Government Vet Dr. Jonathan Nisbett has responded to concerns that rabies could be introduced to the Island when dogs travel overseas to get their ears clipped - and stated that Bermuda was not at risk.

Dr. Nisbett said when he allowed dogs to be sent to rabies-ridden parts of the US to have their ears docked, they were sent under exactly the same conditions as other animals sent for emergency treatment.

"All of the arrangements are made prior to departure," said Dr. Nisbett.

"The animal is sealed in a travel crate by my department. When it arrives, the seal is in tact. It is not allowed to go anywhere else except that particular clinic."

He said the clinics were provided with a seal, so the crate was re-sealed before the animal was discharged from the hospital again.

And he said when the crate arrived back in Bermuda, Customs officers were responsible for checking to make sure the seal was intact and all the paperwork was at is should be.

Dr. Nisbett spoke out after The Royal Gazette reported yesterday how some vets had concerns that the deadly disease could be brought to the Island if proper checks and procedures were not in place.

They claimed a "loophole" in the legislation that allowed dogs to leave the Island for emergency treatment was being used by dog breeders who wished to have the ears of their dogs clipped.

They said since all vets on the Island introduced a policy not to clip ears, on the grounds that it was unethical, dog owners have had to go overseas to get it done legally.

President of the Bermuda Veterinary Association Dr. Andrew Madeiros said when animals were sent abroad for specialised surgery, the situation was, theoretically, fully controlled by the vet and top line clinics were used.

However, he said when breeders or owners sent their dogs to the US for ear-clipping, vets had no idea who was performing the surgery, where the dogs were going, or whether they would be kept in a confined area.

He said there may, in fact, be very little rabies risk, but vets simply did not know, and said the procedure should be more controlled.

But Dr. Nisbett said: "They are exactly the same conditions as the vets use when they send their own referrals out of Bermuda.

"When these puppies are sent to get their ears cropped, they are too young to have the rabies inoculation. But dogs that are sent for emergency treatment rarely have rabies injections - it takes too long for the procedure to take effect.

"Ear cropping is not an illegal procedure. The owners are able to send their dogs out under this policy.

"If there is a rabies risk when we send dogs for ear cropping, then there is exactly the same risk for sending out dogs for medical treatment. Exactly the same conditions apply."

But Dr. Nisbett also said the vets were being hypocritical because many of them were happy to dock a dog's tail, but not ears.

And he said his department recognised that it had to protect against rabies, and so carried out all of the checks necessary.

However, he admitted that his department did not know details about the clinics overseas, or the confinement they were kept in.

He said before the dogs were allowed back in to Bermuda, all of their paperwork from the clinic had to be shown and approved.

"I think the crux of this matter here, with the vets, really is whether or not we, or I, should prohibit people from travelling overseas under this legislation for what they would call distasteful surgery," added Dr. Nisbett.

"When people come to me for a permit, I try to discourage them from sending their dogs away for this, but it is their choice.

"Yes, we have a long way to go to educate people, but it's an ethical issue and people have to make up their own minds."