MINUTES OF THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON THE WELFARE ISSUES OF DOG
BREEDING
Minutes of meeting No 10 held at the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons,
Horseferry Road, London on Tuesday 15 May 2012
Present:
Sheila Crispin (Chairman)
Lesley Bloomfield
Rachel Casey
Cathryn Mellersh
Mike Radford
David Sargan
Also attending:
Heather Peck (Secretary)
Agenda Item 1
1. Apologies for absence had been received from Lisa Collins, Chris Laurence, Lisa
McCaulder and Clare Rusbridge. The Chairman welcomed all members to the meeting
and expressed the gratitude of the Council to the Royal College for their kind hospitality.
Agenda Item 2 – Declarations of Interest
2. There were no new declarations of interest.
Agenda Item 3 – Minutes of the previous meeting
3. The minutes of the previous meeting were formally approved and signed.
Agenda Item 4 – matters arising from the minutes
4. Paper AC 67 refers. In addition the following updates on projects were provided.
a. With regard to launching the standard, it was noted that CL had
undertaken to draft a press release and that it was planned to enlist the
support of stakeholders in the launch. It was agreed that stakeholders
should be contacted to seek their endorsement and commitment to
circulating the standard, and a launch date agreed. The possibility of
inviting them to add logos was discussed and favoured.
ACTION SECRETARY
b. It was also agreed that the Kennel Club should be asked what their
timescale was for the gap analysis between the Assured Breeders
Scheme and the Council standard for dog breeding.
c. Members were reminded to let CL have any final comments on SoPs as
soon as possible.
ACTION ALL
d. With regard to the research project, it was reported that there were
indications that there might still be a possibility of funding from Dogs Trust.
It was agreed that DS should seek a meeting with David Argyll.
ACTION DS
e. It was also agreed that copies of the Bateson Report should be supplied to
the RCVS library. ACTION SECRETARY
f. In a discussion on the seminar, LB circulated a schematic of what she
thought breed health coordinators needed. A number of areas which would
be helpful were listed, including the role of the coordinator, awareness of
the health and welfare issues involved, and how to carry out a breed
health survey. It was agreed that two seminars might be preferable, one
identifying what the coordinators wanted, and the second seeking to
respond to their identified requirements. It was agreed that in the meeting
with the Kennel Club later that day, members would seek to identify what
they planned to include in their September seminar, and how the Council
might help in a way that would also address Council priorities. The
possibility of a follow-up seminar would also be explored. [NB the note of
the meeting with the KC is attached to these minutes].
g. The Secretary undertook to circulate the revised guidance on a Puppy
Health Check. ACTION SECRETARY
h. The revised paper on the first eight priorities was noted and it was agreed
it should be sent to the Animal Health and Welfare Board for England
(AHWBE) and placed on the front page of the new website.
i. Website – all members praised the work done by Henny van den Berg and
her very generous offer to manage the site. It was agreed that some
discussion was necessary to agree the way forward, particularly with
regard to the management of the Members Only page to which the
Secretary should have access. ACTION SECRETARY TO SET UP A
SKYPE DISCUSSION BETWEEN HERSELF, DS AND HENNY.
Agenda Item 5 - Chairman’s Report
5. Paper AC 67 refers. The Chairman also provided feedback from the Animal
Welfare Forum, where examples had been quoted of serious welfare breaches in
cattle showing including inappropriate use of steroids, water restriction followed
by excessive ( and forcible) water consumption. It was noted that what RC
termed “Vanity by proxy” was a problem across many species of animals. The
need for the veterinary profession to become engaged in inspections at shows
was noted. The Chairman undertook to share the synopsis of the Forum with
Members when available. ACTION CHAIRMAN.
Agenda Item 6 – Expenditure Report.
6. Paper AC 69 was noted. In addition the Secretary reported that the further
funding contribution from the PDSA had been received and Blue Cross had
stated that their contribution would be received shortly. The Council recorded its
gratitude to both.
Agenda Item 7 – 2012/13 Programme
7. In addition to the progress reports already made under matters arising, the
following were noted.
a. It was agreed that at the July meeting, the identification of the next (8?)
priorities for the Council’s attention would be discussed. ACTION ALL
MEMBERS TO CONSIDER AND PREPARE FOR THE DISCUSSION.
b. With regard to the review of legislation, it was agreed that for the moment
priority needed to be given to Council responses to the Wales and
England consultations. A response to Wales would be circulated before
the end of the week and when submitted the final version of the Council’s
standard would be included. ACTION MR AND THE SECRETARY.
c. On microchipping, it was agreed that the Council would respond in favour
of permanent identification, with microchipping being the current default
method of identificaton. Members expressed their disappointment that
microchipping had been linked so firmly to action on dangerous dogs,
rather than in the wider context of what microchipping could achieve for all
dogs. ACTION MR TO DRAFT
d. Further discussion of the comprehensive review of legislation was
postponed to the July meeting.
e. RC confirmed that she would provide a discussion paper on the proposed
research project on the heritability of temperament for the July meeting.
Date of next meeting
8. The next meeting will be on 31 July at the Animal Welfare Trust, Newmarket.
9. The meeting closed at 1200.