NEVER felt oppressed by the Mods on this subject ;)
We may not like it, Penel - but it is legal, and while democracy allows us to campaign for a change in the law, I don't think anything is gained by continual "car crash" techniques that focus on the extremes, targeting people who want to make perfectly legal choices ::) All that does it marginalise people like me who want to engage in reasoned debate with the decision makers :-\
-
I have to say, I find many posts quite sensitive to read. I know the idea of a forum, is to discuss topics, but it does seem to me, some people don't like it when there view is not agreed with.
I also find some of the comments quite patronising. ( ;) ::) )
I think its important to remember that everybody reads words, but interputs tone differently.
Some say more how they feel than others. What I object to, is those arguing over things they know little about. Personally on this occasion I didn't sense any rudeness. Some do force there opinion stronger than others, a fair and valid argument in an interesting discussion.
There are some people who actually delight in making a point on something they read recently and the righteousness of it is tedious.
Edited to Say: Sorry I don't know any Vets in London... to keep it on topic...
-
... and I'm guessing a lot of other members daren't disagree with the Mods ;) ph34r
It's not about agreeing or disagreeing with the mods ( what makes you think we all hold the same opinions ? ) - it's about putting views across in a polite and reasonable manner, rather than being rude and confrontational.
I still fail to see what is *rude* about saying it's ridiculous to remove dew claws in case someone forgets to trim them. That is my final posting on the subject.
-
I totally Agree with you Cathy ::) :005:
Different peoples opinions makes this forum and I'm far more likely to take on board someones opinions if the write in a nice tone without sarcasm . don't be fooled into thinking that just because a mod is a mod that people wont Disagree Because thats just not true .
I'm guessing that far more people would rather not argue the point
-
Speaking for myself, 99% of the posts I make on this forum are as myself and not with a 'Mod' hat on.
I have trimmed a couple of newer COL members dog's recently and whilst chatting about the forum have found that they find some of the comments and attitudes on here quite intimidating.
People come here to seek advice and guidance as well as to offer it, surely it is up to all of us to do that in a polite and considerate manner.
Imagine how you'd react if you stopped someone in the street and sought their advice and they replied in a hostile or intimidating manner. That is how I see posting on here, speak (type) as you would like to be spoken to. Just because you can't see someone, it doesn't give you the right to be rude to them.
-
... and I'm guessing a lot of other members daren't disagree with the Mods ;) ph34r
Well talk about the pot calling the kettle :lol: Sorry Penel but that really made me giggle :005: Anyway, enough has been said on this subject now so I'll close it. It would be nice to think that if this subject comes up again we could have a non-confrontational discussion but I won't hold my breath.......