Perhaps this belongs in the NAAFI but

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by ugly, Jan 9, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    Today I will be complaining to the BEEB about the one sided reporting on radio 5 regarding Tail docking and the animal welfare bill!
    So angry what with that and the scum suckers blithering on about Banks was enough to make me put on a cassette of regimental music. My radio is knackered in the car, no ariel and can only recieve LW so for a 4 & 1/2 hr drive I am tortured by Nicky I love my own voice Campbell (was he a PTI?).
     
  2. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    A copy of the text in the body of my complaint!

    This morning on radio 5 there was a "vet" interviewed regarding tail docking and the Animal Welfare bill! Not only did she fail to give any scientific or even pseudo scientific information to back up her liberal prejudice but Nicky Campbell was almost coaching the answers from her. Where was the balanced debate? It is held is it not that all claims against persons or organisations (in this case inferrence to the council of docked breeds and a small minority of vets) made on BBC news are to be allowed an opportunity to respond in the same news piece?
    Why was this not done? This is an example of the worst sort of Tabloid sensational journalism that we have a right to be saved from. I demand that the program makers put this right. The BBC Vet claimed this was a massive problem yet in the same sentence claimed only a small number of vets were doing this. Is she right or wrong?
    Please get a grip of this, this is appalling in the standards of journalism. If only a small number of vets are doing this then can this be proven with figures or are all dog breeders as inferred from her ridiculous comments breaking the law and doing the docking themselves?
     
  3. Whilst i am mainly on the side of the 'non-docking' argument (ie i would only advocate it where needed on working dogs, not for showing etc), i must whole-heartedly agree with you ugly about the poor standard of reporting that was to been witnessed in that particular feature. The Beeb is allegedly an impartial organisation that aims to present the news without imparting a political view.

    Keep them to their promises!
     
  4. ViroBono

    ViroBono LE Moderator

    I heard about this on the Today programme on the Home Service. The report referred to 90% of vets being against tail docking, and called for the practice to be banned.

    What I don't understand is this: why is legislation needed if so many vets are against performing tail docking for cosmetic reasons? Why don't they, as professional, independent practitioners, simply refuse to do it? If research shows it to be unnecessary, then the relevant professional committee of the BVA can instruct vets to stop carrying out the procedure.

    If there is concern that dog breeders are doing it themselves, presumably existing legislation covers it already, and the RSPCA has enforcement powers. Calling for a ban is sooo New Labour.
     
  5. Perhaps its because they can charge a kings ransom to carry out the procedure..Even vets aren't stupid enough to throw away good money on scruples !!
     
  6. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    RSPCA has no powers beyond reporting offences. They are not even allowed access to private property! The issue here is that Vets will only do this for working breeds in my experience and in my opinion quite rightly! The ban it all brigade at work using sensationalism to get there own ends. I will be emailing my MP regarding this as I feel the existing laws are adequate and need to be correctly enforced. Remeber firearms legislation and hunting. So much scientific evidence on display?
     
  7. ViroBono

    ViroBono LE Moderator

    This had occurred to me. I suspect that a another reason will be the loss of fees not from docking but from other work they'll lose as a consequence. How much easier to 'blame the ban'.
     
  8. ViroBono

    ViroBono LE Moderator

    You are quite correct. What I meant to say was that that they do bring prosecutions. Where cruelty is suspected they and the police will usually work together and I see no reason to change the situation.
     
  9. Cutaway

    Cutaway LE Reviewer

    Moved from the Int Cell

    Bunny Huggers Tail of woe.

    news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3891119.stm

    The radio has just enlarged on the content of the above link, saying that the RSPCA are to push the government to ban the docking of dogs tails.

    The RSPCA claim that "three people out of four in the UK are against the practice."
    They've not said if these results have just been received, nor have I heard them quoted before.

    Is this just another example of the New RSPCA trying to enforce some of their weirder ideas or is it really a subject that 75% of the electorate are against after being presented with all the relevant information and coming to an informed decision ?
     
  10. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    Jackie Ballard Boss of the RSPCA has stated that now Hunting with dogs is Outlawed that Game shooting is next. What a class war b*tch.
    What is of concern is that registered charities are carrying out political activities and using tax free donations to do so! They have laid of loads od staff to fund their new campaign!
    If because I dock my tails (my vet does it for me) as they are working dogs and I am one of the 1 out of 4 in favour am I a minority and entitled to protection in law?
     
  11. No, you're an unfashionable minority and thus subject to persecution.
     
  12. Cutaway

    Cutaway LE Reviewer

    Like you think you can claim to have rights in Bliar's Britain...?
     
  13. I understood that vets could opt out of docking although, as docking was not compulsary, I didn't see why they needed to opt out of it. My GSP has torn her stumpy little tail quite a few times (we have juniper where we live). I suppose they will be content when owners have a training accident early on in dogs life and reduction is needed. Thus, the do gooders, create liars of owners, inflict suffering at third hand upon dogs and do not achieve anything anyway.
    As for the opinions of high rise flat dwellers in the middle of a big city, how many had the procedure and alternatives explained? I'll bet there was a Chinese Whisper involving rubber bands. I'd far rather have my dog trimmed when a pup rather than tail torn away when a long way from any vet services. Oh - of course - I shouldn't be allowed a dog anyway. 'Nasty things make children blind Chinese Whisper' totally disregarding the main purpose of my annual shots.
     
  14. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    ORC I couldnt agree more, my last 2 litters have had both sorts of docking, the visiting vet applied the lambing ring to our springers at day 3 and the single cocker was surgically done within an hour of being delivered by caesarian. Neither of which I have any comment on beyond the fact that despite all the brambles my 6 spaniels tear through in search of game none have yet had to recieve treatment for tail tip damage. Most of my possessions have survived the tail swipe attack at coffeee table by tail and everyone is a happy bunny, apart from the ones pegged by my bitch!
     
  15. In two minds about docking though as ORC and Ugly say for some breeds and situations it can save the dog from injury. Though tail related injuries are still probably a rare occurance. Most of it just goes on imo for purely cosmetic sakes. I brought my dog from a breeder and express instructions were given (to which he agreed) about not docking the tail. The breed in question (Schipperkes) have spitz tails and so there was little chance of his tail getting in anythings way - however the Breeder still docked the tail on the grounds he 'wouldn't have looked like an English Schipperke'.
    I just think that if there is a reason for it - by all means dock the tail but for cosmetic sakes I think no.
    But I think such a decision should be left to the owners.