The British Veterinary Association has responded to the Scottish Government's latest animal welfare measures, which include a ban on wild animals in travelling circuses and legislation to permit tail shortening for spaniels and hunt point retrievers intended for use as working dogs.

BVA Scottish Branch President Grace Webster said: "We commend the Scottish Government on seizing the opportunity to improve animal welfare through the introduction of a Bill to ban of the use of wild animals in travelling circuses. While the use of wild animals in travelling circuses may not affect a great number of individual animals, it is emblematic of the way we treat all animals and we would urge the rest of the UK to follow this precedent, introduced on ethical grounds.

"However, this package of measures seems a bit of a mixed bag. Until recently Scotland also led the way on dog welfare with a complete ban on tail docking, so we are extremely disappointed at the decision to reverse this stance. We have carefully considered all the evidence and remain convinced that tail docking in dogs, even specific breeds, is detrimental to their welfare. This is a retrograde step for animal welfare in Scotland, amidst an otherwise progressive package of animal welfare measures."

At the end of May, BVA Scottish Branch Junior Vice President Melissa Donald will be giving evidence to the Environment Committee in the Scottish Parliament ahead of a vote on whether or not to approve the change in law relating to tail docking.

Today’s announcement by the Cabinet Secretary for Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Roseanna Cunningham MSP also included the introduction of controls to restrict the use of electronic training collars and a commitment to update regulations to combat the irresponsible breeding and sale of dogs, cats and rabbits.

Gudrun Ravetz, BVA President, added: "Animal welfare starts right at the beginning of a pet’s life, so the focus on pet licensing and breeding regulations is welcome. We know that a third of vets are seeing puppies they believe to have been illegally imported and an increasing number of owners are buying brachycephalic or designer breeds, like Scottish fold cats; pets must be purchased with owners prioritising animal health and welfare, rather than making an impulse buy based on looks alone.

"Yet we are saddened at the shortfall on legislation around aversive training aids for dogs, which we expect will still permit the use of training collars under expert guidance. We know using fear as a training tool is not only less effective than positive reinforcement, but can take its toll on a dog’s overall welfare. Without an outright ban, we have grave concerns over how enforceability will work. This raft of measures seems to give with one hand and take away with the other."

Linnaeus has set up a funding scheme to cover the costs for its specialists, residents and interns to publish research open access in scientific journals.

The Open Access Publication Charge (OAPC) initiative was introduced in 2021 to cover the fees for the company's employees to publish in prominent peer-reviewed veterinary journals, which can cost up to £3,000 per paper.

Funding was approved for 29 employees to have their work published in eight journals last year, covering topics such as canine mast cell tumours, imaging of canine intracranial intra-axial haemorrhages, electrochemotherapy as a treatment option for feline nasal melanoma and antimicrobial use in female canine urinary tract infections.

The OAPC scheme has now been extended with a fund of at least £30,000 available this year.

The initiative was introduced by Professor Luisa De Risio, Clinical Research & Excellence Director at Linnaeus and a specialist in veterinary neurology (pictured right).

She said: “By publishing in open access journals, we are ensuring that research at Linnaeus is freely available across the veterinary profession and the scientific community.

“Being able to publish high-quality research in prestigious scientific journals supports the career development and job satisfaction of our Associates and fulfils the requirements of those training to become specialists.”

Dr Fabio Stabile, a neurology specialist at Southfields Veterinary Specialists, has been researching how dogs with reactive seizures can be treated with levetiracetam.

He said: “By publishing through open-access journals, I hope to support as many peers as possible with treating canine reactive seizures, which can be extremely stressful for our patients and their owners. It is always great collaborating with Luisa in developing my research, which was as valuable as the OAPC funding itself.”

In addition to the funding scheme, Linnaeus has also appointed Hannah Sargent as Clinical Research Associate to help researchers in areas such as study design, ethical review and statistical analysis.

For more information, visit https://www.linnaeusgroup.co.uk/medical-and-nursing/clinical-research. 

Julian Allen MRCVS, a Director of Friars Moor Livestock Health, has been named the winner of the Farmers Weekly Livestock Adviser of the Year Award.

The Livestock Adviser of the Year Award recognises those who have made a real difference to the operations of livestock farmers.

Julian focuses on dairy cow health and his particular interests include nutrition and benchmarking herd performance. Amongst other things, he has helped one large Dorset dairy farm reduce its antibiotic usage by two thirds over an eight year period.

Julian said: "I was honoured to be named Livestock Adviser of the Year. This work is my passion – I love working together with farmers, getting involved in all aspects of herd management and thinking through different options to improve herd health and productivity." 

Runners up for the award were Phil Baynes, Managing Director of Baynes Nutrition, and Ed Hill, veterinary surgeon at Thrums Veterinary Group. 

Friars Moor, Baynes Nutrition and Thrums Veterinary Group are all members of the XLVets community of independent veterinary practices.

Alice Renner, Farm Marketing Executive of XLVets, said: "We were so pleased to hear of these awards going to such hard-working and deserving people. And it’s a great accolade for our members – reflecting how XLVets practices strive for clinical excellence and really get invested in the success of their clients."

Elanco Animal Health is reminding vets about the importance of correctly interpreting oocyst counts in the diagnosis of coccidiosis during the post lambing period.

The company says scouring lambs that are failing to thrive should immediately ring the alarm bells for coccidiosis. Typically, oocyst counts of >20,000 per gram are cited as diagnostic for coccidiosis in sheep, but counts of up to 100,000 oocysts per gram have been reported in apparently healthy lambs and disease can also occur in the presence of low or negligible counts where there is gut damage but before oocysts have been shed.¹ These discrepancies can lead to misdiagnosis and as such, oocyst counts should always be interpreted with care.

Oocysts of the fourteen Eimeria species described as specific to sheep are indistinguishable from each other by eye and only two species - E. ovinoidalis and E. crandallis, are actually pathogenic.¹ For this reason, diagnosing coccidiosis based on clinical signs of diarrhoea and oocysts in their faeces alone can generate false positives. This could lead to important differentials, such as Nematodirus battus infection (for lambs at pasture) being left untreated.

According to the company, false negatives are also a concern, particularly as prompt treatment of clinical cases with an anti-coccidial, such as diclazuril (Vexocan® 2.5mg/ml oral suspension) has been proven to reduce the convalescence period.² Shedding of oocysts varies with disease progression and faecal counts can fluctuate significantly.³ For example, a delay between the development of clinical signs and oocysts appearing in faeces is common. Another possibility is sub-clinical disease, with affected lambs showing no typical outward signs. The gut damage caused by the parasite can be significant in these animals though, adversely affecting growth rates.

Elanco says that for reliable diagnosis of coccidiosis, faecal oocyst counts should be considered alongside disease and farm history, followed with Eimeria species identification if possible. The disease typically affects groups of lambs aged between 3-8 weeks old and is often triggered by a stressor such as castration, weaning, turnout and/or bad weather. If clinical signs appear around three weeks after such an event, the suspicion of coccidiosis can be heightened. For some farms, predictable stressors cause disease outbreaks year after year and in these cases, a metaphylactic dose of Vecoxan® can be administered to susceptible lambs 14 days after the trigger event.

Finally, the company says veterinary surgeons should also not forget the importance of good management when advising farmers about coccidiosis control. Lambing pen and high traffic area hygiene and age batching lambs are essential for long term control.

References

1. Merck veterinary manual online edition - 'Coccidiosis of sheep', http://www.merckvetmanual.com/mvm/index.jsp?cfile=htm/bc/21203.htm, 10.12.12
2. Platzer B, Prosl H, Cieslicki M, Joachim A, Epidemiology of Eimeria infections in an Austrian milking sheep flock and control with diclazuril, , Veterinary Parasitology 129 (2005) 1-9
3. Gauly. M. et al. Pattern of Eimeria Oocyst Output and Repeatability in Naturally Infected Suckling Rhön Lambs, Journal of Veterinary Medicine, Series B, Volume 48, Issue 9, pages 665-673, November 2001

Bayer Animal Health has launched a new version of Drontal which is presented as a bone-shaped tablet.

The company says that this is the UK's first worming tablet shaped like a bone, and that the product is designed to help improve client compliance.

Dan White, Group Product Manager at Bayer Animal Health said: "Almost half of dog owners - surveyed prior to launch - indicated that new Drontal bone would encourage them to worm their dogs more routinely. This is clearly great news for practices especially during these difficult economic times.

The launch of Drontal bone will be supported by a marketing drive that includes a new advertising creative concept which will be featured as part of a national TV advertising campaign, and an online consumer-facing competition called Give Your Dog A Bone designed to engage further with dog owners and communicate the benefits of having a worm-free dog.

Dan added: "The online and supporting consumer PR campaign will bring to life the special bond between pet and owner, and celebrate the happiness that dogs bring to our lives when they are happy, healthy and worm-free."

Practices can request a practice support pack to promote the availability of Drontal bone which will include a notice board picture-pack aimed at dog owning clients by calling their Bayer Territory Manager or 01635 563380.

The Give Your Dog a Bone competition and PR campaign has been devised by leading healthcare communications agency Pegasus. The new 'bone-shaped' TV and print creative has been developed by the recently-appointed advertising agency Dinosaur and will launch in early 2012.

Drontal's Give Your Dog a Bone competition will be launched on 1st March 2012 at www.giveyourdogabone.co.uk.

RCVS Junior Vice-President Professor David Argyle has announced that he will step aside from his Council duties until such time as the College is able to conclude an investigation into allegations of bullying at his workplace. 

The College has confirmed that it has now received an official complaint about the matter and it is now investigating under its normal 'concerns' investigation process.

Professor Argyle made a private statement about the allegations to RCVS Council at its meeting today, having already answered written questions from a number of Council members in the preceding days.

The Council did not ask Professor Argyle to step aside, but acknowledged that this was his choice, made for personal reasons.

The College said that in line with its normal protocols, and to ensure fairness for all parties, it will not make any further public comment about the investigation for the time being. However, it wanted to stress that it remains firmly committed to following due and proper process in all its regulatory activities.

Zoetis has announced the launch of Sileo (Dexmedetomidine hydrochloride), a new prescription-only medicine for the treatment of noise anxiety in dogs. 

Sileo provides a micro-dose of dexmedetomidine hydrochloride, a selective alpha-2 adrenoceptor agonist which Zoetis says helps a dog calm down or remain calm yet fully functional in situations involving fear-eliciting sounds.

Sileo is presented as an oromucosal gel formulation in a 3ml oral syringe that can be used to apply multiple doses.

Zoetis says that its user-friendly application means that, once prescribed, it can be given by the dog owner and used only when needed for each noise anxiety event. It takes effect within 15 - 60 minutes and last for 2-3 hours. Should the fear-eliciting noise continue, further doses can be given at two hour intervals up to a total of five times during each noise event.

The company says that even when the full dosing limit is used, the dog will remain functional during treatment; the clinical effects of dexmedetomidine are dose-dependent and the anxiolytic effect is reached before the sedative effect.

Animal behaviourist, Jon Bowen BVetMed DipAS (CABC) MRCVS, said: "Fear of seasonal loud noises such as fireworks, thunder and gunshots are known to affect around 50% of the UK dog population but the prevalence of fears of other everyday noises and the extent to which those fears contribute to nuisance and problem behaviour in dogs is something we are researching at the moment. Sileo is ideal as an acute anxiolytic for planned or expected events such as fireworks or thunder, but it has an even wider range of potential applications in planned events that involve stressful noise exposure including travel, social gatherings and even visits to the vet."

Sileo is available to order now via your veterinary wholesaler.

For more information contact your Zoetis account manager or customer support on 0854 300 8034 or visit www.zoetis.co.uk/Sileo. 

Krka has added a new 20g pack size of Flimabend (flubendazole), its water-based chicken wormer, to suit the needs of smallholders and owners of backyard chicken flocks. 

Flimabend is diluted into water and replaces the flock’s drinking water for a set period during the day. 

The new 20g pack includes a post-prescription leaflet to help veterinary surgeons support clients in calculating the correct dose, based on the bodyweight of their flock. It also includes a measuring scoop to ensure accurate administration.

Flimabend is effective against the three key intestinal worms affecting chickens – Ascaridia (roundworm); Capillaria (hairworm) and Heterakis gallinarum, which can be a vector for Blackhead disease. No egg withdrawal period is required.

Charlotte Read, Krka's Key Account Manager – Farm said: “Poultry-rearing is on the increase in the UK, both at a commercial level and among the public.  Recent figures suggest that more than one million UK households keep chickens, with the majority of domestic flocks comprising five laying hens and a cockerel¹.

"A regular worming routine is, of course, essential for optimal flock health and ensuring ease of use in a worming product is the most effective way of ensuring compliance, especially among those keeping backyard chickens.

“As one of the first water-based worming products available for small flocks, Flimabend now offers an innovative presentation of Flubendazole which we believe offers a new level of convenience and flexibility.”

Krka is currently offering virtual ‘lunch and learns’ on the worming of backyard chickens. Contact your Krka Account Manager for more details.

Reference

1. ChickenGuard survey March 2020

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has reprimanded Gloucestershire veterinary surgeon Adele Lewis for failing to pass on information about a horse’s clinical history to a potential buyer during a pre-purchase examination.

Ms Lewis, the sole principal of the Cotswold Equine Clinic in Lechlade, Gloucestershire, carried out the examination of a pony called Luke on 13 February 2014. Luke was owned by Mrs Booth who was a long-established client of Ms Lewis, both at her previous practice, Bourton Vale, and at her current practice. The examination was carried out on behalf of the prospective purchaser, Mrs Grieve.

Upon examination Ms Lewis certified that, in her opinion, Luke’s veterinary history did not increase the risk of purchase.

Following the purchase of Luke, Mrs Grieve attempted to obtain insurance for Luke and found out from a pet insurance company that a claim had been made by Mrs Booth in September 2013. She subsequently found out that, following concerns expressed by Mrs Booth and her trainer about Luke’s movement and their wanting an expert opinion, Ms Lewis had referred him to Dr Kold, a Specialist in Equine Orthopaedics, in September 2013. Dr Kold had diagnosed Luke with lameness and had given him intra-articular medication. Luke had also had a follow-up appointment with Dr Kold about four weeks later in October 2013.  

The Disciplinary Committee hearing commenced on Tuesday 13 October 2015. At the outset, Ms Lewis admitted several parts of the charges (charge A and charge B) against her. In regards to charge A, she admitted that she had failed to inform Mrs Grieve that, when she examined Luke on 24 September 2013, his then owner Mrs Booth had complained firstly that Luke was “not tracking up and going forward” and, secondly, that he had improved significantly when put on a Phenylbutazone trial. She also admitted that she had referred him to Dr Kold for a poor performance investigation and that she ought to have informed Mrs Grieve of these matters.

In regards to charge B, she admitted that she completed a Certificate of Veterinary Examination in which she had declared that Luke’s veterinary history did not increase the risk of purchase and allowed the vendor’s declaration to include assertions that there had been no previous lameness and no intra-articular medication given in the last 12 months. Ms Lewis admitted that she ought to have known that her declaration that Luke’s veterinary history did not increase the risk of purchase was incorrect.

However, Ms Lewis denied being aware that Dr Kold had diagnosed lameness, administered an intra-articular corticosteroid to Luke and examined and noted a problem with his breathing, including upper airway disease and possible lower airway disease. Furthermore, she denied dishonesty in regards to both the charges against her and in relation to vendor declarations made on the Certificate of Veterinary Examination regarding previous lameness and intra-articular medication.

During the course of the hearing, Ms Lewis told the Committee that she had not received the reports about the two consultations by Dr Kold (despite their having been sent to her by letter and, with respect to the second report, also by email) and that she was therefore unaware of his findings when she carried out the pre-purchase examination. She also stated that she had not been informed of these by Mrs Booth. During her evidence, Ms Lewis also admitted having entered inaccurate information on a veterinary report to assist with an insurance claim.

The Committee did not find Ms Lewis to be an impressive witness citing the fact that her “explanations as to her practice showed a worrying absence of probity in the completion of veterinary reports for the purposes of insurance claims, and an absence of any effective practice management, consistent with acceptable practice.”

However, the Committee felt it did not have the evidence to conclude that Ms Lewis had acted dishonestly during the pre-purchase examination. It cited the fact that her actions, when informed by the purchaser Mrs Grieve of Dr Kold’s examination, did not appear to be those of someone trying to cover their tracks.

In regards to charge A, the Committee also found that the “apparently chaotic manner in which Ms Lewis ran her practice, and her own opinion that the pony was sound, would appear to have led her to wrongly disregard these matters from disclosure.”

In making its decision on her conduct and sanction, the Committee said that Ms Lewis’ failure to fully communicate to Mrs Grieve all the relevant information about Luke’s veterinary history fell far short of the conduct expected from a veterinary surgeon. It also cited the utmost importance of a complete and accurate certification process, as made clear in the RCVS Code of Professional Conduct and the Twelve Principles of Certification.  

Chitra Karve, chairing the Committee and speaking on its behalf, said:  “The Committee continues to emphasise the importance of maintaining the integrity of veterinary certification in any aspect of practice. Mrs Grieve told this Committee that if she had been fully informed about Luke’s veterinary history she would not have purchased the pony. It is clear from the evidence that it affected Mrs Grieve’s ability to insure the pony. Ms Lewis has accepted that the information about Luke’s veterinary history, not having been disclosed, was capable of affecting the risk of purchase. The public are entitled to rely upon veterinary surgeons providing complete and accurate information, when certificates and reports are prepared.”

In mitigation, the Committee paid regard to Ms Lewis’ inexperience at running her own practice and found no issue with her competence or clinical ability as a veterinary surgeon. It concluded that she had acted out of character and that there was no financial motivation for her actions. It also found it “highly relevant that the facts admitted and found proved related to a single pre-purchase examination.”

It also noted that Ms Lewis has now put in place a practice management system and has shown insight into her actions, by taking active steps to better comply with her obligations under the Code of Professional Conduct. She had also made early admissions of guilt and made a full apology to both Mrs Grieve and the RCVS both at the outset of the hearing, and in her evidence.

Chitra Karve added: “Having had the opportunity of observing her demeanour at this hearing, the Committee believes that it is unlikely that she will repeat her conduct.... The Committee has concluded that an appropriate and proportionate response in this case is to reprimand Ms Lewis.”

An accredited General Practitioner Advanced Certificate (GPAdvCert) in Small Animal Medicine has been launched by Improve International.

The course is aimed at veterinary professionals across Europe who want to advance their knowledge and diagnostic skills, progress their academic qualifications and gain recognition in their field.

The GPAdvCert in Small Animal Medicine is for veterinary surgeons who have already completed a General Practitioner Certificate in Small Animal Medicine (GPCertSAM) or a Postgraduate Certificate (PgC) in Small Animal Medicine.

Accredited by the European School of Veterinary Postgraduate Studies (ESVPS) and validated by Harper Adams University, the programme will be delivered in three, five-day blocks of training by globally recognised experts in three European training centres - Sheffield, UK; Porto, Portugal and Berlin, Germany. The programme includes a practical session in which delegates will perform an upper and lower gastrointestinal endoscopy under the guidance of their tutor.

David Babington MRCVS, Business Development Director of Improve International (pictured right), said: "Delegates attending our first GPAdvCert in Small Animal Medicine will enhance their skills and confidence in dealing with complex animal medicine cases.  Each module will take their knowledge beyond Postgraduate Certificate level with more in-depth and advanced content covering topics as diverse as mycobacterial and ureteric disease. They will also learn how to design a detailed diagnostic plan and build an understanding of nuances in interpreting laboratory findings to enable them to manage cases requiring complex therapeutic management with confidence."

He added: "The qualification is a natural ‘next-step’ for veterinary surgeons wanting to further progress their knowledge of small animal internal medicine.  It will help them to reduce the number of patients which are referred, retaining a higher level of income for their practice and will also provide them with skills which they can pass onto their team."

Improve says the successful achievement of the GPAdvCert will enable delegates to progress from a Postgraduate Certificate in Small Animal Medicine (or equivalent) to the Postgraduate Diploma in Advanced Veterinary Practice Sciences in the UK, which is awarded by Harper Adams University. This can, in turn, be used towards the award of a Masters Degree (MSc) in Advanced Veterinary Practice Sciences.

Barrettine Environmental Health has launched MiteMax, a new treatment for poultry red mite (PRM) with a physical mode of action. 

Charles Phillips from Barratine said: "PRM poses a significant threat to laying hens particularly, with infestation costing the UK egg industry in excess of an estimated €3 million per annum through PRM control and lost production. In the UK, PRM is prevalent in varying percentages according to the rearing system used. Caged birds are estimated to have a variable 7.5 to 87.5 % prevalence. Free range systems are estimated to have 60 % prevalence of PRM, with organic systems higher at 78 %. Less intensive systems have a greater prevalence of PRM due to the higher number of cracks and crevices associated with a more enriched environment¹."

MiteMax is applied directly to a shed’s inner surfaces via knapsack sprayer, rendering the surfaces sticky and permanently immobilising red mites that come into contact with them.

According to the company, the new product - which is designed to fit into and encourage integrated pest management practices - provides rapid knock-down of poultry red mite.

Charles added: "The physical mode of action of MiteMax makes it effective against pesticide-resistant mites. MiteMax is specifically formulated to penetrate surface dust making it highly effective at reaching mites harbouring deep in crevices."

In conjunction with robust cleansing practices, Ian Whelan an expert in physical insect control techniques says MiteMax fits neatly into an integrated pest management style of husbandry: "Using treatments with different modes of action together as part of a flock health plan ensures each one fulfils its potential."

MiteMax is available nationwide from Barrettine Environmental Health's appointed distributors.

Reference

1. Statistics 2009- Exp Appl Acarol 48:3-10. 

The RCVS Disciplinary Committee has dismissed a case against a Kent veterinary surgeon convicted of tail-docking and also charged with misleadingly altering an owner's record relating to tail dockings.

At the outset of the four-day hearing, David Smith, of Lakeview Veterinary Centre, Deal, admitted he had been convicted of an offence of tail docking on 14 December 2010 at the Channel Magistrates Court.

He said that, in 2008, he had misinterpreted the legislation about tail docking and as a result had removed the tails of a litter of 13 Rottweiler puppies. He was subsequently convicted of illegal docking.

Mr Smith also accepted he had altered the owner's record, at the owner's request, when the RSPCA was investigating the circumstances of the docking by adding the words "for law enforcement", but maintained this alteration was to clarify the record to which he had initially added the words "for security selection"; he denied any attempt to mislead, or that he ought to have known it may mislead.

The Committee accepted that Mr Smith misinterpreted the legislation and had taken some steps to satisfy himself that the tail docking was legal, namely: he had asked an employee colleague to make enquires of the College and, as advised, he had downloaded a copy of the AWA 2006 to read and to make his own decision with regard to legality; some enquiry had been made by the practice of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) at Reigate; and, Mr Smith had himself researched dog breeds on the Kennel Club website.

The Committee also accepted that he had asked and been told that the client had previously supplied dogs to the police.

However, the Committee found that these steps were inadequate; in particular, he should have contacted the College and Defra himself and not delegated this to administrative staff. Furthermore, that he should have obtained confirmation of the advice given in writing.

Regarding the alteration of the owner's record, the Committee was satisfied that this annotation was added for clarification. The Committee was not satisfied that the addition 'for law enforcement' altered the meaning of what was already stated on this form, and found the wording confirmed Mr Smith's misapprehension at the time of the legality of the tail docking.

This charge, which alleged that the alteration had been carried out misleadingly, was dismissed. 

The Committee also said that Mr Smith's reluctance to engage with the police and the RSPCA during their later investigation had been regrettable: as a professional he had had a duty to co-operate fully. However, it concluded that this had been "of little probative significance".

The Committee would like to make it clear that it is the responsibility of every practising veterinary surgeon to ensure that tail docking is legal in each and every instance before carrying out the procedure. If there is any doubt, then tail docking should not take place.

In deciding whether Mr Smith was fit to practise, the Committee took into account two previous RCVS Disciplinary Committee findings involving tail-docking.

It concluded these were significantly different. In the first case, the respondent knew that the tail docking he had carried out was illegal. On the contrary Mr Smith had misguidedly believed the docking he carried out was permitted.

In the second case there had been several charges, in addition to the charge of tail docking.  In this case no charges other than those related to tail docking had been alleged against Mr Smith.

It further noted that no issues of clinical competence were raised, and that the dockings were undertaken less than 12 months after the new legislation came into force. 

Speaking on behalf of the Committee, Vice-Chairman Beverley Cottrell, who chaired the hearing, said: "The Committee has expressed its disapproval about Mr Smith's failure to make adequate investigations of the College and of Defra, and his erroneous interpretation of the Act. 

"In reaching its decision, the Committee has paid particular attention to issues of animal welfare, maintaining public confidence in the profession and the upholding of proper standards of conduct.

It has concluded that Mr Smith's conduct fell short of that to be expected of a veterinary surgeon but does not consider that it fell far short." 

After directing that the case should be dismissed, Mrs Cottrell added: "The Committee would like to make it clear that it is the responsibility of every practising veterinary surgeon to ensure that tail docking is legal in each and every instance before carrying out the procedure. If there is any doubt, then tail docking should not take place."