Facebook

[Springfield Pointers]

And this is why I find Trialling so unpalatable. People who think that they have the monopoly on common sense. They forget that it's about dogs, not people. When that balance is lost, the breed will suffer.

[trekmoor]

I'm just sorry that the bad feelings about this matter seem to have spilled over into this forum. I recognise that offended parties feel a need to express their feelings somewhere . Since they either got kicked off or resigned from the forum where this matter first caused problems, they cannot do it there - -- - but I wouldn't like to see this forum be badly disrupted by something that few of it's members even know about.

Wullie

[westcountry]

I was denied access to the proper cocker FB group from the start,strange as I am not controversial or have any strong allegiance to either side of the argument. Therefore I have no access to what was said about David and the 3Ts. I do however feel it is very improper to implicate a field trial society and its committee in any form of malpractice. I also fail to see how one particular venue can be any harder to win at than another,unless the terrain doesnt suit your particular dog. I would not hesitate to run mine at any venue. The 3Ts has a great on line entry system that I feel should be emulated by all clubs and societies.
From the outside looking in ,it seems to me that what started as a well meaning group aiming to keep the integrity of the breed pure has ultimately caused more harm than good,albeit unintentionally. The cocker breeders are split into factions which is not good. Especially as cocker trials struggle for entries as it is with many being cancelled due to lack of interest. I keep threatening to get a couple of cockers but the way things are we will bide our time.

[Naj]

Well said. I’d not hesitate to get another cocker again if I had the rabbit numbers that I once enjoyed. I was into Cockers long before the current fad for them and have had old fashioned plainer actioned types and the faster, flashier trial types and they’ve all made great shooting dogs.

Naj

[Judy]

I'm just sorry that the bad feelings about this matter seem to have spilled over into this forum. I recognise that offended parties feel a need to express their feelings somewhere . Since they either got kicked off or resigned from the forum where this matter first caused problems, they cannot do it there - -- - but I wouldn't like to see this forum be badly disrupted by something that few of it's members even know about.

Wullie

In many ways I agree, Bill, I did think carefully about it before posting but some things are way too important to ignore.
The whole Cocker / Sprocker thing seems to be being driven by a very few people who are not keen on anyone querying anything. This should be out in the open for the good of the breed, geneticists should be involved, the KC should be involved, parentage tests should be done and yet any suggestion of any of the things which might help have been ignored and everything comes back to a few Wisdom tests and Wisdom themselves say the tests are a bit of fun and they wont stand by their results. People are being very secretive when its something that, in one way or another, affects everyone with a Cocker. So many rumours so much angst, get it out into the open and get it sorted properly or not but things can't go on as they are because all credibility is being lost which is a shame.

[trekmoor]

I do think that if a trial is labelled as being a cocker trial no breed that is not a cocker should run in it. If someone knowingly runs a sprocker in cocker trials then he is being dishonest whether his dog is any damned good or not.

Trialing is, however , a very expensive sport and I would not enter cocker trials if I had to go to the extra expense and trouble of having my dog's DNA tested first !

I don't know nearly enough about dna etc. to argue about this subject with anyone , all I can say is thank god I am never likely to trial my cocker ! If I had a sprocker that worked well I would be very pleased to own it but I would not trial it or breed from it . The first of these would be dishonest, the second would be far too uncertain in terms of the quality of the pups even if I publicly stated that my dog was a sprocker prior to breeding from it.


What will happen following any K.C. investigation into this squabble is very uncertain ! The K.C. is dominated by interested parties too.

Wullie

[Sgurr]

I don't have a Cocker but as the main accusations seem to have been levelled at a trialler/breeder also deeply involved with Springers, I've just taken the view that all pedigree information depends on the honesty of the breeder. Accepting that what is past is past, all I can do as an honest breeder is to ensure that pups from me can be traced to sire, dam and grandparents (the latter wherewhere possible) by DNA profiling. If The Kennel Club would require DNA Profiling before Registration, as clubs more concerned with the intergrity of their Registry have done so, then at least the recent breedings would be transparent and people could move on from there, whatever their persuasion on 'Cockergate'. DNA Profiling is £30 from Animal Health Trust, it is for determining parentage, not breed. Just as a note, the Wisdom Test has been used recently in a UK court to help convict a breeder making false claims about pups breeding.

[Naj]

I totally agree and commend your own decision on this, dna profiling is the logical way forward.

It’s also been suggested that identity chips are scanned as the leash comes off the dog in a trial but there’s been great resistance against that simple precaution. People don’t seem to like change no matter how well intentioned.

Wullie, I’m sure that everybody would agree with you that anybody knowingly running a sprocker in a cocker trial is blatantly dishonest but the issue is that there’s been a lot of mud slinging and unfounded accusations against a certain individual, who everybody admits, including those making the accusations, doesn’t need to cheat in order to win, but so far there has been absolutely no conclusive proof of any wrong doing.

Naj

[trekmoor]

there’s been a lot of mud slinging and unfounded accusations against a certain individual, who everybody admits, including those making the accusations, doesn’t need to cheat in order to win, but so far there has been absolutely no conclusive proof of any wrong doing.

Naj

Then until there is conclusive proof, leave that individual alone. Nobody should be put on trial by an internet site.

Wullie

[Plainsman]

there’s been a lot of mud slinging and unfounded accusations against a certain individual, who everybody admits, including those making the accusations, doesn’t need to cheat in order to win, but so far there has been absolutely no conclusive proof of any wrong doing.

Naj

Then until there is conclusive proof, leave that individual alone. Nobody should be put on trial by an internet site.

Wullie

Exactly right. Lots of rumour, lots of “oh trialling people have known for years” lots of DNA tests done by individuals with no serious level of independent verification sent to a firm that will not stand up for its own tests in court. No real evidence that will stand up in court and one breed whose future and reputation has been destroyed along with a successful trainers reputation. All on the back of an internet campaign that looks more and more like an advertisement designed to bolster one persons bank account. Bloody shameful.