The Most Dog Friendly Community Online
Join and Discover the Best Things to do with your Dog

Register

Foot and Mouth

Does anybody know how many clubs are in unaffected areas? If there are either club or neutral venues in areas where there are no restrictions, maybe we should try and get opens and championsips on in these locations.  I'm sure some clubs would be prepared to try and bring their opens forward.  Even if they felt that they didn't have time to prepare for an open, surely they would be only too glad to allow their track to be used for a championship.  

If it transpires that the Northern club are not going to be able to host the first championships (due to local restrictions), could an alternative venue be arranged?  There are still more than seven weeks until 6 May, surely there is still enough time.
 
Trying not to be negative but....

"If there are either club or neutral venues in areas where there are no restrictions, maybe we should try and get opens and championsips on in these locations."

Is this not a little iresponsible/selfish ? I want to start racing as soon as possible but to converge on an unaffected area from suspect areas is asking for trouble. At the end of the day it is fun/sport to us whereas it's people's livliehoods/animals lives at stake.

Regards,

Scott.
 
Hi Scott

You are right to be concerned over the possibility of increasing infection.

However, if you look at the available information I think that argument becomes little more than an emotional one with little or no basis in fact.

The virus needs a living animal that is able to act as a host to survive - animals that fall into this category are pigs, cattle, sheep, rats, hedghogs, deer etc. Neither humans or dogs can sustain the virus.

That is why the government and MAFF have put a restriction on the movement of the susceptable animals but no restrictions on the movement of people or dogs, because they cannot be a host to the virus. There are no restrictions on movement into, out of, or through affected areas. That is why life continues, and is allowed to continue, as normal for the vast majority. Public transport is still running, trains are running, taxi drivers are still driving, football matches continue, horse racing is on, greyhound racing is on - all because the best information from MAFF indicates that these activities do not increase the chance of spreading the virus.

The countryside has been put off bounds because there is a finite chance of the virus moving from an infected animal onto boots, clothing, your coat or even a dogs coat. For this reason footpaths and bridleways are closed and farms have straw and disinfectant down. If someone is breaking the law and moving about in these areas they could pick up the virus, but there isn't a huge risk because the virus starts to die off the host and at increased temperatures and in sunlight. So, for example, if the person then drives anywhere for more than a short distance the virus starts to die because the car heater is put on, the engine heats up, the tyres heat up. Short journeys are much more likely to carry the virus than long ones.

So the possibility of infection as you describe seems to have no basis in fact. MAFF will tell you that every case so far can be tracked to infected animal to animal contact. There have been some reports of cases where it was thought that wind blown virus was responsible, but I understand these have now all been traced to animal to animal contact.

There are around 60 million people moving around in the UK, still going to work, still driving, still moving from, to and through infected areas with no restrictions, 7 days a week. You cannot seriously consider that an open meeting with less than 100 vehicles travelling once a week significantly affects the chances of the virus spreading - especially when there is no evidence to sustain the theory that the virus has been spread this way anyway.

Everyone has a right to their own opinion and make up there own minds as to what they should do. Certainly there will be those with the view that the virus can be spread as you describe but what amazes me is that these people are still going to work, still driving around, still going down the shops. Now I do think that  is irresponsible/selfish.
 
I am most disturbed to have just heard again that definite threats have been made (by the WCRA Chairman by telephone), to take away passports if people go racing with their dogs, even in a non affected area. Can you please confirm Doug, that this is definitely not the case.  Oxford WRC (non affiliated) have been told by their local authority, that there is no reason to stop racing at their ground.
 
Excellent post Nigel.  It really is refreshing to see that somebody has something positive to say.  

We all now have the information that presumably Nigel has got from MAFF.  Doug, - will this information be considered by the WCRA?  

Having just looked at the non-pedigree forum, I see that the NWRF are intending to hold a meeting on Sunday at Bidworth. Surely they will have taken MAFF advice and will have carefully considered the foot and mouth situation, and decided that it is safe to proceed.  I find this a sensible approach, and I'm also sure that both of the non-ped governing bodies would not threaten their clubs and members in the way the WCRA has done.

I'm looking forward to Doug's response to this forum.  Doug, you said you would respond tonight (Thursday).   I would just like to ask if the letter sent by the WCRA to clubs was as a result of a WCRA meeting, and all committee members were consulted on the content of the letter and the manner in which it was written?  The WCRA is an elected committee and it would be of some concern if only one or two members were taking actions that were not agreed by the majority on the committee.

I hope that Nigel's information above will ease some of the worries regarding foot and mouth and its affect on whippet racing, and so pave the way to resume racing in the near future.  

I do hope I am not being too "selfish and irresponsible"!
 
Hi Doug - I see from "active users" that you are looking at the Foot and Mouth section.  I await with great interest your replies to the many and varied points and questions put by people.  There is a great deal of concern and confusion out there,  for instance - will our passports be taken away if we race somewhere?  When can we race again, when Maff say its safe or when the WCRA say we can? It's Thursday night and we are all waiting for your promised comments.  Jane
 
Robin is quite corect to say that I did promise to reply on Thursday and it is now 1135pm on that day as I start to type this.  The reason for the late start is that I have just spent most of the evening ringing every member of the committee to obtain their views before responding.  I have managed to talk to 13 of the 15 and 12 are in full agreement with this response.  One has reservations about the tone of the letter sent to Secretaries.  I am confident that the two I have not spoken to also support our action from previous conversations with them.  The letter did not result from a committee meeting.  As you will appreciate we live in wide spread areas of the country and as this was a matter requiring fairly fast action opinion was sought over the phone.  Again almost all members were spoken to and the overwhelming majority were in agreement.  I hope this reassures you that it was not the decision of one or two members.  I will also repeat that after the letter had gone out I personnally spoke to nearly all club Secretary's to expand on our reasons for taking the action we had and received almost universal support.  Can I also say that when the outbreak first started I had a number of calls asking what lead the WCRA were going to give.  If we had done nothing then we would have been criticised by that group and now we have done something we are open to criticism by another.  "Damned if we do and damned if we don't"

And one last point before I get into the meat of my answer.  I use the word 'I' throughout because it is easier to write in the first person but please take it to mean 'we' i.e. the committee of the WCRA.

I apologise if the reply is a little disjointed as with 18 pages to answer I am going through it page by page and answering points as I come to them.  Also at this time of night my ancient brain goes into withdrawal.

The most contencious point seems to be the "implied threat" to disaffilate clubs which do not follow our guidlines.  I agree it could be read that way but it is sometimes difficult in a formal letter to get a point across.  I did go through our reasoning when I spoke to club Secretary's.  I will try to explain it now.  When I contacted the clubs  there was a 100% agreement to suspend racing on a voluntary basis.  However there was an intimation from one club that they might continue.  We had to consider what we might do in this eventuality and affiliation is our only recourse.  However remote the possibility we had to inform clubs of what the consequences might be.  Consider this situation.  One club decides to continue despite the restrictions in force.  After the event we then take action against them.  Would they then not argue that they had not been warned in advance?  I am sorry it was seen as a threat when it was only intended as a way of letting clubs know in advance the possible consequences of something which was very unlikely to happen.

I hope this clarifies the position and perhaps smooths a few understandably ruffled feather.

Moving on to the next main point raised which is the decision to ask clubs to suspend racing until clearance is given by MAFF.  We still consider this to be the most sensible course to follow and again this supported by our contact with club Secretary's.  Robin makes the point that horse racing is still on.  Horse racing stands to lose an estimated £60million a month so perhaps money speaks louder than morals in that case.  Opinion polls indicate that 80% of the population think racing should be suspended.  Also racing has the money and resources to disinfect every vehicle person and animal entering a track.  I doubt very much if in our sport that could be done.  There is also, if the media reports are correct a division within racing with many trainers withdrawing and voicing their oppostion to the continuation.  Football again is big money.  What about the multitude of events and sports which have been cancelled or suspended, these far out number those going ahead.  I agree the risk factor is far far less in our case but we cannot influence other sports and our responsibility is to pedigree whippet racing.

Your next point Robin is to ask how many Opens will be jeopardised by the restrictions.  I wish I had a crystal ball.  A week ago the spread seemed to be on the decline, over the last few days it has esculated again.  Some statements I have heard say it might improve next week, others paint a very dismal picture.  We can only follow the news as you do and re-act as things change.  I wont comment on your points about far flung locations as this has been more than covered in previous discussions at the Club Representatives Meeting and one or two people seem to be responding to you via this medium. I will however make a very personal point and I emphasis that the next few lines are from me and not the committee.  I was as many of you are aware one of the founders of the Northern and for many years its Secretary.  I campaigned throughout that time for a Championship in the North so I hope you can appreciate that if it were to be cancelled it would hurt me far more than you can imagine.  However I think this is a small sacrifice to make when I see cattle being burnt, farmers in financial ruin and driven to suicide and whole families devasted by events. As far as re-scheduling cancelled meetings and Championships is concerned it is almost impossible to do at this stage when we don't know how long this will go on and consequently how many will be cancelled.  Rest assured as soon as the picture becomes clearer we will look at what can be done, but it is obvious from looking at the forecast of Opens that there are very few dates free this year.  Extending the season could considered but once you get into Oct/Nov the available daylight limits things a bit. Depending on how things go we might even have to look at next years programme but at this stage we are really guessing.  You say that we should look at moving events fron unsafe areas to safe areas.  The reports I am seeing seem to show that no area of the country is unaffected.  Surely this suggestion defeats the whole object of the suspension which is to minimise the movement of people and animals in rural areas.  If an Open was to go ahead then you would have movement between safe and unsafe areas.

Judy, I don't think we have said and it certainly wasn't the intention to say that the WCRA is a higher authority than MAFF.  We have clearly stated that the decision to race or not rests with clubs but as previously stated we have been asked to publish guidelines.  How we respond will of course be done with due regard to MAFF information.  I have visited the MAFF site and will continue to do so at regular intervals as well as monitoring as far as is possible all information coming out in the media.  I have covered the "threat" question in replies to June and Robins points and hope this is now seen as how it was intended.  I was aware of the Kennel Clubs statement as my wife is Secretary of a national breed club who have just cancelled their show.  As far as I am aware the vast majority if not all shows are being cancelled either voluntarily or because the owners of venues are withdrawing permission.  The Kennel Club obviously employ a far better wordsmith than me but you only get what you elected and I'm sorry if I don't live up to your expectations.  There don't seem to be too many volunteers for election at the next Whippet Club AGM.

Jane, I think I have covered the points you make and hope this post clarifies things a bit.  I am trying(very trying some might say)

I note the points Michelle makes but we are only concerned with pedi racing.  We are I think all aware of how the disease can be spread and accept that the risk from our activity is probably very small but in the circumstances believe we should do whatever is necessary to minimise that risk.

June S.  Your points on disinfectants seem to be at variance with the previous post but it seems to me to be a very personal choice.  I still think it would be a difficult task for clubs to provide the necessary disinfectant regime at club level let alone an Open or Championship.  I'll pass over your comments on travelling as this is something between you and Robin.

June Mc  I sympathise with you on getting used to this new format.  I'm still a novice and struggling.  When things settle down a bit I'll be ringing Nigel for some idiots guidance.  30days after the last confirmed case seems to be a figure being quoted but I am not aware if this is official or not.  I think I have covered your point on extending the season and I am sure that if a club can stage a meeting late in the year we will give it a sympathetic hearing.

BeeJay, I havven't seen the web page you refer to but will try to have a look when I get the chance.  It would appear to have a far stronger tone than other MAFF pages.

June J.  You are totally wrong about the movement of the van to the North or any other championship venue.  There is a logistic problem in moving the van and it was decided to ask host clubs to assist.  I personally rang the Secretary of the Northern and asked if he could find a couple of volunteers to go to Moreton and drive it up to a safe storage I had arranged. Mark and Steve kindly volunteered and were re-imbursed for the expense involved.  The Northern were not told it was a condition of holding the Championships and no pressure was put on that club to do so.  IT WAS VOLUNTARY and we are extremely grateful for the co-operation we received from the club. I am not aware that anyone was told they could not drive the van North.  I have already spoken to East Anglia to ask if they can collect it from the Northern and take it to their venue again on a voluntary basis.  Arrangements are already in hand to get it to and from Cornwall.  I have yet to speak to Maidstone but again when I do it will be to ask them if they can help.  There is no ruling nor is a condition of staging a Championship that the host club has to move the van and equipment.  It remains the responsibility of the WCRA but we do need assistance and do not consider it unreasonable to ask clubs to help if they can.  As a Northern member I know how important it is for you to host a Championship and I know you moved your Open date to accommodate the Championship.  You say it is no secret that some members of the committe were against the scheduling in the North.  From the questionnaires it is pretty obvious that a lot more people had that view.  However despite quite considerable pressure the WCRA did stick to its decision on the venues for 2001.  We are believe it not a democratic committee and the majority decision is accepted by all.  How can we make a decision to re-schedule it when at this moment in time it has no been cancelled.  Until the restrictions are lifted we don't know what will go ahead or be cancelled but once again I will say that we will look at the whole programme as soon as we have a clearer picture.

Mark R,  I am absolutely amazed that you should say that you were told that all clubs must provide a driver.  When I rang you it was to ask if you could help by providing a couple of volunteers.  You must remember that we even juggled the dates around to best suit both parties.  There was no coercion and I hope you will retract that statement as it paints a very poor picture of the WCRA and me personnally.  A lot can change before now and May so don't give up hope just yet.  We will not cancel until as late as possible which will probably mean about 3 weeks before the event.  The situation is still very fluid and we must all hope that there is an improvement before then.  I don't know who you spoke to about moving the van but I am certain that to my knowledge no one was told they couldn't do it.

Judy When I took the job I knew occasionally I would be in the firing line.  I'm not bullet proof and some of the comments have hurt especially from people who know me well enough to know that I have every racers best interests at heart.  I will soldier on even though wounded and it will be up to all racers to decide if I should continue when I come up for re-election next year.  One of my main aims and I believe that of the committee it to open up the governance (is that a word Judy) of the sport and by sending out Secretary's letters putting notes in the Championship programme and entering into discussions like this I believe we are trying to follow that path.

Darcia.  I echo your sentiments everyone in their own way wants to get back racing.  It is when and were that seems to be the division.  I agree that the risk from whippet racing is small and precautions such as disinfecting might work, however it is also the perception of other we are taking into account.  Very many sports and events are already cancelled or suspended.  If we were to re- commence racing would we not be seen as going against a national trend.  If an outbreak occurred close to a venue where racing had taken place regardless of whether the whippets had been responsible or not there would be some who would point the finger. Do we really need some local paper or regional TV saying whippet racing continues, regardless of the seriousnessof the situation and may have been the cause of an outbreak.  This is the responsible approach the WCRA is trying to take by looking at the broader picture.  Is the sacrfice of a few weeks or even months racing which to us is only a recreational pasttime worth even the remotest risk of spreading the disease or even being suspected of doing so.

Nigel, responsible yes I agree, it is a question of what we variously think is responsible.  The tone inthis thread certainly supports your statement about universal support, but I would say that this amounts to a very small number.  I have spoken to far more who fully support the WCRA but who perhaps have not got the access to the Internet or are content with what we have done so far and do not want to get involved.

June J.  I must learn how to put in these things like biggrin and cheesy.  Its now 2.30 am so can you let me know what the jargon is for p***** off.

Robin  As far as I can see from current reports there are no areas in the country not affected.  As previous said to have an event in a "safe" area would encourage travel across the borders of "safe" and "unsafe" which is the prime reason for we have asked clubs to suspend racing.

Scott I think you endorse some of the points I have been trying to get across.

Nigel.  Yes there is an element of emotion in these arguments.  There is also a responsibility on us to ensure that the perception of whippet racing with the general public is maintained.  The Hunting with Dogs act is in parliament at present, probably wont go through because of the Lords and I don't want to enter into the rights and wrongs of it, I think Mark R more than covered this in his postings on the subject.  However the last thing we want now is to give the antis another peg to hang their campaign on.  I cannot argue with anything you say about the spread of the disease and the remoteness of whippet racing spreading it.  But I come back to the argument that we must be seen to be acting responsibily and the suspension of racing for a relatively short period is a small price to pay to protect our reputation.

June J  There has been nor will there be any action to take away the passports of anyone racing at an event not organised by the WCRA although we would prefer it if passport holders did not race at present.  I am not at liberty to discuss telephone conversations made by the Chairman but will say that this was a private conversation between the Chairman and an individual and the circumstances leading to it were outside the scope of this discussion.

Robin , We have and will continue to consider all information available from whatever source but cannot guarantee that our response will meet with universal approval  although we still think that a large proportion of racers agree with our actions.  I cannot comment on what the BWRA do that is their business.  Ours is to administer pedigree racing.

I hope I have covered most of the points made by the various contributers, albeit in a random and not very logical way.  Given more time I could have perhaps tidied things up a bit but nevertheless I hope I have explained our reasonings in reaching our decisions.

I expect this will raise more responses and can I say that I will try to come back on them but it will be Sunday before my job lets me get back to the keyboard.

Its now 0250 so I'd better get some sleep or there may be some taxi passengers getting wrapped round telegraph poles when I start driving tomorrow.

Nightie, nightie.
 
p.s. I ran out of ciggies 2 hours ago so anyone who knows me will know that I am not in the best of moods at the moment!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is this a fiendish plan to stop me smoking????????????
 
Hi Doug

           When you rang me about the van you did ask for volentiers, but during our conversation you did say that all clubs where expected to provide drivers, if becouse of the information below I have taken that the wronge way then I do appologies.

I did speak to a person with a witness present who stated that they had offerd to bring the van up to the Northern but where told (NOT BY YOURSELF) that it was upto the host club to collect.

as I stated in my other post I don't feel that shooting the messanger works as all you end up with is a new messanger.

whats needed is for people to use their vote at the whippet club AGM and get people on the committee who they feel best serve the racers needs.

(All racers regardless of where the clubs located)

(now I can keep my pic)

After taking over from yourself at the Northern i've found that whoever makes the decisions its the Secretary gets the blame.

"Cigs are on the way"
 
Hi Doug

At this point I would just like to thank you for taking part in discussion on this board and taking the time to reply to the all the posts.

And I dont think anyone has tried, or even wants to shoot you.
 
Hi All

        I'd like to start this off with an appology, I have just had a long conversation with Doug regarding the moving of the WCRA van to the Northern.

When we first spoke about moving the van he made a comment that on its own would have just gone past me as a comment,  but with being told later that a persons offer to move the van had been turned down (not by Doug) I took it as a threat that if drivers had not come forward we may have lost the Champs.

Doug assures me that his comment was just that an inocent comment, but agrees that having heard the later information how I could of missunderstood what had been said and taken it as part of a threat.

So I would like to appologies to Doug that in the heat of things I thought that he could or would be party to anything of that nature.

                                    Sorry Doug ;)
 
Doug

From what I have heard most clubs are being denied access to their grounds by their Landlords or local Authorities.  So therefore any form of racing Club or Open can not go ahead.  However when these local restrictions are lifted will the WCRA allow racing to resume at club level  or continue the decision  for an overall stopage  until the last area is clear.
 
Hi Doug.  Thank you very much for your long and most interesting reply to the many queries.  I am very glad that the WCRA will not be taking our passports if we race at non-affiliated clubs. :)  (Ooh, I've managed my first emoticon!!  I feel rather proud of it)
 
Gosh!  This is going to be a difficult reply, but hopefully not too long winded.  I will quote from your post Doug, and then respond to each part. :)

"When I contacted the clubs  there was a 100% agreement to suspend racing on a voluntary basis.  However there was an intimation from one club that they might continue".  

;) Maybe it would have been better to write to that club with your proposed actions?

"I am sorry it was seen as a threat when it was only intended as a way of letting clubs know in advance the possible consequences of something which was very unlikely to happen".

What a strange sentence!  If it was very unlikely to happen, why bother at all......?  Perhaps a lesson to be learnt in putting the cart before the horse!  :cheesy:

"The reports I am seeing seem to show that no area of the country is unaffected".

Can I draw your attention to Nigels posting on 17/3/01 on the latest information from MAFF.

"How we respond will of course be done with due regard to MAFF information"

Again, I refer you to Nigels post.

"June J.  You are totally wrong about the movement of the van to the North or any other championship venue"

Not totally it would seem!  Mark has cleared up the misunderstanding with you, but at the time they went for the van they understood it to be MANDATORY.  They were in fact only too happy to oblige, but it is such a shame that the gesture was sullied by the Chairmans remarks to the non Northern member who offered to assist.   :(

"The tone inthis thread certainly supports your statement about universal support, but I would say that this amounts to a very small number.  I have spoken to far more who fully support the WCRA but who perhaps have not got the access to the Internet"

It must be pointed out that the majority of posts on this board do not support the actions of the WCRA, and there is no reason to summise that those without internet access feel any different - it would certainly appear not from the amount of phone calls I have received.

"June J  There has been nor will there be any action to take away the passports of anyone racing at an event not organised by the WCRA although we would prefer it if passport holders did not race at present".

Thank you from us all for clearing up this point. :biggrin:

"I am not at liberty to discuss telephone conversations made by the Chairman but will say that this was a private conversation between the Chairman and an individual and the circumstances leading to it were outside the scope of this discussion".

It is interesting to note that you do not deny the Chairmans threatening phonecall . :angry:

"we still think that a large proportion of racers agree with our actions".

:confused:  Where do you get these ideas from?

I hope you will read the latest info posted by Nigel, and then look responsibly at the venues that can and can't be used.  I believe a letter has gone out to all clubs, stating that you do not approve of some clubs starting to race when others are unable to.  :confused:  What is the reasoning behind this?  

On the basis of the latest guidelines it may be wise to reconsider this, to avoid further unrest amongst the racing fraternity.

Lastly, I hope I do not offend you in speaking out on behalf of many people - I learnt it from an old Secretary that used to be at the Northern, but he appears to have weakened in his old age!!!!!!!!  :shocked:

Nightie Nightie Doug  XX

(Edited by June Jonigk at 1:32 am on Mar. 18, 2001)

(Edited by June Jonigk at 1:34 am on Mar. 18, 2001)
 
Hello again Doug

Having re-read your post, I feel there are a couple of points that need to be made.

Firstly you say that we are a small number of people on this board that disagree with the WCRAs actions and that you have spoken to far more who agree with you but they do not have internet access or do not wish to join in this discussion. Well, that goes for a lot of other people too and to assume that they support the WCRA certainly goes against what I am hearing at a more grass roots level. You state that you are a democratic committee. Well, in that case, if you (WCRA) want to know what people really think, would it not be better to ask peoples opinions before taking action rather than telling them afterwards - having presented them with a fait accompli. At least you are talking to us now, and for that I thank you, even though I am getting the impression that the WCRA is just not open to argument.

About a third of dog shows did indeed take place last weekend and of those that didn't, many were unable to due to the unsuitability of their venue with regard to FMD. The point is, their committees had freedom of choice - something which has been taken away from our's and I for one resent it.

One of your (WCRA's) main concerns seems to be that you do not want people travel. I would like to point out that MAFF have not placed any restrictions on the movements of people or dogs.

I guess we are not going to agree on this. But I am not imposing my ideas on anyone.

Still, at least I have managed to have my say ;)
 
I've just spent 2hrs responding to the latest postings and for some reason and despite advice from Nigel I've managed to lose the lot.  Idiot!!!!!!

It will now have to wait till Thursday.

Please be patient with this novice.  

(Edited by DOUG SMITH at 10:39 pm on Mar. 18, 2001)
 
I have just been looking at the show forum and have noted that the whippet club championship show due to be held on 7 April has been postponed.  According to 'Beejay', the provisional new date is 12 May.  Does this mean that the Whippet club have considered that the F&M crisis will have eased sufficiently by then to hold a championship show?  If so, then surely it would follow that it would also be safe for a WCRA championship meeting to take place.  After all, the WCRA is a subsidiary of the Whippet club, so if it's OK for them to plan to resume by then , then it would be reasonable for the WCRA to plan to be racing by then.  

The first champs are scheduled for the 6 May which is only six days earlier than the provisional new show date.  I am sure that the show dogs travel from all over the country, just as the racing dogs do.  Are the Whippet club less concerned about people travelling than the WCRA?  Perhaps the Whippet club would like to offer some guidance.
 
Second attempt to answer the latest batch of responses.  Hopefully I will press the right button this time!

Just a quick reminder that I post this only as an organ of communication for the committee of the WCRA.  If I do say anything of a personal nature I will try to make it clear that that is the case.

Judy B.  All comments about getting shot etc in my last post made very much tongue in cheek. I have no problem with healthy discussions and anyone in my position will obviously not please all the people all the time.  As long as we all remember that everyone is entitled to express their opinions openly and without recrimination it can only be for the good of the sport in the long run.  I'll take off the Kevlar jacket for the time being!

Mark R.  Thanks for your explanation about the movement of the van.  I think it is now clear that the WCRA did not put pressure on the Northern to move the van and that it is not our policy to ever do so.

Which leads to June J's comment about turning down a volunteer.  At this moment in time there are no firm facts on what was said by who to whom and until the full facts are known and all parties have had a chance to respond I don't think any useful purpose is served by pursuing this matter.  If there are any developments which the committee feel should be made public I will on their behalf communicate them.

June Mc.  You are quite right in saying that at the moment the decision on whether any club races seems to rest more with the Landlords of venues rather than the clubs.  When these restrictions start to be lifted we will of course look again at the re-instatement of racing.  At this moment in time we are still of the opinion that when racing re-commences it should be all clubs at the same time.  I will expand on this later in this post.  I think I can say that our responsibility is to the affiliated clubs and through them to their members.  If any club feels that it is safe to re-commence racing and writes to us on behalf of the majority of its membership we will give consideration to their proposals and please bear in mind that although we are on the committee we also own whippets and want to get back on the track as soon as is safe and practicable.

Jane R. I think your points are covered already.  Congrats on getting on the wave of this new technology.  This wrinkly is still trying!

June J.  I spoke at some length to the Secretary of the club in question explaining the rationale behind the WCRA actions.  We have a responsibility to 16 affiliated clubs and feel it only right that any relevant information is communicated to all.  I don't accept that this is a strange sentence.  It was as previously said a simple forewarning to all clubs of what might result from a disregard, however remote, of the guidelines.

Again as I have said before, IF by some chance we do have to consider action against a club and had not told everyone the consequences we would have been accused of making arbitrary decisions without prior warning.  We seemed to be in a position of being damned if we do and damned if we don't.  Areas of the country affected.  I draw your attention to the last line of paragraph 4 on the first sheet of the document Nigel posted.  We will act in response to information from MAFF.  The MAFF document in question can certainly be used to support an argument for a return to racing and it is not denied that the risk from whippet racing is very small.  However we think there is in paragraphs on what not to do an element of risk contained in the practice of our sport.  We also feel that there is a broader consideration. Our sport is to a great part carried out in rural or semi rural locations, our landlords are often involved in at risk businesses, our venues are in many cases adjacent to farm land.  There is a perception with the general public, however much the government tries to counter this, that the movement of people and animals contributes to the spread of the disease.  We therefore feel that not only must we act responsibly but we must be seen to be acting responsibly by our landlords whether private or public authorities, their neighbours and the general public.  We believe this will have long term benefits in ensuring that we have a continuing use of venues.

A cautious and some may say an over cautious approach but one that we feel is right in the present circumstances.  The daily reports we can all see and read in the media indicate that there is no slowing up of the spread of the disease at present.  It would do irreparable damage to our sport if any accusation could be laid at our door that we had been involved in the spread of the disease whether this accusations was based on fact or pure speculation.  It is obvious that you will be aware of the number of people supporting your arguments but you must also accept my word when I say that I have received numerous letters and phone calls supporting the actions of the WCRA.  As a committee we were elected to administer the sport and this we are doing in the way we feel is right.  The final judgement of our actions can only come through the ballot at the Whippet Club AGM.  I cannot nor am I willing to deny, confirm or comment on a phone call that I was not privy to, which I do not know the content of or in what context anything was said.

I am not confused. I get my ideas from the fact that 15 of the 16 committee members of the WCRA are in favour of the action we have taken, all sixteen clubs have responded positively to our requests and to date non have contacted us asking for a change of direction and finally from the many contacts I have had from racers supporting our views.  We have read the MAFF document and also visited the MAFF Website and constantly watched and read the media and do not feel there is yet enough evidence to change our advice giving regard to the points made in the previous paragraphs.  As far as avoiding unrest is concerned, if we were to relax our guidelines we would no doubt satisfy those who are support your view point but we would equally upset those who stand firm behind our actions.  Something about a rock and a hard place springs to mind.

And finally, and this is perhaps a personal comment, I am not and never will be offended by anyone expressing their views or speaking up on behalf of others.  I am glad some of my ethics rubbed off and I will always defend the right of everyone to enjoy the right of free speech.  It so happens that in this case as well as speaking on behalf of the WCRA I also on a personal basis believe what we are doing is right.  I find it almost insulting to be accused of weakening just because I support a different argument to yours.  I do not deny you the right to express your views so please allow me the same privilege.  I have always considered you a friend and hope that although we seem to be on opposite sides on this one subject we will continue as friends.  I sincerely hope this applies equally to all that enter into this discussion.

And a bit less of the "old age".  It's hard enough to live with without a young un like you rubbing it in.  Anymore and I might just let slip your age in the next post!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Judy B.  I think most of the points you raise are covered in the foregoing.  If not I am sure you will let me know.
 
Hi Doug,

Glad to see you got your post here in the end.

Can I ask for your personal view as to whether you would support a return to racing if the majority of a clubs members wanted to return and MAFF guidlines were observed.
 
Hi Doug

  I think we should all state our ages i'm 23 (ish):biggrin:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top