Are there UK breeders of breeds that are docked and/or cropped in the U.S. who refuse to ship puppies to the U.S. because the breeders/owners will or may subject the dogs to those procedures?

I was talking to a breeder of Manchester Terriers at ringcraft the other night and she said she wouldn't sell a puppy to the USA because of this. Rather an odd situation though - a breed where the ears are not cropped in their native country, but are elsewhere!

> Rather an odd situation though - a breed where the ears are not cropped in their native country, but are elsewhere! <img src="/images/confused.gif" alt="confused">

I found out the other day that Boston Terriers can be cropped in the US. But they already have prick ears. Why would they need cropping?

It's too bad there is controversy over this cropping/docking business. Breeds would benefit from the intermingling of bloodlines.

To answer newyork's question, I've read that it's a matter of taste. I suppose some Boston owners/breeders like the look of cropped ears, or the dog's ears are too big, so they crop them to give them a more ideal look.

I just read the AKC Manchester Terrier standard and it says that button ears are permissible, so I don't see a reason to crop. The Manchester Terrier is one breed which looks better with natural ears, in my opinion. Mind you, I am not for banning the practice. I believe it should be left up to the dog's owner. I shake my head at the fact that animal rights nutters have succeeded in getting tail docking banned in the UK and Europe! Bouviers with natural tails look so odd, as do pretty much all the other breeds that were docked before the ban. I guess I'm just not used to it.

> I shake my head at the fact that animal rights nutters have succeeded in getting tail docking banned in the UK and Europe!

Thanks a bunch! - you've just labelled me and a whole lot of others on this forum as "AR Nutters."
Many of us believe deliberate mutilation of animals to be unnecessary and cruel in this day & age. And guess what, so do the governments of many other countries, all over the world.  Who's the nutter now?

I wasn't trying to wind you up, MsTemeraire. I don't think cropping or docking is barbaric, and I believe the individual has the right to decide whether or not to have their dogs undergo these procedures. UK breeders haven't cropped for over a hundred years, but they did dock up until the ban was passed. So do you think these people were/are monsters? I don't.

It's unfortunate that certain breeds will probably develop into different types between the two continents, all because opponents of docking had to have it their way.

> It's unfortunate that certain breeds will probably develop into different types between the two continents, all because opponents of docking had to have it their way.

It's unfortunate that certain breeds will probably develop into different types between the two continents, all because proponents of docking want to have it their way.

And its not as if this was not happening anyway between the two continents. The US GSD bears little resemblance to the English Alsatian or the European GSD. And then there are Cocker spaniels. Our American cocker went over to the states as a Cocker spaniel and came back as a totally different breed.

The USA could stop docking and cropping too. There are a lot of practices that hail from centuries ago that are now outlawed in much of the world. As a society finds out that a practice is inhumane then as a developed society it is reviewed and if found to have no good reason then the practice is stopped.

I personally have less of a problem with docking as it is carried out so young I do believe that pups recover quickly from it. However it can cause long term problems therefore it would be better not done. Ear cropping however I find quite barbaric. It is done on older dogs and involves anaesthetics which carry a risk  and no doubt causes pain to an animal. Ear cropping is done entirely for cosmetic reasons just because people like pricked ears. I don't believe we have the right to cause pain and suffering to any animal just on a whim. If American breeders like pricked ears so much then why not breed for them like UK breeders have bred for bobtailed boxers?

Some breeds were losing sameness in type between the UK/Europe and the U.S., but now even more so will, and that is something very regretful. So breed vigor will be sacrificed to make whiners happy. I don't think it's worth it.

Proponents aren't forcing others to live by their rules! If you're against it, don't do it to your dog, but don't try to decide for others! My dog; my choice. You can't tell a parent they cannot pierce their child's ears or circumcise them, so what makes you animal rights extremists think you should be allowed to tell other dog owners what they can do with their dogs?!

It's ludicrous that some countries, to my knowledge, won't even allow cropped/docked dogs into the country, never mind to be shown! Is it true that even the offspring of such dogs will be disqualified? To me, that is an overreach!

If you're against it, don't do it to your dog, but don't try to decide for others! My dog; my choice.

yes and my dogs my choice too, If the US is that worried about not being able to import European dogs then they can stop docking or cropping. It sounds like you want Europe to start allowing docking again just to suit the Us.

>So breed vigor will be sacrificed to make whiners happy

'Whiners'? So people who are concerned for animal welfare (as opposed to animal rights, which is a totally different matter) are 'whiners'? Perhaps that attitude is why people are wary of allowing their carefully-reared puppies to be subjected to pointless and painful procedures?

>It's ludicrous that some countries, to my knowledge, won't even allow cropped/docked dogs into the country, never mind to be shown!

Which countries are those? It's certainly not something I've ever heard; definitely not the UK.

> Is it true that even the offspring of such dogs will be disqualified?

You'd need to check with the relevant KCs - again, it's certainly not true for the UK.

Vets are prohibited from performing surgical procedures that have no medical benefit for an animal, which is why tail docking isn't totally banned. Ear cropping has absolutely no medical benefit and was banned over a century ago. Debarking and the declawing of cats are also banned for the same reason.

I think you are being offensive in labelling all those that support the banning of these practices as animal rights nutters.

I don't think you will find any support for your views here so why waste your breath?

If you are so concerned about limiting lines then why don't you set aside your pursuit of canine aesthetic surgery and concentrate your efforts on improving gene pools.

You introduced this subject, seems like you are the one doing the whining.

They do the same with Min pins (we have a Canadian Min pin poster) over there, but because they crop often the uncropped pups have either over large ears or they don't stand up.  I assume ditto with the Bostons.

>I don't think cropping or docking is barbaric,

I certainly think cropping is barbaric, as it is done when the pup is several months old, and has been outlawed in the UK for around 130 years.

As for docking if done at a few days old I have no real objection, as it does prevent tail injury, and at that stage puppies nervous systems are immature.  Certainly with the ligature method they and their dam seem totally unaware it is being done.

Removal of hind dewclaws causes more discomfort, but is worthwhile (as easier to do when newborn and they often cause pain if torn later) and legal for even a lay person to perform.

Cropping has no benefit for the dogs, docking and dew claw removal can prevent tail injuries which are common enough to be considered a therapeutic reason for doing them.

>It's unfortunate that certain breeds will probably develop into different types between the two continents

This is already the case in many many breeds whether docked or not as the showrings priorities are rather different between UK and USA.

Stronger breed competition numbers in most breeds at Championship level here, mean that winning in the breed (or sex) is what counts and anything else is Icing on the cake, largely irrelevant. 

It seems for those that are very competitive that winning in the breed, in countries where entries are low, so competition unsatisfying, it's all about Group or above. 

With primarily non specialists judges judging breeds in countries where numbers in breeds are low, the 'Generic' show dog is king, and often more correct type dogs are sidelined. 

This tends to lead to exaggerations, like overangulated hindquarters and straight front assemblies seen in many breeds, though the uniform way of stacking across the board tends to heighten this.

Surely a lot of this, when it comes to a breeder wanting to go to the expense of importing (UK to USA) would primarily be for the bloodlines - if the dog is good enough to be shown, that would be icing on the cake.  However, many dogs have now gone to America to be shown at some point in their careers, in UK form.

Personally although I'm for docking, provided it's done within days of birth, and by a professional, and regret this being banned now in the UK, I absolutely hate cropping because I have yet to read anything to persuade me that these days this is done for anything other than cosmetic reasons.  Unlike docking.

I guess exporting a dog who might be cropped later on, would be up to the individual UK breeder.   Perhaps sending one over after the time cropping should be done, would stop that from happening?

Add -   In Bassets, when I first came into the breed, removing dew claws (front - back didn't happen usually) was the norm because it was commonly felt it made for a neater looking foot.   I did my early litters (vet) but neither of us enjoyed doing this (vet nor me) and after the first litters, I stopped.   Out in Canada they were left on in any case - and more recently in the UK, they are also not removed ..... mainly I think because it was really only in the UK that this procedure was done and with exporting these days, people now feel it's better to leave them on.   Over all the years I've had Bassets, we've never had a dew-claw injury (now just watch ...... Sods Law).

It's unfortunate that certain breeds will probably develop into different types between the two continents,

I know you said that in innocence but you need to understand this - In mainland Europe all working breeds must (mandatory) pass a fit for purpose test by the breed registration club before a breeding licence to breed that individual dog is issued, thats mainland Europe - certainly my breed is very different there to UK the equivilent.

This is a UK site & UK The UK Kennel Club is the breed registration club, there are no mandatory fit for purpose tests here although there seems to be an insignificant number or rules of some kind, over this past 3 or 4 years only to some dogs, if jack wants to mate his Lab with Jills lab down the road for any reason whatsoever then yea hey just go ahead & do it, no mandatory anything.

So please do not equate UK dogs with their Euro counterparts, in a canine context specificaly, the UK dog breeding is a very different continent to Europe.

Just so you get more information about UK breeding I typed into youtube search -"UK Kennel Club" - check the link below to see what comes up!
http://bit.ly/1mpbvfJ
.

I have never removed front dewclaws and never had issues, these are strong but neat toes that the dog use when chewing ones etc. they are never removed in the UK, or in Scandinavia where the dogs are worked over rough terrain, < but some in USA do.

There is some evidence that removing front dews is disadvantageous for dogs doing Agility as at speed they appear to help with stability/grip.

Our bred does not have rear ones, but an elkhound Husky  cross I fostered had rear ones that were just a claw on a skin tag, and shortly after she was homed she ripped one and it took some time to heal.

My understanding is that most usually the rear ones are not proper claws with bones attached to the foot but just this skintag claw type arrangement, and these certainly are best removed.

My understanding is that most usually the rear ones are not proper claws with bones attached to the foot but just this skintag claw type arrangement, and these certainly are best removed.

Far from always. I have had rear dewclaws in BOTH my breeds (which are totally different to each other) where the extra one has been a complete toe the same size as the rest with just as much bone. But they do need to go all the same. My mentor in one breed once kept such rear dewclaws and found once adult the dog's rear dewclaws would occasionally get stuck in each other causing the dog to fall over. Like having your shoelaces tied together as a prank! I have however never removed front ones and find they are used a lot by the dogs. I can remember one dog that frequently had problems with injuries with her front dewclaws, but that is only one out of all I've had.

It's unfortunate that certain breeds will probably develop into different types between the two continents, all because opponents of docking had to have it their way.

Is it just me not seeing this but I don't see how docking/cropping or not would cause this, as if breeding to the breed standards the only diffrence would be the tail length and ears, everything else should still be the same as the breeds standard. So any diffrence should be down to differences in the standards in diffrent countries or breeders breeding for extremes.
Also if USA breeders want new blood and can't find UK/Europe breeders who will sell them one of there pups as they don't want to risk pups they habe bred being cropped/docked once out there why couldn't they simply use studs from UK/Europe instead.

I shake my head at the fact that animal rights nutters have succeeded in getting tail docking banned in the UK and Europe! Bouviers with natural tails look so odd, as do pretty much all the other breeds that were docked before the ban. I guess I'm just not used to it.

We weren't used to seeing dogs with full tails either in traditionally docked breeds, we did get used to it.

Unfortunately your posts are reinforcing the stereo typical American dog person as often seen by UK dog people: Let's chop the dog's tail off, cut the ears into a nice shape, let's remove the vocal cord to stop it from barking, remove cats' claws to stop them from scratching, while you are at it also neuter at 8 weeks for anything going as a pet, and no need to worry if you are working full time -the dog isn't able to bark so you can easily stick it in a cage for 12 hours a day and 8 hours a night, it is after all GOOD for the dog and better to have a home than not. Then if the dog has any behavioural problems, stick an electric shock collar or choke chain on it and teach it who is the boss. No, I do not necessarily believable ANY of this is true of the average American dog person, but it is an impression that is often given to us here and all you are doing here, on a UK forum, is to reinforce that. If you are worried about bloodlines maybe you should help to make US breeders look good rather than bad?

Bottom line: I do not think it's barbaric, no matter how much people try to condemn the practice! The dog is asleep and can't feel a thing during the operation. They may feel discomfort for a day or two, but then they heal and it's all back to normal and they're playing happily! There is no lasting negative affect on the dog's psychological health, so what is the big deal?

Let me also say this: Part of why I own dogs is because I want something pleasing to look at. It's not as much a joy, for me, to have a floppy-eared Dobie or any other cropped breed as it is to own one that looks menacing and intense. Yes, it boosts one's ego to show off such a dog, just like it does to show off expensive cars or clothing. Call me shallow, but I'm NOT sorry for MY reasons for owning dogs.

It's a shame that some UK/Euro breeders ostracize Americans instead of respecting our different ways of doing things.

> It's a shame that some UK/Euro breeders ostracize Americans instead of respecting our different ways of doing things.

It's a shame that some Americans breeder call UK and European breeders animal rights nutters instead of respecting our different ways of doing things.

Just out of interest, could a docked dog (born since ban) be shown if the docking was for a medical reason and they had vet certification?

>They may feel discomfort for a day or two, but then they heal and it's all back to normal and they're playing happily!

Apart from the weeks of continual bandaging and rebandaging, and the discomfort of having the ears taped to posts for weeks to make them stand up - not being able to roll over on their backs as natural-eared pups can, without discomfort.

>as it is to own one that looks menacing and intense.

And that's the bottom line - it's to make a dog look fierce and more of a p***s-extension.

This is the same poster who, in previous posts, was praising dogs with extreme features like the folds of skin on Neo Mastiffs. this current rant/discussion seems to continue the same desire for extreme features.
Almost a case of 'I want the dog to look like 'this' and to H*** with how its life is affected'

Actually I am wondering if this person is a troll. It seems a pointless discussion since the other person will not be persuaded there is a problem with her a stance and I doubt there is anyone else on here that wholeheartedly shares her views so cannot see where the debate will take us.

This poster is happy she says to be viewed as shallow, so be it.

I just knew someone would call me a troll! What? You find it unbelievable that anyone could truly feel as I do!? Well, freelancer, I am NOT a troll, and I am not alone in wanting dogs for aesthetic reasons, either! I think cropped/docked breeds look better altered than natural; I'm being 100% honest! So why should I not have the right to own dogs the way I want them to look? It'll be a sad day when I won't be able to own a Bouvier that looks like the ones from books and how I remember them from my childhood!

This discussion started about UK breeders rejecting buyers from the U.S. based on their objection to what we do to dogs in the U.S. My question was answered that, yes, there are breeders who won't sell to Americans because we crop/dock, and my response is that is spiteful and shameful. I strongly hope that there won't be any compromises in type and health in U.S. show dogs in the future as a result of overreaching legislation and policies abroad.

I just knew someone would call me a troll!

Take no notice, when adults are.......well....'limited' they draw on memories of the playground vocal tools & a chronological regression without insight takes place, maybe they are a nice person in situations which demand little, well, very little. Its just a form of internet bullying, this minority of internet mariners are useless unless they're in these little gangs.
.

Poochlover, so, you have made it clear where you stand and what your views are, others have replied. That's about it, I think, is there anything to add?

My question was answered that, yes, there are breeders who won't sell to Americans because we crop/dock, and my response is that is spiteful and shameful.

Funny how you think that it's fine for you to do with your dogs as you wAnt but don't like others doing what they like with there dogs.
At the end of the day in many places ear cropping is banned and in those places most breeders feel its not acceptable to physically alter a dog for cosmetic reasons, as such they will not want puppies they have bred and raised to have to undergo those sort of things. They are their puppies and they can sell them to whoever they wish. Just as your free to do with your puppies as you wish.

If breeders in the US want new blood they can agree not to crop puppies they buy from one of those breeders, they won't be able to show it but they can breed from it as after all that was the point of wanting the pup anyway New blood not a new show dog.

>I just knew someone would call me a troll!
>>Take no notice ....  Its just a form of internet bullying ...

And this from someone who only 2 days ago accused me of being a troll ...

> So why should I not have the right to own dogs the way I want them to look?

Because they are living, emotional animals that feel pain, and these procedures have no medical value whatsoever - you are inflicting pain on an animal for purely cosmetic reasons.  Docking for a working dog that might otherwise end up with months of severe pain and tail amputation further down the line (which I have seen), yes; but ear cropping serves no purpose except to fulfil your own aesthetic desires.  It's selfish, and it does not benefit the dog.

>ear cropping serves no purpose except to fulfil your own aesthetic desires.  It's selfish, and it does not benefit the dog.

That sums it up in a nutshell. There's no moral justification for the procedure.

> This discussion started about UK breeders rejecting buyers from the U.S. based on their objection to what we do to dogs in the U.S. My question was answered that, yes, there are breeders who won't sell to Americans because we crop/dock, and my response is that is spiteful and shameful.

Why not ask the same question on forums in Asutralia, New Zealand, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Scandinavia (to name but a few?). You will get the same answer. In fact at least one of those countries does not permit cropped dogs to even be owned by residents.

Ear cropping was outlawed in the UK around 1840, so not far off 200 years ago - long before ANY Kennel Clubs or showing societies were established anywhere in the world, not to mention breed standards for the purposes of showing.

Ear cropping was outlawed in the UK around 1840, so not far off 200 years ago - long before ANY Kennel Clubs or showing societies were established anywhere in the world, not to mention breed standards for the purposes of showing.

Like button wanted. :)

That sums it up in a nutshell. There's no moral justification for the procedure.

The only justification needed in my book is that it's MY dog that I have to live with and I want it to look that way for my own (yes, selfish) pleasure! I love dogs, believe me I do, but I don't love them to the point of assigning human emotions and value to them! Therefore, I see it as my right to do to my dog what I want. Of course, I think those who abuse and/or neglect animals are monsters who should be punished, but cropping and/or docking do not meet the threshold for abuse in my eyes.

I suppose, like one member said, if an American breeder wants to introduce new blood into their program, the best solution is to promise the breeder that they won't subject the dog to those procedures and will just use it for breeding.

A sound solution and one we probably all agree on.

MY dog that I have to live with and I want it to look that way for my own (yes, selfish) pleasure! and I see it as my right to do to my dog what I want.

Extending that line of thought  I suppose you would persuade/insist that your partner or child went to a plastic surgeon if they developed any physical differences that you did not like!

I find it laughable that someone who proclaims to be a dog lover, see's nothing wrong in snipping off parts of a dogs body they find to be unacceptable.
I will never understand some people.

Tatty, it's beyond ridiculous to compare children to dogs! A human's worth is infinitely greater than a dog's! You cannot treat another human the way you can treat a dog. You own the dog; you don't own another human! A dog doesn't have near the same rights as a person, and it is morally indefensible to alter a human's body without consent. But since a dog is just an animal, there's a different standard for how I can treat it.

I'm sorry, but people who compare dogs to children need to get their priorities fixed! A dog lives 15 years if lucky and never makes plans to travel the world; graduate from university; never shares funny stories; never fixes you tea when you need cheering up, etc., etc.  Each person is a unique and special being who leaves an irreplaceable mark on the lives of those close to them. Their idiosyncrasies are irreplaceable. What do dogs do? For the most part, they eat, sleep, lick themselves, and cuddle with you.

Like I said, I love dogs, too, but some people take that love for dogs too far!

> Like I said, I love dogs, too, but some people take that love for dogs too far!

So they are merely objects that can be "customised" to the owner's wishes?

I think those who abuse and/or neglect animals are monsters who should be punished, but cropping and/or docking do not meet the threshold for abuse in my eyes

What meets the term of abuse/neglect will differ depending on who you speak to. For example im sure the people who are involved in dog fighting, bare baiting, horse fighting ect don't think there sport is abuse however most of the world would beg to differ. So if you go onto a forum based in a country where cropping has been banned you can expect that the majority will not share your opyion and may conisder it as abuse.

It seems all your posts have been made about the diffrences in opyion, Type or dogs ect of USA and UK dogs and to me at least seems like there posted more to wind up the uk members more than anything.

I think those who abuse and/or neglect animals are monsters who should be punished, but cropping and/or docking do not meet the threshold for abuse in my eyes

What meets the term of abuse/neglect will differ depending on who you speak to. For example im sure the people who are involved in dog fighting, bare baiting, horse fighting ect don't think there sport is abuse however most of the world would beg to differ. So if you go onto a forum based in a country where cropping has been banned you can expect that the majority will not share your opyion and may conisder it as abuse.

It seems all your posts have been made about the diffrences in opyion, Type of dogs ect of USA and UK dogs and to me at least seems like there posted more to wind up the uk members more than anything.

I'm sorry, but people who compare dogs to children need to get their priorities fixed! A dog lives 15 years if lucky and never makes plans to travel the world; graduate from university; never shares funny stories; never fixes you tea when you need cheering up, etc., etc. Each person is a unique and special being who leaves an irreplaceable mark on the lives of those close to them. Their idiosyncrasies are irreplaceable. What do dogs do? For the most part, they eat, sleep, lick themselves, and cuddle with you.

I know disabled children who would fit this description.    So would you treat them like your dogs?  

After all, according to you, if they can't do everything a non-disabled person can do, then they are fair game.

It sounds to me as if you don't actually take much notice of dogs, apart from wanting to cut bits off them so they fit your idea of looking the part.   Otherwise you'd realise that dogs also are unique individuals with their own set of idiosyncracies and quite irreplaceable too.   You may be able to have another dog, but it won't be the same dog, it will have a different personality.  If you stop cutting bits off it long enough you might get to know the dog.

I don't wish to wind people up! How many times do I have to tell people this!? I am concerned that, with American dogs being excluded from participating in breeding and showing outside N. and S. America and Asia (and breeders in those continents use American dogs anyway), desirable traits might be lost or undesirable traits might start appearing more widely in our stock. I come to this forum to address those concerns and to find out if they're warranted. 

>I am concerned that, with American dogs being excluded from participating in breeding and showing outside N. and S. America and Asia

You still haven't answered my query about which countries "to your knowledge" don't allow docked/cropped dogs to be imported, or their offspring shown.

>Each person is a unique and special being who leaves an irreplaceable mark on the lives of those close to them. Their idiosyncrasies are irreplaceable. What do dogs do? For the most part, they eat, sleep, lick themselves, and cuddle with you.

Every single dog I've had has been "a unique and special being" with individual idionsyncrasies and unique personalities who has left an irreplaceable mark on my life. I feel very sad for your dogs - and for you, because you're missing out on so much - if you haven't bothered to notice this about them.

When the natural/primitive form of the canine is to have prick ears, why develop breeds with drop ears and then try and undo that by cropping them.

Mine like yours is a preference for a dog to have prick ears, so I chose a breed that naturally has these.  I also find it convenient to not have a swishing tail covering my walls in mud and battering my legs and if large knocking things off small tables, so I chose a breed with a tightly curled tail.

I have also never understood why people choose breeds, presumably because they like how they look with profuse coats, and then have them clipped off, but at least a coat will grow back.

> I don't wish to wind people up! How many times do I have to tell people this!? I am concerned that, with American dogs being excluded from participating in breeding and showing outside N. and S. America and Asia (and breeders in those continents use American dogs anyway), desirable traits might be lost or undesirable traits might start appearing more widely in our stock. I come to this forum to address those concerns and to find out if they're warranted.

Yes quite probably. If the rest of American dog owners have a similar attitude to yourself then I think you will find people becoming increasingly reluctant to send any dogs to the US. The rest of the developed world now accepts that there is wrong to mutilate animals just for our pleasure. Your posts have convinced me that there is no way I would send a dog out to the states even though my breed is neither cropped nor docked over there.