Dexter Cattle For Sale Discussion Board

Just received interesting email from John O'Neill wondered if anyone else had as apparently he posted on here and it was removed. I could understand why DCS may not wish to print but surprised not allowed on here !! I didn't think it anymore contentious than some other posts we have had on here ??

Yes, I received the same email. I find it of interest that Andrew Sheppy's denunciation of the pedigree of some historic bulls could be cheerfully published in the Bulletin without DCS taking legal advice but not this rather less contentious and more balanced letter.
Andrew Sheppy, like Lawrence Alderson, appears to have been in the right place at the right time to gain a robust reputation as an expert in such matters. Given the explosion in technology to study cattle genomes (eg Matthew Collins' BioArCh team at York, Dan Bradley's team in Ireland) it would be helpful to have a public, round table discussion of these issues with other experts in the field and ordinary DCS members, not just Council.
At the moment, we appear to receive ex cathedra statements without substantiating evidence.

Yes it seems very strange that Mr Sheppy is allowed to publish in bulletin with no right to reply when he appears to have been replaced from two genetic projects that he was involved in one being the chondro search and the last one with Cardiff because of with holding information if this is correct not sure he should be allowed any credibility.
But of he would be welcome to reply on here I'm sure
P's.don't no either parties personally.

Louisa Gidney wrote:.... it would be helpful to have a public, round table discussion of these issues with other experts in the field and ordinary DCS members, not just Council.
At the moment, we appear to receive ex cathedra statements without substantiating evidence.

In common with many other issues, it would seem that it is 'for our own good'. We vote people onto Council and we must trust in those in whom we voted to 'do the right thing'. Publication of the Minutes would prevent debates long after the event.

Publication of draft minutes asap after a meeting is really needed for those who were there to be able to say with confidence if they are right or wrong. Sadly DCS council is not nor has been for a long time interested in accurate minutes. So it is very unlikely we will see any sign of minutes till next year.

In recent years, particularly 2013, the AGM minutes have been a shining example of selective memories, with any contentious issues missed out. Efforts at the 2014 AGM to correct this were likewise under recorded. On top of that there is no effort whatsoever to ensure that only those who were present at the meeting vote to approve or reject the minutes.

I sincerely hope that accurate minutes have been taken for this years AGM when several people spoke against Council proposals, and also against Mr Sheppy and his rantings. I did have the feeling that although some members just wished we could have an uneventful short meeting the majority of the members present were with us.

It is incredible that the Council of any breed society will allow a so called genetic advisor to throw such damaging accusations on the validity of the Society's own herd book, whilst at the same time proposing that certain blood lines are so worthy that the case may be made that in any crisis the "original population" will receive preferential treatment by government agencies over all others. We cannot allow this situation to go on.

Duncan

From the outside looking in this seems like a distraction technique against the important job of advancing the breed and ensuring there is a market for it. Deckchairs & Titanic.

The letter was posted on here and removed by myself on the same grounds that the society did not print it, basically legality reasons. I have only removed 1 post before from the forum, its something I try not to do but I felt very uneasy with the one from Mr O Neil.
I would hope no one else prints it on here as well, thank you.

When the posting was removed I received the following email


Hi John, i have for the only the second time in the lifetime of my site removed a post from the discussion board. I removed your FANGRA letter and response from the DCS. I feel the site is not the right place to raise personal issues like this. If the subject matter progresses and there are outcomes no matter which way they go then i am more than willing to publish them.
regards
Mark


No mention of legal concerns. The future of the Dexter breed and the nonsense of an 'original population' based on one persons statements is described as a 'personal issues' not suitable for the discussion board

Rob R wrote:From the outside looking in this seems like a distraction technique against the important job of advancing the breed and ensuring there is a market for it. Deckchairs & Titanic.

The breed will be advanced - anyone having an 'original population' Dexter (assuming there is such a thing) will have a market at a premium price. The fact that anyone claiming any sort of government incentive to graze a 'rare/minority' breed in the future will no longer be eligible seems to have been lost somewhere in this 'quest'. http://www.rbst.org.uk/Rare-and-Native-Breeds/Cattle

What are the reasons, and the related laws?

Jac wrote:

Rob R wrote:From the outside looking in this seems like a distraction technique against the important job of advancing the breed and ensuring there is a market for it. Deckchairs & Titanic.

The breed will be advanced - anyone having an 'original population' Dexter (assuming there is such a thing) will have a market at a premium price. The fact that anyone claiming any sort of government incentive to graze a 'rare/minority' breed in the future will no longer be eligible seems to have been lost somewhere in this 'quest'.

That doesn't sound like an advancement.

It should be when numbers of the general population rises above the threshold for special consideration then the 'original population' (assuming there is one) will qualify. Although in circumstances where money is tight it may be that subsidising the 'op' only will be the preferred option.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... s-risk.pdf

This is a very complicated subject, but basically an Original Population should only be identified officially when there has been significant introgression in the breed as a whole. The Cardiff Project, whilst it did not do many of the things some of us had hoped it would do, did demonstrate that the Dexter breed, whilst displaying a healthy degree of genetic variation (necessary for the health of a breed - see Prof. Sponenberg and D. Bixby's book) was very identifiable as a breed. Although some herds, such as the Woodmagic herd and one or two others, having been closed for a long time, did display some differences, they were sitting happily within the breed.

I do not have any objection to anyone taking pride in the fact that they believe their cattle are totally descended from entrants to the herd book back to 1900; I do have objections to anyone trying to create advantage for a very very small minority of the breed over the vast majority. Things get even worse when those individuals cast doubt on the pedigree of bulls based on nonsense and hearsay. It is scandalous that the breed society should back these individuals. It is scandalous that they should limit the size of the DCS council on the pretext of being more likely to result in an election, when the real effect is that it is easier for a small number to control the council Fortunately the AGM saw some of this and the current council did not have it all their own way.

We have a huge need in the Dexter Cattle Society for more members to pay really close attention to the structure of the breed and the breed society. I did my best when last on council to keep things going the right way, but eventually the pressure got to me and I could take no more. As one of the longest standing members of the society, a paid up Life Member, a past Vice President, Field Advisor, Bull Inspector, and honoured by being made an Honorary Life Member, I was told I lacked committment to the breed, I had to put up with gross inaccuracies in minutes, and the existence of the Genetics committee (which had been asked by Council to write a letter to FANGRA ) denied, I resigned. The ridiculous obsession with secrecy and confidentiality was another important factor.

We need members to wake up to what is going on, learn a bit more about breed management and gain the confidence to take up places on council. What we cannot afford to do is to divide the breed. One breed needs one competent Breed Society.

Duncan

I do have objections to anyone trying to create advantage for a very very small minority of the breed over the vast majority.

How many are there? Other than Elmwood Mackoy who advertises as 'original population' do we actually have a list of the others?

Secrets tend to mean that either someone is on the fiddle or they're not doing anything worth promoting.