Examination of Witnesses (Questions 220-229)
MS GINETTE
ELLIOTT, MS
LYNNE SMITH,
PROFESSOR DAVID
B MORTON, MS
CLARE O'DEMPSEY
AND MS
PAULINE BAINES
8 SEPTEMBER 2004
Q220 Ms Atherton: But they would not
preclude dog breeders from participating, it would be more about
changing the attitude of the judges?
Ms Smith: Yes, but at every dog
show the judge has his own personal choice; it is one person's
opinion of a dog on a particular day.
Ms O'Dempsey: Perhaps I can refer
the Committee to the last page of the ADA's submission, page 13,
which has a list of those countries which have a complete or almost
complete ban from docking. Dogs in those countries, obviously
particularly the Scandinavian countries, who have not been docking
for almost 20 years in the case of Norway and Sweden, all dogs
in those countries are shown with tails. If I could just come
in on that? There is a Danish Old English Sheepdog breeder and
judge—and I have a transcript of a talk that they gave in
advance of a show last year—saying that she thought of giving
up, but did not. She is Dr Birgitte Schjoth, a veterinary surgeon
in Denmark, exhibitor, international judge, and billed here as
"Owner of Denmark's top kennel, Danish Delight".
She says: "It is without doubt better and sounder for the
dog with a tail, but it is extremely difficult to get used to
for those who have had the breed for so many years. For a short
time I myself considered giving up when we had the docking-ban
introduced in Denmark in '93, but I just could not find another
breed I liked so much. I have lived with, bred and shown Old English
Sheepdogs with tails for seven years now and with success, contrary
to what everybody told me." She is speaking before an international
show. "Today I have gotten used to the tails. So much so
that I sometimes catch myself thinking that the docked ones actually
lack something—the tail. I have fought hard in my country
for permission to dock but with no success at all." She adds
at the end, "None of the arguments for docking hold when
you enter into a serious discussion." She also says, if I
can produce one more quote: "In the beginning I thought it
would be more difficult to sell pups with tails than without but
it was not. People actually like them with tails, even those who
have had Old English Sheepdogs for many years."
Q221 Chairman: I want to pick up on a
thought process that comes out of what you are saying because
the two respective organisations before us deal with the question
of working dogs. In the Council for Docked Breeds' evidence you
make an important point; you say, "However, if docking does
not compromise the welfare of working dogs, then we do not see
that an identical procedure performed on a non-working dog, for
example to prevent future hygiene problems, compromises the welfare
of the dog." I noticed in the Anti-Docking Alliance's evidence
some observations, for example that the UK Fire Service Search
and Rescue Dog Teams and others also use undocked dogs, such as
Border Collies, to work in confined and hazardous environments.
I am getting confused because one of the arguments that was put
to us that certain working dogs, to prevent damage, to give them
the best chance to carry out their work in confined or dangerous
spaces needed to be docked, and yet if the UK Fire Service and
Search organisations say that, for example, even in earthquake
situations or factory blasts they can work okay, I am now confused
whether you really do need on working dogs to dock or not to dock.
I wonder if one or other of you would like to respond to that
to try to give me greater understanding of this particular matter?
Ms Elliott: I think it is because
they used different breeds. The Customs & Excise use English
Springers, which have a very vigorous tail action. If they are
sent into a lorry to look for drugs or whatever their tails, if
they are full tailed, smash against the container and spray blood
everywhere. The Border Collie is not a docked breed anyway, it
has a thick covering of hair on its tail to protect it, and that
is the difference.
Q222 Chairman: So, to adopt the wrong
analogy, in your view it is horses for courses?
Ms Elliott: Yes.
Q223 Chairman: Professor?
Professor Morton: I was going
to try to help because I am not here as a representative, but
I think it depends on the type of work that is being considered,
and my point is that I do not agree with preventive docking because
I think the number of times an animal, even an animal that has
worked, gets a tail injury that needs it to be docked as an adult,
is a very, very small percentage of all those animals that carry
out that activity. So I do not see why we cause harm to 100% of
animals for the sake of 0.01%.
Ms Elliott: Can I just say that
the 0.01% at the moment is because 99% of normally docked dogs
are getting docked. I expect that to go through the roof if we
have to start leaving tails on.
Professor Morton: That has not
happened in places where there is a complete ban, like Sweden
and Norway. One veterinary clinic looked at the incidence of docking
in docked dogs and undocked dogs and their figures did not support
what Ginette is saying. In fact, when you allow for the number
of animals there was no difference in tail injuries between docked
and undocked dogs, and that is the only survey that has been done
in a peer review paper.
Ms Elliott: I was going to say
that we vaccinate our children as a preventative measure. It is
the same sort of thing. We are protecting the dog. I have pictures
in here of maggot infestation.
Q224 Chairman: I hear what you say, but
I do not want to get into child inoculation issues!
Ms O'Dempsey: Can I just say that
obviously there is never going to be a meeting of minds between
each end of the table here, but we would not say it is analogous
with vaccination, we would say it is analogous to chopping someone's
little finger off at an early age just in case they caught it
later in the car door when being taken out of their baby seat.
Q225 Mr Mitchell: To the Anti-Docking
Alliance, first of all. If non-therapeutic docking was included
in the Bill, if it was made illegal, how would it be enforced?
In the past I gather breeders of docked animals went to the vet
to do it in what one would hope would be better conditions and
more safely. If the vets are precluded from doing it and people
still want to do it, are we going to get back street docking?
Ms O'Dempsey: Back street docking
takes place already among people who think that, for example,
a Rottweiler should not have a tail.
Q226 Mr Mitchell: But how are you going
to stamp it out? The dog cannot talk.
Ms O'Dempsey: If there were no
exemptions at all then it would be very clear that any dog born
after a certain date had been illegally docked, whether by a veterinary
surgeon or by a back street docker. If there were any exemptions,
as we understand Defra is currently considering for dogs that
can be proved to be working dogs, then we think that makes it
much greyer, whether a dog has been legally or illegally docked.
So the system that we understand is currently proposed would,
we think, be much harder to enforce than a complete moratorium,
during which proper scientific studies could be carried out, with
peer review, to see whether these injuries in working dogs actually
occurred in the large enough numbers to justify bringing in an
exemption. As David has already said, none of the countries that
have banned docking completely for getting on for 20 years have
felt it necessary to derogate from that ban.
Q227 Mr Mitchell: One final question
from me. What does it matter? It worries me that people get such
religious enthusiasm on both sides of the argument. Why is it
so important?
Ms Elliott: I think the thing
is that the UK breeds the best pedigree dogs in the world. They
are exported all over the world; we have been breeding them for
centuries, top quality dogs. Do we really want to be known as
the generation that spoilt it all?
David Taylor: Does "best" necessarily
equal tailless, then for some breeds?
Joan Ruddock: That is why I asked the
question.
Chairman: That is the message that we
have. Joan Ruddock wants to bring our questioning to a conclusion.
Q228 Joan Ruddock: I wanted to check
with Professor Morton on the evidence coming from Scandinavia
where, as you say, you have 20 or 30 years of experience. Does
that specifically include the breeds that are used here as working
dogs, or are there breeds that they were using as working dogs,
which were docked dogs and are no longer docked dogs?
Professor Morton: To be frank
we do not know because there has been no peer review study published.
All I can talk about is anecdotal evidence that in Sweden particularly
they have commissioned a study to be done comparing the incidence
of tail injuries before the ban and after the ban, and those results
have never been published. If it had been so obvious—there
are many common breeds like the Springer Spaniels that are used
in Sweden and in Britain—I would have thought that we would
have known about that by now, and nothing has been published on
it, and the Swedish government has not reversed their ban at all.
Q229 Joan Ruddock: Presumably, people
must know who has done the study. Why cannot this information
be found?
Professor Morton: Because it is
not there. People are doing studies, studies are being commissioned,
but they have not found any significant results. There has been
no difference before and after the ban, I think is the real reason.
Remember, I am just one person. I might have two or three veterinary
friends; we are trying to get a large number of animals into the
survey so you need to have a more professional study than that.
Could I just make point to Mr Mitchell there? We docked horses
at one point, but do not do that now; we cropped dogs' ears at
one point, and we do not do that in the UK. The Kennel Club stamped
out ear cropping in dogs by refusing to allow people to show them
in the ring.
Chairman: Right. Can I thank both organisations
for your kindness in coming and giving your evidence and for answering
our questions so fully, and may I again reiterate my thanks for
the written evidence which you sent us, it is much appreciated.
Thank you very much.
| 
