Males having them snipped to stop fighting etc.  I've known a few dogs that have had this done for this reason and actually are now worse !!  If an owner can't look after his dogs and stop them from mating should they have them??

All these that are anti-docking have you been there when a dog is docked?  Are you pro removing dew claws?  Just wondering as I've been there and they scream when they have the claws removed much more than when their tails are docked.  Actually I have always wondered why this is so?  Vets do seem anti this though.  I remember years ago wanting to have our Pomeranian's dew claws done and being asked at the time whether their tails needed docking too, boy how times have changed and that was a breed that didn't have their tails docked. 

To tell you the truth I'm not pro or anti docking.  I do have a breed that are docked though and whilst it's still legal to have a qualified vet to do it then I will.  The breed that I have also can be born naturally with short tails and tails of differing lengths so I'm in a slightly different position than some people. 

Many breeds did have their tails docked especially working dogs as in gundog and shepherding breeds for their health side as many years ago, especially the herding ones were outside and definitely weren't house dogs and in some ways their owners didn't treat them like we do today so could be left for some time and due to them being working dogs they didn't want to have to clean their back ends all the time, especially the woolly breeds such as the Spanish, it definitely wasn't for the look of the breed.

I know for me if it's banned it's banned if not I will still continue doing it the legal way.  I am definitely against anybody who did it themselves though.

Docking should be a totally individual decision.   I am in favour of retaining the right to dock, I have a breed that only has the tip docked and only a couple of breeders have their pups docked now BUT I believe anyone should be able to have their pup's docked if they so wish.    I also think it sould be able to be done again by those breeders who have years of experience in docking tails and can do a damn better job that some cack-handed vet's.

Dew claws are removed with no problems and no-one has a problem with that so why so anti-docking?

like most people on here I can see the point of docking a genuine working dog to safeguard against injury but as pups are docked when only a few days old how will a vet KNOW that they will be worked ? ( how will many of them even be able to tell what BREED they are ?. I am anti - docking for cosmetic reasons and think that we will get used to the look of tails on traditionally docked breeds (Cavaliers were once docked and we would think that looks odd now :))

There in lies the problem in working breeds Trevor, how many breeders know the sort of home a puppy will go to when its born, so perhaps they dock the whole litter in case they all go to working homes.

Talking of cosmetic mutilation, I'd much rather see a docked tail on a dog then some one walking towards me with enough metal in their ears and other places to make a family hatchback :)

Many of us who have working dogs believe in the value of them going to working homes.  I had someone request that I leave a tail on and thought she had chosen her ideal pup from birth.  He was to go to a busy and hectic home.  I refused her request even though she would have paid me up front.  It turned out that the puppy she had chosen initially did not have the right personality for that family but one of the other pups has, and fits in a treat.  She has since thanked me for not letting her be biased against docked tails.

I have had the experience of a springer who needed a long and painful amputation of a whole tail due to damage.  It had bled constantly for a year before the vet gave in and removed it all.  It was awful and really affected the personality of the dog who became more nervous and obviously suffered prolonged pain.

Having witnessed docking, I would choose that every single time for a working spaniel (who will work) over the trauma of an amputation.  I know there is no guarantee that damage will happen but when a painless and quick procedure will ensure that it doesn't, why worry?  I have fillings and injections that are uncomfortable momentarily but you soon get over them!

I would not dock a show spaniel.

Yes I believe that tail docking should be banned; anyway, when I spend money I want ALL the dog! :D

I would not buy a pen without the nib! :D

Surely whether a dog is worked or not is irrelevant?

Point 1/ If docking is banned due to being a cruel mutilation, then it follows that ALL docking should be banned, not just selectively in non-working dogs?

It is just another hypocritical proposal from the 'do-gooders' from which we seem to suffer eternally.

Point 2/ If it is not okay to dock dogs, why is it okay to dock sheep, castrate pigs without anaesthetic and de-beak chickens?

All animals are sentinent beings and if it is not okay to 'inflict mutilation' on one species, why does the same not hold true for all?

A lack of consistency in animal husbandry is what angers me, the docking of a puppy is a mere discomfort for a few minutes. Confinement in a battery cage is a life-time misery for a hen, but because they are 'just a chicken' and keep us in cheap McNuggets we turn a blind eye.

Anyone who has raised hens will confirm that they have just as much character and individual personality as a dog but because they are food, it doesn't matter how much they suffer.

I do not have a docked breed, so it will not actually effect me, but my opinion is that there are far more serious problems in the dog-world than a quick snip.

As an aside (but also linked to tail-docking) it will be interesting to see what happens when the Animal Welfare Bill is introduced. One potentially controversial item that interests me can be found in Section 3, Animal Welfare, paragraph 4, c "The need to exhibit normal behavior patterns".
Are the Government proposing that a dog should be allowed to hunt wild mammals, defecate in public and mate indiscriminately. This is all normal behaviour for a dog.

I think what they really mean is that 'dogs should be compelled to exhibit abnormal behaviour patterns that humans find acceptable'!

The mind boggles at such an obvious lack of knowledge making it as far as a draft Government bill.

Snomaes

King Charles are still docked by some breeders(well by their vets) different breed to the Cavaliers of course

Trevor, that's really interesting about Cavies, I wonder why they still dog King Charles' ????

docking should be banned - end of story. :-)
its an oudated practice, it harms the dogs ability to communicate, both with other dogs and with humans, not to mention their balancing, running and turning ability. It can also have an effect on the way they go to the toilet as the tail is used when urinating and defecating.

there is a very small case for docking working breeds, such as spaniels which work cover and run close to the ground/brambles etc, but this is a very shallow argument, since very few of the dogs bred and docked, will actually ever go on to work in the field.

Come on people, its time we showed a bit more respect for our canine companions. :-)

Many complete litters of spaniels are sold to working homes.

A correctly docked working spaniel will have plenty of tail left for communicating, balancing, running and turning.

and what is correctly docked?
just taking a small amount from the end of the tail?
why do it at all?
why not leave the tail as nature intended?
labradors are a working breed, they dont have their tails docked.......why dock some breeds but not others?
It doesnt make sense to me...........never has...........never will :-(

"what is correctly docked?" - No more than one third removed
"why do it at all? why not leave the tail as nature intended?" - The tail is shortened sufficient to reduce the risk of damage without losing the benefits of having a tail which you mentioned.
"why dock some breeds but not others?" - Because the risk to a working labrador is sufficiently less than that to a working spaniel. Labs tend to have thicker coated tails, they are less inclined to be hunting really severe cover and those that do, dont thrash their tails about like a quality spaniel will do. 

I know a number of working spaniel breeders, who breed with field trials in mind. A long tail looks stylish when the dog is hunting. There is no benefit to the breeder to shorten the dogs tail other than the prevention of working injuries. If the dogs didnt benefit, there would be no point in doing it.

Simmo has obviously never seen a Spaniel come out of the brambles covered in blood! As to Labradors, both my Anna and my old Bethany have, during their lives spent more time with their tails bandaged up than without. Add to that, a Flatcoat breeder who posts on this board who had to have a section of her dog's tail amputated due to an injury which would not heal. Certainly retrievers are not at risk as much as spaniels. A working Spaniel with a tail is almost certain to have serious trouble before very long.

Regards, John

Personally I am point blankedly against tail docking.  Have never agreed with it and never will.  I have no problem with coming out and saying it either.  They look better because that is what we are used to - it doesnt make it right.

Claire

Not me (proud owner of a docked breed with "bob tail genes" and so ends up with deformed tails sometimes, easily sorted by docking.

Lets also remember that the "working" dogs - i.e. used for shooting, ratting or whatever will have a limited time too. No doubt when the do-gooders have finished with this Bill it wont be long before the campaigns start to stop shooting. In no time, the only working dogs left will be sheep dogs. (And if they nip a sheeps ankles, they will no doubt have to be put down or muzzled!)  

Dogs will soon have no rights, they will have no jobs and if it even barks at someone it will be considerd wrong.

Ok so maybe I am going to the extream but fillis does have a point!

I do unfortunately believe that this is how our country will end up.  Now I know why I prefer dogs to people!  Regarding sheepdogs, my breed is traditionally a herding breed which actually nips at the cattle and sheeps back legs rather than the way Border Collies round the sheep, maybe that's why only one is used for this purpose inthis country.

I guess its the way life goes :( I to prefer dogs to people and am one of the few junior handlers at the age of 16 still putting dogs before boyfriends! :D Much prefere to sit at home with the dogs or walk them then go out with mates!

I do think the world will end up in sily state, or head to it, before that I'm sure we will somehow destoy ourselves by becoming "too cleaver" with things such as technology etc!

There are three breeds native to the Uk that worked by nipping the heels of cattle

The Pembroke Corgi that can have a natural bob  & I believe they were all natural bobs until Cardigan corgis were used in the breeding program
The Cardigan corgi always full tailed
The Lanceshire Heeler-always full tailed

i dont agree that we shoul;d ban tail docking but leave it up to the individual, as long as it is done correctly whats the problem???
l have Field Spaniels and would not wish to see them with tails, there little tails move faster than setters tail wow can i just see the damage that would inflict!!!

why chop off a dogs tails just because you *think* it may get damaged at some point in its life?

As a lady put it very well on another board - It is a bit like saying you will cut off your childs pinkie finger incase they pick their nose with it when they are older

:D :D :D @ Simmo! ;-)

:-)

I cant remember who said that (sorry to whoever it was for nicking your quote!! )
but I thought it summed it up quite nicely :-)

So you would also ban human, male circumcision for the same reason ? Approximately 20% of the male population is circumcised. (80% in the US)

Daisy

If dogs had freedom to roam in the wild, they probably would be fine with tails, but we expect them to live in small houses with coffee tables, door frames and hard furniture.  Either we (and the dogs) have to put up with damaged tails as a price to pay for the breed we want, or we can take action to minimise the damage by having them docked very early in life.

I'vr been told that in some countries some of the once traditionally-docked breeds now wear tailguards in the house and kennel to prevent damage.  Well, I know which I would prefer to see. 

Is there some reason why dogs cannot simply be bred to have shorter tails?

I am presuming it must be harder than simply selecting for short tails...

Lindsay
X

You'll be interested in this site about the naturally bobtailed boxers.
:)

Probably possible with  cross-breeding, as Bruce Cattenach did when he crossed Pembs Corgis with Boxers to get the bob-tail gene into the boxer.     But, in that  case, I believe the genome was similar, believe it or not. 

Good breeders have higher priorities when they choose a mating.

  Not sure what you'd cross a springer with to get a shorter tail and keep breed character- any suggestions?

Jo and the Casblaidd Flatcoats

If the dog (say Spaniel for instance), is going to be used for hunting then much as I hate to say it, I don't have a problem for docking. But......as hunting with hounds has been banned (will be illegal in a few months), and killing mice will soon become reason for prosecution, I really don't think it's going to be long before bird hunting will become illegal too.  And if that becomes illegal then why do we dock tails at all if there's no viable reason?  

Maybe we should take a leaf out of Germany book (not in the breed banning though), they have banned docking.  But if you can prove the dogs are to be hunted then you can get permission for docking.  But only for a third of the tail, and ONLY when the breeder has the permission.

I am totally against cosmetic docking though.

So all in all I am for a ban against docking. :)

EDIT:  I just read the post and I realised I couldn't understand a single word :D  So if you can make out the thread of my post you are a better person than I am. :D

As I said before, there will be people for and against and both will have their arguments. Neither will ever change the others mind. At the the end of the day, you just have to do what you feel is right, so you can look your dog in the eye without feeling guilty, and sleep at night. Personally, I don't like docking, or operations to hold up ears. I don't know about working dogs, so I can't comment. But I can almost garrantee no one on here will change their minds because of someone elses views.

Kate, I think I know what you meant! :p

But thats the point - we are not being allowed to choose what we think is right, as the CHOICE is being forcibly removed. One set of views is being forced on everyone.

Do the dogs get a choice as to whether to keep the tails or not ?  Why should the choice be ours ?

If you have some method of giving the dog the choice, then share it with us - we can also ask them if they want to be castrated/spayed or not. While the choice is with the humans, why should some dictate to all?

Unfortunately im not pyscic but if a dog is born with a tail why chop it off - surely it wants to keep it

Its also born with testicles, but some folk think they should be routinely chopped off!

Hi KateL,

I'm obviously as on the ball as you - I thought it made sense until I re-read it after your edit - now I don't have a clue what you're on about :D :D  :D

It's a relief to know I'm not alone when it comes to my fingers overtaking my thoughts at times LOL

Teri ;)

yes :-)
I see it as an unneccesary surgical procedure which people have done for one of two rather pointless reasons :

1) outdated religious tradition

2) supposed "hygiene" reasons

The 2nd one being a poor reason indeed, to keep that part of the body clean and hygenic is very simple...........wash it regularly!!! :-) :-)

sorry...........that was supposed to be in reply to daisy, but somehow its ended up here instead :rolleyes:

Unfortunately your second argument is not very good. The vast majority of those males in the US were circumcised because of medical necessity :(

Daisy

are you talking about adult males requiring to be circumsised or babies?

(I assumed you were refferring to the latter as that would be in comparison to puppies having their tails docked? )

I have no problem with an adult dog having its tail removed if it becomes severely injured, and a vet thinks that is the only course of action. Obviously it is a more difficult operation in the adult dog, but Im sure it is better that a small percentage of dogs have an operation they really REQUIRE rather than a large percentage of puppies having an unneccessary one :-)

On the same note, I have no objections to circumsision (sp) on medical grounds, but do not think it should be performed on babies (although obviously the procedure is easier in infancy)

Hope that clarifies :-)

Circumcision is more often done on religious grounds though, rather than on health grounds

Not true particularly in this country and the US see http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/menshealth/facts/circumcision.htm

Prince Charles has been done - did you know ;)

Daisy

So has someone that I know , but that was health reasons. I was thinking of Jewish men Daisy ;)

Did I *really* want to know about Charles I ask myself????

in men i prefer it! ;)

Ooh no, I think it's horrid! ;)

just as well its not complusury then!!!! ;)
that would be a good debate!!!!!!!
:D

I much prefer it too :D

I agree with you on both points, simmo.