Tail docking illegal?

Bubblefett

My dog (a rescue from a haulting site) had his tail docked and for the first 6 months I had him he couldn't wag it properly, it wagged in a slow clockwork motion no matter how happy he was.
It was a man I met in my local park who said his tail had been docked badly and probably very painfully. Absolutely broke my heart.

Only recently he's wagging his tail like a real dog, I cried the first time I saw it, it was like he'd finally healed from the awful way he was treated before.
I still get a kick when I see it going when we play ball or he gets a treat.

Bullseye1

Something we need to consider is the fact that the majority of dog breeds that we know today would not exist if it were not for breeders. A substantial number of dog breeds exist to do a specific task, some even for how they look.

Personally I don't buy the tail docking argument as there are just as many hunting dogs with undocked tails. Dobermans and Rotties are not hunting dogs yet traditionally they have had their tails docked and in the Dobermans case their ears docked to make them look more aggressive.

It will be interesting to look at these dogs in 5-10 years time when we will be seeing them fully intact.

TooManyDogs

About dew claw removal, I wouldn't have much of a problem with removing rear dew claws, the vast majority of the one's I've seen simply hang off the side of the leg flapping, only attached by skin. I can't see any practical use for them but can imagine them getting caught on everything and potentially cause injury. When my spaniel had a large growth on the tip of her ear the vet recommended removing it to prevent it getting ripped off by accident, I think most rear dew claws fall into this category.
I would hate to thing of people removing front dew claws, they do have a purpose and having seen my lot climb near vertical banks I can only assume the front dew claws helped

ISDW

Good point Bullseye about Dobies and Rotties. What is the reasoning behind their docking, as they are not hunting dogs?

kylith

ISDW wrote: »

Good point Bullseye about Dobies and Rotties. What is the reasoning behind their docking, as they are not hunting dogs?

Word is, and this may be apocriphal, that they were working dogs. Working dogs were taxed, and to show that this tax had been paid the dogs were docked. There's also a theory that this is where the word 'dog' came from (a corruption of 'dock'), because 'dog' appears very suddenly in the middle ages with no etymology; previously any dog would have been called a 'hound'. As I said I don't know if it's true or not, but it's the story I've been told.

Both mine are docked, and though Tegan isn't too bad, Rani was left only with a stump, like a boxer. I feel so sad for her because she can only twitch her stump to show that she's happy. Whoever did it was an absolute brute.

Discodog

ISDW wrote: »

What do people who disagree with it even on those grounds think about the removal of rear dew claws on dogs - when the reason given is to prevent them catching on things and injuring the dog? Not as common as tail docking, but it does happen, and in fact I have a dog that needs to be neutered, and will be having his rear dew claws removed at the same time.

The problem is where do you draw the line ? Yes dew claws can get injured so can long ears, or tails. It is difficult to justify surgery on the basis of what might happen especially if the evidence shows that it often doesn't. Law or good practice runs into problems where there is too much individual interpretation. So if a Vet removes dew claws, for what he perceives as medical reasons, then someone else can use the same excuse to have them removed for cosmetic reasons.

There is also a perceived difference where the procedure is secondary i.e. the animal is undergoing a more major procedure & the claws are being removed whilst it is under anaesthetic. In the case of rear dew claws there may be an argument for ethical removal if it is deemed that they are a genetic oddity.

Discodog

kildare.17hmr wrote: »

Discodog its not that working dogs break their tail they cut it and it gets snagged in thick heavy cover, if a hunting dog gets hurt Badly it may not hunt cover again so Its not cosmetic its ptactical. your commenting on something you know nothing about

With respect you do not know me so you have no idea whether I "know" about this subject or not. I was expressing a personal opinion but one that is backed by a very extensive study by a highly reputable organisation.

One could argue that if your dog gets injured whilst hunting then you could be at fault by putting the dog into situations where it can get hurt. My youngster would happily charge into Briers if something took his attention but it is up to me to stop him if he is at reasonable risk of injury.

Yet again we have a situation where people that use animals for "work" or "sport" believe that they are a special case & should be excused from animal welfare law. I have no doubt that the "sport" lobby will ensure that docking is retained for working dogs even if it is against all the Veterinary evidence & advice.

Wibbs

DBB wrote: »

ISDW, my comment about dew claws is this. They are vestigial, and serve little, or no purpose (though I think the thinking is that they help spread pressure to prevent dogs sinking into soft snow? Do they really? I've always found it hard to believe, but I'm very much open to correction!).

I dunno DBB, wolves who often live in deep snow environments don't have dew claws on the rear legs. if they gave an advantage you'd imagine they would? If one is spotted with them it's even used as a clear indicator of domestic dog interbreeding/ancestry.

ISDW

kylith wrote: »

Word is, and this may be apocriphal, that they were working dogs. Working dogs were taxed, and to show that this tax had been paid the dogs were docked. There's also a theory that this is where the word 'dog' came from (a corruption of 'dock'), because 'dog' appears very suddenly in the middle ages with no etymology; previously any dog would have been called a 'hound'. As I said I don't know if it's true or not, but it's the story I've been told.

I can see the reasoning behind that, but then why wouldn't collies have docked tails? Very much a working dog, and rotties were originally herding dogs.

Discodog wrote: »

The problem is where do you draw the line ? Yes dew claws can get injured so can long ears, or tails. It is difficult to justify surgery on the basis of what might happen especially if the evidence shows that it often doesn't. Law or good practice runs into problems where there is too much individual interpretation. So if a Vet removes dew claws, for what he perceives as medical reasons, then someone else can use the same excuse to have them removed for cosmetic reasons.

There is also a perceived difference where the procedure is secondary i.e. the animal is undergoing a more major procedure & the claws are being removed whilst it is under anaesthetic. In the case of rear dew claws there may be an argument for ethical removal if it is deemed that they are a genetic oddity.

Thats my point DD. I would always tend towards removing rear dew claws, because I would worry they could get torn off and hurt the dog - the same reasoning for docking terriers though. So, am I any different in my beliefs to those who dock?:eek:

kylith

ISDW wrote: »

I can see the reasoning behind that, but then why wouldn't collies have docked tails? Very much a working dog, and rotties were originally herding dogs.

Maybe they figured it was needed for speed while chasing after sheep? Rotties would have been more for droving cattle, so didn't need to be as fast, as is evident by their size.

Discodog

ISDW wrote: »

Thats my point DD. I would always tend towards removing rear dew claws, because I would worry they could get torn off and hurt the dog - the same reasoning for docking terriers though. So, am I any different in my beliefs to those who dock?:eek:

A dog could damage dew claws by accident but a terrier is docked because it is potentially going be put into danger - there is a big difference. Terriers should never be docked & not deliberately put into risky situations.

doctor evil

Discodog wrote: »

A dog could damage dew claws by accident but a terrier is docked because it is potentially going be put into danger - there is a big difference. Terriers should never be docked & not deliberately put into risky situations.

Define danger, would that include stairs? There is risk with everything.

Zapperzy

kylith wrote: »

Both mine are docked, and though Tegan isn't too bad, Rani was left only with a stump, like a boxer. I feel so sad for her because she can only twitch her stump to show that she's happy. Whoever did it was an absolute brute.

I thought yours were cairn crosses? I didn't realise cairns were normally docked?

I don't agree with docking, especially not for rotties, dobies and boxers (non-traditional working breeds) where it is done on a purely cosmetic basis. For working dogs I would have thought well at least there is a reasoning behind it (whether true or not), but after reading here I'm not so sure now.

I would also think that lack of a tail could also contribute to people's fear of certain breeds like rottweilers, when you think of a happy dog you usually picture a waggy tail, without this waggy tail people who aren't used to dogs could misinterprete a happy dog as a cross dog so you end up with someone thinking all rottweilers, dobermans, boxers etc. are cross or just not happy lovable dogs. Would also be interesting to see how a docked dog's body language differs from a non-docked dog when communicating with other dogs.

DBB

The same argument I posed above re English pointers and the various setters applies to terriers.
Why are jackers docked, yet cairns, scotties, westies etc not? They all had the same jobs. Wheatens, patterdales, Kerry blues, Irish terriers and others traditionally have only a small portion (is it the top 3rd?) removed. Is it geographic? Or just mixed up thinking?
Any other ideas?
Zapperzy, you're quite right, cairns should not be docked. I might freak kylith out now by saying I met her dogs before she adopted them, they're cairn crosses. And, as it happens, I've taken in about 5 docked purebred westies in my time.

kylith

Zapperzy wrote: »

I thought yours were cairn crosses? I didn't realise cairns were normally docked?

They are Cairn crosses. I don't know if they're usually docked, but Tegan's seems to have been docked at about a hand's length (she was abandoned in the pound for being useless for hunting, so she was probably docked for hunting). Rani, I don't know about; I have zero history on her except that she was fat when I got her, so probably not a hunting dog. You can just make out her stump in this pic

Discodog

doctor evil wrote: »

Define danger, would that include stairs? There is risk with everything.

There is a difference between everyday danger or risk & making a dog take additional risk to suit a purpose. A Jack Russell kept purely as a pet is very unlikely to damage it's tail. It is a different matter if it is being used to hunt.

The question here is whether it is ethical to allow the mutilation of a dog for a recreational purpose. It is not being done to improve the dog's health which is why Vets have effectively banned it.

Cherry Blossom

JustAThought wrote: »

At the risk of being snarled to death by the usual suspects here ;

People are getting a bit sick of this snide, childish attitude, if you are going to continue making sweeping statements/accusations directed at either unnamed persons or the general population of this forum expect infractions to accompany them from this point on.

Either refute posts you disagree with in a civilised manner after they appear instead of speculating about what people are going to reply with, don't post in the first place if you don't want people to reply or report posts you feel cause you offence. If you have issue with this post take it up by the appropriate means, do not reply to this post on thread.

Shanao

I think most people know my stance on docking having witnessed it being performed on a boxer pup a few years ago (:mad:) so I'm not going to bother repeating the valid arguments people have already posted here.
With rotties and dobies, as far as I know, rotties had their tails docked as being cattle dogs there was a risk of their tails being stepped on by the cattle if they sat down near them. Dobies on the other hand were docked as they were bred to be guard dogs and without a tail it was impossible for an intruder to tell whether the approaching dog was friendly or not, hence making them far more hesitant about breaking in.
I've seen a few traditionally docked dogs lately with their full tails and i think its brilliant to see them, especially rotts and dobes as people see a big waggy tail and dont feel quite so scared of them.

Zapperzy

kylith wrote: »

They are Cairn crosses. I don't know if they're usually docked, but Tegan's seems to have been docked at about a hand's length (she was abandoned in the pound for being useless for hunting, so she was probably docked for hunting). Rani, I don't know about; I have zero history on her except that she was fat when I got her, so probably not a hunting dog. You can just make out her stump in this pic

Lovely looking pair, they look happy! I'd love to let mine off the lead for a run but the last I'd see of him would be his nose down and tail up! Such a shame to see a cairn with a docked tail, my fella has such a waggy tail that curls over his back when he's very happy!

kylith

Zapperzy wrote: »

Lovely looking pair, they look happy! I'd love to let mine off the lead for a run but the last I'd see of him would be his nose down and tail up! Such a shame to see a cairn with a docked tail, my fella has such a waggy tail that curls over his back when he's very happy!

Thanks They're very tired in that picture. We'd done about 5km, and they'd been chasing gulls all the way. That's one of only 2/3 places that I'll let them off, pretty much anywhere else and they'd be gone after rats and rabbits :rolleyes:

Cherry Blossom

DBB wrote: »

I've taken in about 5 docked purebred westies in my time.

Westie's have had a 're-inforced base of tail' bred into them so they could be picked up by it if they needed to be removed from somewhere they get stuck in a hurry if necessary, this was done for hunting purposes. I wouldn't imagine a Westie tail would give in too easily to being docked Or were they docked much further along the tail than most dogs?

ABajaninCork

andreac wrote: »

Thats not entirely correct. You can still show at shows in the UK where the isnt an entrance fee charged to the public so you can still show at a lot of shows in the UK with a docked dog even if it was docked after April 2007. Also you can show at shows in N.Ireland Scotland too with docked dogs after this date.

Legislation is due to be passed in NI shortly AFAIK...

andreac

andreac wrote: »

Toomanydogs, thats because there is no law!! Not in the Republic anyway.

I own and show rottweilers and know many many people involved in showing and breeding dogs that are docked. They are 100% allowed to show a docked dog in Ireland and people still dock. Trust me, i know the score on this as im involved in showing dogs and know many people who breed as well.

There is a new law coming in up North this year from April, but its not coming in down here.

ABajaninCork wrote: »

Legislation is due to be passed in NI shortly AFAIK...

Yeah i know, see my post where i already stated that

DBB

The law in NI re tail docking is already in, since early 2011. It's part of their new animal welfare Act, and does allow for docking of some working dogs under certain conditions... It amounts to a neat get-out clause, I suppose.
I'll link to it when I get a chance and when I'm at my laptop, not my phone!

AJ, the westies I got with the docked tails had stumps of about 1-1.5 inches long. One had the bone protruding from the stump, and had been like that for a looonnnnggg time. It needed to be surgically redocked. I'd have to think they're from the same source as it's quite an unusual thing to see.

meoklmrk91

I have a boxer, he is docked, if I had had my way then it wouldn't have been but there you go I was none the wiser at the time. If actually got infected, I had to take him to the vet, the vet said he was done too late and that it was lucky I had caught it early, if the infection had been left to fester it would have travelled to the bone and then up along his spine leaving him paralysed.

Anyone who argues that it is harmless and painless can take the above story into account and come back to me.

Probably the worst I ever heard was of someone who left it too late to dock the tails and wanted to sell the puppies quickly, they went to the pups with a hammer and a chisel. I hope personally hope they die a slow, painful, miserable death for inflicting that kind of torture on those poor pups.

Vote 4 Pedro

My miniature Schnauzer has a full tail and she is the only mini Schnauzer I have seen with a tail, I'm sure they are many others but i've never seen any.
When we got her a 8 weeks and she still had her tail I suppose there was no choice but even if there was I love her to bits with the tail, wouldn't have her any other way.

Wisco

For those who think docking with a ring is pain free and also risk free, you're just wrong. I've seen docked tails with bits of bone protruding (presumably because the dead tissue sloughed off leaving bone behind) as well as swelling and infection even after the dead tissue fell off. As someone else mentioned, there's a risk of infection travelling up the spinal cord and causing further problems.
And that's not including the screaming that goes on from the pups, even with local anaesthetic and pain killers (pre Vet Ireland ban). Horrific.
I'm glad the Vet Council has said not to do it, I wish it was also law. And I'd have serious concerns about using a vet who would perform such unethical surgeries anyway.

ShaShaBear

My aunt had a litter of boxer pups about 4 years ago. She tried selling them un-docked and people were having none of it. She went to a vet (I shall not name) who agreed to dock them for her. 7 of the 10 pups died on the way home, blood all over the back seat. She was utterly horrified and disgusted with herself, as she didn't realise, as I'm sure plenty don't, that this is not safe practise.
I know not all dockings end this way, but if registered vets refuse to do it, then any other means of getting this done is without question putting your dog's life at risk. My Shadow is a collie cross, and I've had him come home from a run with half the forest in his tail. I've often taken scissors out with me to cut him out of dodgy situations!
But back to my aunt, since Maggie and Tyson were never shown, and simply bought as PBR puppies and re-bred, a lot of the people ringing about the pups probably just wanted a boxer and all that "goes" with it. Since then, Maggie died of a brain tumor, and my aunt recently remembered to have herself removed from a breeder list, as many people were phoning to ask if she had un-docked puppies available (in the last year).

andreac

ShaShaBear wrote: »

My aunt had a litter of boxer pups about 4 years ago. She tried selling them un-docked and people were having none of it. She went to a vet (I shall not name) who agreed to dock them for her. 7 of the 10 pups died on the way home, blood all over the back seat. She was utterly horrified and disgusted with herself, as she didn't realise, as I'm sure plenty don't, that this is not safe practise.
I know not all dockings end this way, but if registered vets refuse to do it, then any other means of getting this done is without question putting your dog's life at risk. My Shadow is a collie cross, and I've had him come home from a run with half the forest in his tail. I've often taken scissors out with me to cut him out of dodgy situations!
But back to my aunt, since Maggie and Tyson were never shown, and simply bought as PBR puppies and re-bred, a lot of the people ringing about the pups probably just wanted a boxer and all that "goes" with it. Since then, Maggie died of a brain tumor, and my aunt recently remembered to have herself removed from a breeder list, as many people were phoning to ask if she had un-docked puppies available (in the last year).

How old were the pups when she brought them to be docked?? :eek: As docking is meant to be done between 3-5 days old just after they are born.

ShaShaBear

andreac wrote: »

How old were the pups when she brought them to be docked?? :eek: As docking is meant to be done between 3-5 days old just after they are born.

I couldnt tell you, because I could be wrong, but I would be almost positive it was 3 days after Maggie gave birth. Again, I wont say it was, because it might not have been, and I don't condone docking regardless of the age, breed, or role of the dog in a working community.

Regardless of their age, the poor pups suffered, my aunt has vowed never to breed again, and the vet in question is no longer practicing.

Personally I think a dog's tail and ears are half their character. Imagine trying to correctly interpret a human's meaning into something if they had no arms or eyebrows.