Gundog Training Forum

I was thinking recently about the row that ensued! Gawd knows why as nobody likes every single line and its a free Country so no reason why you shouldn't state your opinion.

Judy wrote:I was thinking recently about the row that ensued! Gawd knows why as nobody likes every single line and its a free Country so no reason why you shouldn't state your opinion.

Anyone is allowed an opinion on here, as long as it's the same as Judy's

I never stopped you stating your opinions, TJ, I might not have agreed with them, I might have mentioned that I didn't agree with them but didn't stop you posting them now did I?

not wilfully fanning the flames but if the TS can do this based on 48 out of 50 puppy buyers from the breeder then surely it can be sorted one way or the other so that people can cut their cloth accordingly.

I hope its all smoke and mirrors and a spiteful grievance as the effects of this could in essence tarnish most modern day breeding programmes, which would be a crying shame for the worlds best gun dog.

http://www.tradingstandards.uk/extra/ne ... ewsid/1596

The problem with these DNA tests folk are using is the validity of them. I emailed the company and asked to see the names of the dogs which they have based their Cocker spaniel profile on. They wouldn't provide it.

They said they were TYPICALLY registered dogs, which to me means that some of them aren't registered Cockers and probably they have used a DNA sample that someone has sent in believing they have a Cocker to build the profile.

They also said that the test can't be used to validate a pure bred dog, only give an indication of its likely ancestry.

If their DNA profile has a significant number of sprockets which were assumed to.be Cockers by the owners which sent their DNA in, then we could potentially just be testing a sprocker against a sprocker without knowing the kc names of the dogs used to build the profile. The test gets sent to America for analysis which also adds more uncertainty for me.

The only way to clear it up is to DNA profile all dogs and their parents and start from scratch. The costs associated with that are prohibitive I'd imagine.

Compulsory microchip scanning at trials should happen in my opinion as it would take the club sec or steward of the beat 5 minutes at the start of a trial

Amberquest wrote: Compulsory microchip scanning at trials should happen in my opinion as it would take the club sec or steward of the beat 5 minutes at the start of a trial

What are they going to check the microchip number against?

PERCE wrote:

Amberquest wrote: Compulsory microchip scanning at trials should happen in my opinion as it would take the club sec or steward of the beat 5 minutes at the start of a trial

What are they going to check the microchip number against?

The Kc must now register the microchiped number when pup is registered, it surley cannot be beyond the wit of Man to be able to match up a Kc registered dog and a microchip number, can't?

DR its still optional, I registered 2 yesterday.

Perce, there have been allegations regarding some people running a different dog to that entered in the Trial, at least a quick scan would put that one to bed, and not done in the car park but at the start of the dog's run.

romanriver wrote:DR its still optional, I registered 2 yesterday.

This is the problem, untill the Kc grow a pair this problem will carry on, make it compulsory, get the problem sorted, prosecute for fraud the people that breed sprockers and sell and run them as cockers and let Platty judge the championship.