Barrie

Wild bird..... I'm afraid there appears to be more than a little confusion here. There's not a vet in the country who would dock your pup once it gets past 5 days old, it would be illegal for them to do so and they would most certainly lose their license to practice. It should have been done at between 3 and 5 days of age. The only exception to that would be, if it was necessarily performed in order to treat an existing injury (typically a tail injury). Other completely unrelated procedures such as spaying etc do not feature in the equation. I hope this helps clarify matters - Barrie

Hopefully these few old pictures and some of recollections from my early teens (the late 1950’s and early 1960’s) may be of some interest. They’re all old style “rag whippets” and pre date the requirement for a whippet to be registered with the Kennel Club in order to enter a race. Typically these dogs ran from about 14-20 lbs (sometimes smaller) and anything past say the mid 20’s would be questioned as to whether it was actually a true whippet (rather than maybe a whippet x greyhound). At that time, my father ran a “drinkers pub” in the heart of the Black Country (aka the Industrial Midlands). In the main it was frequented by steelworkers and almost exclusively those of the “sporting variety”. If you were known to have a genuine interest in Whippets, Staffords, Poultry or Pigeons then you were always made to feel welcome. But if not, you’d have very little in common with the regulars and be treated with a fair degree of suspicion. For as long as I can remember, this photograph always hung above the fireplace in the bar and that would be at least 60 years back and beyond. In those days the whippets ran in straight lines between strings and without muzzles, if they crossed out of their lane they were immediately disqualified, but rarely did. They were all hand slipped and ran to a rag waved by their owner at the end of the track. With hand slipping, you listened for the gun to go off and as soon as it did the dog would be flung through the air and hit the ground running. It was literally a “flying start”, very much an art in itself and it was often said that a good slipper could make you a yard to begin. So determined were these little dogs and so fierce their hatred for the “rag”, they would take hold of it in full flight. And in order to prevent them injuring themselves, the “rag man” would have to follow them through, swing them through the air still latched on and catch them under their arm (once again an art in itself). Before each race the dogs were publicly weighed by the Weighing Steward and then handicapped in accordance with the old “yards for pounds rule”, where for example a 19lb dog would be given a one yard start over a dog weighing 20lbs and so on. At that time there was none of this “handicapping on performance”, where a poorly performing dog was given a “fair chance” to beat something undeniably better. In my day, the weighing in process was normally carried out using an old fashioned balance scale which I always knew as a “Steelyard”. This was always carried out in complete silence, the only person who spoke was the Weighing Steward and anyone foolish enough to do otherwise was automatically viewed as “attempting to influence the Steward” and ran the very real risk of receiving immediate rough justice right there and then. “Old Jack”, my father’s mentor and benefactor, weighing a dog with the same “steelyards” I have at home today. My Dad was given a bitch pup by “Old Jack’s” son Joe, a very close friend and a man who’d inherited all the talents of his father. Throughout my entire life I only ever knew any of them to “gift” dogs, and then only to people who had earned their trust (not a mean feat in itself). Around the same time, a brand new soft drink was launched and as a Publican my father was being bombarded with advertising literature and requests to stock it. The drink was called Tango and that’s what they named the pup. “Tango” made 19.5lbs and earned herself a bit of a reputation. Between them they’d always had good dogs and were definitely “the ones to beat”, but this bitch was that little bit special and to plenty that were about at that time she was viewed as the best that there was. In fact so confident were Dad and his mates in that bitch and their ability to present her properly, that they had a challenge out to run any dog in the country, yards for pounds, over 120 yards, for a decent side stake of anything up to a maximum of £100 a side. When you consider just how long ago that was and the fact they were only ordinary working men, that was a lot of confidence to have, particularly when you consider I’d be about 13 or 14 at the time and when I started my first job at 17 my first week’s wages was £3/4s/2d (that’s about £3.21p in modern day money). Now before anyone shoots me down, I’m not saying there weren’t other good dogs about at that time (in fact there were plenty), or that there weren’t any which might have been able to beat her. But what I can say with my hand on my heart and 100% certainty is that of the handful or so which rose to the challenge, no one ever walked away with the purse. My apologies for banging on a bit, but once I’d found out these old photos the memories just came flooding back too. Y.I.S. and with the greatest respect for those no longer with us – Barrie P.S. I remember seeing a letter from a famous Hollywood actor who was very well known for keeping Staffords. It was a letter to “Old Jack” inviting him to America and offering to set him up with a house and pay him whatever he wished to “look after the dogs”. When his friends and family asked him what he was planning to do, his reply was “Why the f*** would I want to go to America, I don’t know anybody over there” and he really did mean it. They certainly don’t make ‘em like that any more.

My apologies and I agree it does look a bit bad.... Originally it was one of the Tony B'Liar set of posters we did for the Marches and Demos, but the THL Avatar gizmo seems to crop it down and mainly leaves his sickly grin Kindest Regards - Barrie

Two Crows, I fully appreciate what you’re saying and that your not advocating that we do nothing either. Nor do I have any doubts about whether you’ve done your fair share in the past and I take my hat off to you for that too. But with all due respect, I have to disagree with you about us not being able to change or influence things, and if I might I’ll give you one such example of several, which as a terrierman is very close to my heart. The Animal Welfare Act 2006 covers amongst many other things tail docking. This proposed Bill was at a very advanced stage, it had had gone through all the various processes, public consultation, written submissions, committee hearings etc, etc and had now reached the “Government White Paper” stage. For those not familiar with the term, “White Papers” are defined as being “Policy documents produced by the Government that set out their proposals for future legislation. They are often published as Command Papers and may include a draft version of a Bill that is being planned”. In my world that translates as “Discussions are all over, this is what we’re doing.” Following on from the publication of the White Paper, the NWTF attended a meeting in London with DEFRA officials, alongside a range of other interested parties from all sides, which from memory included RSPCA, LACS, BASC, CA, Kennel Club, the British Veterinary Association and others. The meeting opened with us being told “The Minister (Elliot Morley) was totally opposed to cosmetic mutilation, but also recognised there were very genuine reasons, based upon animal welfare grounds, why certain breeds of gundogs should be exempted from the Bill’s proposed tail docking ban.” That meant everything else was out of the frame, including working terriers. I won’t bore you with the blow by blow details, but what I will say is that during that meeting the NWTF put forward a very strong case why working terriers should also be exempt. That was the Tuesday, that night when we got home there was an email thanking us for our contribution and inviting to a further meeting in London on the Thursday. On Thursday we were informed working terrier would also be exempt from the ban. I’m not suggesting we can win every battle and I know we’ve all had our setbacks, but it’s a fact that you’ll never know unless you try. J.M.H.O. - Barrie P.S. It's not as if I've nothing better to do with my time, my garage clear out is now 24 years overdue (as I was reminded this morning) P.P.S. I found this document in the Scottish Parliament archives, it's pretty much the same arguments we put forward in relation to tail docking at the meeting with DEFRA. Unfortunately in Scotland we were less successful, but at least we gave it a shot. http://www.parliament.scot/S5_Environment/Meeting Papers/050_National_Working_Terrier_Federation.pdf

What we have on the table is a Bill which clearly states that amongst other things it proposes to…. Protect foxes and hares in law. End the hunting of all wild mammals with dogs. Remove all the current exceptions to the offence of hunting wild mammals with dogs. Make it an offence to “search for, stalk, flush, chase, pursue or course” a wild mammal with a dog. Make the landowner who gives permission for hunting on his/her land vicariously liable for any offences committed (so that’s any permission you had gone). Reverse the burden of proof and put the onus on the defendent to show that their actions fell within an exception to the ban (and they’ve already stated their intention to remove all the current exceptions). So unlike murderers, rapists, paedophiles, grooming gangs, drug dealers, terrorists and other pillars of society who are all presumed to be “innocent until proven guilty”, the reverse will apply to us and we’ll be presumed to be guilty from the very outset and face the onerous task of attempting to prove that we’re not. Increase the maximum penalty for hunting a wild mammal with a dog to a £40,000 fine or 5 years imprisonment. Increase the time limit for bringing prosecutions The Government have asked for your views on these proposals and make no mistake it’s not going to go away. Yet there are “dog men” advocating that we say and do nothing, that’s regardless of the fact that every anti in the country will be writing in supporting these proposals and saying they don’t go far enough. If you think you're f****d now, then you ain't seen nothing yet. You'd best start taking some relaxation classes, cos you're on the verge of being "spit roasted" as well !!! I think I’m going back to bed, I feel a "no sex" headache coming on LOL

Very much so In fact last time I checked, top of the opinion polls was that I was "A Sick B*****d" (the antis), followed very closely by "A Lazy Git" (her indoors)

The proposed Bill as it stands today only relates to Scotland, but we have all seen the results of the "domino effect" where a new piece of legislation in one part of the U.K. is presented as "an improvement in animal welfare" and then promoted elsewhere. With regards to responses. The Scottish Parliament very recently engaged in another public consultation regarding their very own and long awaited Bonomy Review. Their proposal was (and to the best of my knowledge still is), to extend the current Hunting Act in Scotland way beyond Bonomy's recommendations and contrary to the report's actual recommendations, impose a limit of TWO hounds when flushing foxes to guns as per in England and Wales (see what I mean about the domino effect). In actual fact Bonomy was very specific and spoke out quite strongly against such a move. Their justification for over ruling and ignoring Bonomy was that it was "due to overwhelming public demand". What they didn't say was that much of that demand (in fact a significant majority) was from outside of Scotland, it was from elsewhere in the U.K. and even beyond. It's a mistake not to be repeated and as the old saying goes "what's good for the goose is good for the gander". I hope that's of some help - Barrie

Ugly..... maybe Stupid.... never !!!!

As I see it you have 2 choices in this life. You can either stand up and fight for those things which you claim to care passionately about. Or you can take the easy option of sitting back and doing nothing. At least that way, when the time comes, all you have to do is roll over and throw in the towel. Personally I know which I'd rather do, but we each make our own choices in life.

No offence intended...., but you're the one advocating we sit back, do nothing and let an Anti MP get away with doing whatever she chooses without offering any form of resistance. But nevertheless I won't insult you by suggesting you might be an anti and I don't think you are, otherwise I would say so. As regards my credentials, I've been around and on here for more than a little while. There are plenty who do know me and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out who I am, either on here or in real life (that includes the antis and I've a wonderful collection of hate mail just to prove it). My only reason for starting this thread was to ensure that what I considered might be "like minded individuals" were aware of what was afoot and that they had an opportunity to make their opposing views known. From there on in it's a matter of personal choice and I'll simply leave it at that. Y.I.S. - Barrie

And if that's your excuse for sitting back and doing nothing, while the antis take away the few remaining freedoms you have. Or if it helps in some way to salve your conscience, then that's your own personal choice. Just don't complain afterwards that no one was prepared to listen. The only people who benefit from the "I'm doing bugger all attitude" are the antis and it's a big contributing factor to us being where we are today. Dislike them we may AND I DO, but if nothing else you have to admire them for their commitment. It wouldn't hurt now and again for some of us to take a leaf out of their book and fight back, instead of doing their work for them. If "this country is knackered", that's just what happens when you sit back, do nothing and aren't prepared to defend, or fight for what you believe in. J.M.H.O. - Barrie

The proposed Bill as it stands today only relates to Scotland, but we have all seen the results of the "domino effect" where a new piece of legislation in one part of the U.K. is presented as "progress in animal welfare" and then promoted elsewhere. With regards to responses. The Scottish Parliament very recently engaged in another public consultation regarding their very own and long awaited Bonomy Review. Their proposal was (and to the best of my knowledge still is), to extend the current Hunting Act in Scotland way beyond Bonomy's recommendations and contrary to the report's recommendations, impose a limit of TWO hounds when flushing foxes to guns as per in England and Wales (see what I mean about the domino effect). In actual fact Bonomy was very specific and spoke out quite strongly against such a move. Their justification for over ruling and ignoring Bonomy was that it was "due to overwhelming public demand". What they didn't say was that much of that demand (in fact a significant majority) was from outside of Scotland, it was from elsewhere in the U.K. and even beyond. It's a mistake not to be repeated and as the old saying goes "what's good for the goose is good for the gander". Kindest Regards - Barrie

For anyone who has concerns about including their name and address I would stress, that this is a Government based survey of your views and opinions on what's being proposed (nothing more and nothing less). Because it includes personal data it must and will be registered under Data Protection Legislation and as such your privacy is protected and guaranteed by Law. What individuals choose to do, or not do, is their own personal choice, that's between them and their conscience. But you can be certain that our opponents will be doing just that, along with their grandmother and no doubt the cat next door too. Barrie

For anyone who has concerns about including their name and address I would stress, that this is a Government based survey of your views and opinions on what's being proposed (nothing more and nothing less). Because it includes personal data it must and will be registered under Data Protection Legislation and as such your privacy is protected and guaranteed by Law. What individuals choose to do, or not do, is their own personal choice, that's between them and their conscience. But you can be certain that our opponents will be doing just that, along with their grandmother and no doubt the cat next door too. Barrie

For anyone who has concerns about including their name and address I would stress, that this is a Government based survey of your views and opinions on what's being proposed (nothing more and nothing less). Because it includes personal data it must and will be registered under Data Protection Legislation and as such your privacy is protected and guaranteed by Law. What individuals choose to do, or not do, is their own personal choice, that's between them and their conscience. But you can be certain that our opponents will be doing just that, along with their grandmother and no doubt the cat next door too. Barrie