Supplementary memorandum submitted by
the Council of Docked Breeds
With reference to our meeting with the select
committee on Wednesday 8 September. Unfortunately, as it unexpectedly
started and finished early I was unable to submit further evidence
as planned and we are somewhat concerned that as expected, the
docking of dogs tails is one of the major issues in the bill,
neither we nor the committee have had the time to explore the
matter in depth.
I am posting copies of a docking film for the
committee and would ask that you reassure them that even the
most squeamish among them will see nothing that could be considered
offensive even to a child and has been shown on national daytime
television. It is a bloodless, animal husbandry procedure as performed
by breeders prior to 1993 and now a few vets use this method on
request. Please ask that they observe the demeanour of the Dam
(mother) of the pups, as her reaction to the procedure will speak
for itself. Although words and music have been added to the film
to make it a promotional item, I do still have the original.
I also enclose a letter from Quinton L Laham
Professor of Microbiology at the University of Toronto on anatomy
and movement [not printed].
You will recall that in oral evidence the RSPCA
made reference to Defra guidance notes as though these should
be regarded as authorities (the accuracy of which is disputed
by both ourselves and Vets for Docking.) Also Professor Morton
introduced on the subject of pain tentative research much of which
we believe relates to other species at a more advanced stage of
maturity than a three day whelp ie human.
More disturbing however, is a communication
I have received regarding Defras' review of the scientific
aspects and veterinary opinions relating to tail docking in dogs,
aspects of pain in dogs 6.3 wherein is the critically important
statement ". . . and whilst animals may show different signs
of pain (Fleeman 1995) it is clear they do feel pain in the same
way as man and the pain threshold has been determined to be the
same in both dog and man (Fleeman 1995)" The brackets and
dates implies a scientific reference meaning that person has obtained
and published scientific evidence of the matters being stated.
Professor J R S Hales Biomedical Research Professor, Faculty of
Medicine, Uni. Sydney; Chief Research Scientist, Division of Animal
Physiology/Production, CSIRO recently contacted Dr Fleeman for
clarification of her study to be told that she has never carried
out any scientific research whatsoever on this subject, therefore
this must put a question mark over the whole evidence.
As our meeting with the Select Committee was
cut short, we were unable to advise them of the most important
statement as follows: The one consideration we would ask the committee
to keep uppermost in their minds is this is an Animal Welfare
Bill and the Draft makes great play of its intention to be pro
active in preventing animal suffering and placing on owners the
obligation to safeguard their present and future welfare. Its
first flagship Act is to prevent dog breeders from doing just
that! If we fail to protect our animals in the best way we know,
then we will, by the stand of the Act, be committing an offence.
Breeders cannot protect their dogs' future welfare without the
docking option.
14 September 2004
| 
