Concerning AB 1634—Impacts on Sporting Dogs and their Owners

May 26, 2007

Charles A. Hjerpe, DVM
25258 County Road 95
Davis, CA 95616

Assemblymember Lois Wolk
Capital Office
State Capital
P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA 94249-0008

Dear Assemblymember Wolk:

This letter is written in an attempt to identify the potential impacts of AB 1634 on sporting dogs and their owners in California, their sporting dog organizations, and the sporting dog competitions sponsored by those organizations. I am personally familiar only with the pointing dog breeds, and especially with the English pointer and English setter breeds. However, it is likely that all sporting dog breeds would be similarly affected by AB 1634.

I believe that I am well qualified to assess the potential impacts, given that I have been breeding, raising, training, hunting with, competing in field trials with and judging English pointers and English setters since 1961. To date, I have won 10 field trial Championships and 10 Runnerup Championships with dogs that I have personally developed. I have served continuously, since 1967, as the secretary of the Sacramento Bird Dog Club.  I am also a veterinarian, an emeritus professor of veterinary medicine at UC Davis, and a former director of the UCD Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital. At this point I would like to briefly explain what pointing dog field trials are all about.

Pointing dog field trials are competitive, simulated hunting exhibitions, in which the performances of the competing dogs are evaluated and ranked by judges. The hunting is simulated, in that only blank ammunition is used and no game birds are killed. The dogs are hunted in pairs, usually for periods of time ranging from 30 minutes to 3 hours, depending upon the rules of a particular event. In California, the dogs are hunted for either 30 minutes or 1 hour. Each dog is allowed one handler and one scout, and is observed by one judge. In most of the trials that I attend, handlers, scouts and judges are all mounted on Tennessee Walking Horses. The job of the scouts is to assist in finding dogs that disappear from view and are presumed to be “on point”. The dogs are evaluated by the judges for many attributes, including speed, range, stamina and endurance, running style, hunting pattern, ability to recognize and proceed to hunt in the best game bird habitats, responsiveness to the handler,  scenting ability, bird finding ability, staunchness on point and pointing style. Winning dogs are either ranked first, second and third or Champion and Runnerup Champion, depending on the rules of the particular event.

AB 1634, if it were to become law, would have very serious negative impacts on the California sporting dog scene. The dogs themselves would survive it, except that they would be inferior specimens and there would be a lot fewer of them. It is the California sporting dog owners and their breed and field trial organizations and competitive events that would be adversely impacted. I am listing and discussing these impacts below, in no particular order.

1. To the best of my knowledge, there are no licensed breeders of field-bred English pointers or English setters in California. All puppies of these two breeds are produced by hobbyists, hunters or field trialers, who seldom, if ever, produce more than a litter per year. Consequently, AB 1634 would be expected to greatly reduce the numbers of field-bred, registered English pointer and English setter stud dogs and puppies. Persons wishing to buy a well-bred puppy or breed a bitch to a well-bred stud dog would, in most cases, have to look outside the state. This would entail buying sight unseen, or traveling outside of California, in most cases to Midwestern or southern states. Although these comments refer only to English pointers and English setters, I suspect that the situation with the other sporting dog breeds would not differ greatly from what I have described. I will defer to others with more knowledge of these breeds to confirm or deny this last statement.

2. AB 1634 would increase the expense and hassle associated with obtaining puppies and breeding (impregnating) bitches of all sporting dog breeds. This would be a significant deterrent to people (especially young people) who are considering involvement with sporting dogs and sporting dog field trials. Sporting dog field trialing would, eventually, wither and die, as the recruitment of new participants failed to keep pace with natural attrition.

3. Pointing dog field trialing in California is both a local and a regional (and even a national) activity. This is true with most (if not all) of the sporting dog breeds. This past February, three English pointers from California competed in the National Field Trial Championship at Grand Junction, Tenn. Each year, four open Championship field trials, are conducted in California for the English pointer and English setter breeds. Approximately half of the 25+ dogs entered in these field trials are owned or handled by persons who live outside of California. While I, personally, attend about 10 field trials per year within California, I also regularly attend and compete with my dogs in 9 additional field trials that are held in Arizona, Nevada, Washington state and in Alberta and Saskatchewan, Canada. The point I want to make here is that spayed or neutered California dogs would have to compete with intact dogs from other states. I have a serious concern that spaying and neutering might make the California dogs less competitive.

4. Although competing in and observing sporting dog field trials is healthy outdoor activity and is lots of fun, the real purpose of these contests is the identification of those individual dogs that are most likely to be able to contribute to the improvement of the breed.  If all of the canine participants in field trials were spayed or neutered, at least 75% of the incentive for holding a field trial would have been eliminated. Consequently, it is unlikely that these activities would be able to survive, much less flourish. As a result of all this, the overall quality and performance capability of sporting dogs in California would, undoubtedly, decline.

5. In the 44 years that I have been attending and competing in pointing dog field trials, I know of only one field trial bitch that was spayed. To the best of my knowledge, no castrated male English pointer or English setter has EVER been entered in a field trial, ANYWHERE. If California sporting dog field trialers were to be compelled to begin spaying and neutering their field trial dogs, they would become UNWILLINGLY engaged in a colossal, COMPULSORY, uncontrolled RESEARCH project in which the outcome could NOT be predicted.

6. Field trial quality English pointers and English setters are amazingly athletic and beautiful animals. Some of the top dogs in the nation have sold for as much as $100,000, and selling prices ranging between $25,000 and $35,000 are standard for young dogs that can win the most prestigious national field trials. Should any of these magnificent animals be rendered non-competitive as a result of these compulsory surgical procedures, WHO should be held financially responsible? Assemblyman Levine? The California legislature? The California Veterinary Medical Association? The Governor? The State of California? The veterinarians who performed the surgery?

To what extent, if any, would the field trial performance capabilities of our English pointer and English setter bird dogs (as well as those of the other sporting dog breeds) be adversely affected by spaying and neutering? Since I am, honestly, unable to answer that question, let me turn this around, and let me ask THE READER some questions:

If Michael Jordan had been castrated, do you believe that he would have been able to jump as high as he did and be as great a basketball player as he was?

If John Elway had been castrated, do you believe that he would have been able to throw a football as fast or far as he was able to?

If Nolan Ryan had been castrated, do you believe that he would have been able to pitch 7 no hitters and strike out 5,714 batters?

If Barry Bonds has been castrated, do you believe that he would have been able to hit 745 home runs (without taking any steroids)?

If Lance Armstrong had had BOTH of his testicles surgically removed, do you believe that he would have been able to win the Tour de France 7 times in succession?

How many geldings and mares have ever won the Kentucky Derby? The Preakness? The Belmont? The Triple Crown?

Is a gelding ever as intelligent as a stallion?

All other things being equal, is a steer ever as strong as a bull?

If your answer to 6 or more of the 8 questions above was “yes”, then I can, probably, put you in contact with someone who has a bridge that they would like to sell you!

Sincerely,

Charles A. Hjerpe, DVM