Tail Docking

[babybell911]

Your argument of the dogs tail being natures way is pretty flawed. Due to the fact that most dog breeds arent actually nature. They were all specifically bred by us crossing this with that to get a certain thing in a certain breed. Infact nature has little to do with most dogs, we did it all. Have you not read the kennel club thing? They have so many specific things you need in a breed that if you left it up to nature to do you'd never get a show worthy dog. I know plenty of breeders that have had puppies put to sleep because they are not just right. (wrong colour, wrong size,wrong anything) That is not nature. The runt of a litter dying maybe, but just because that puppy is a little off show colour nature wouldnt make it die.

I agree with docking tails although when it's illegal I wont miss it or kick up a fuss I have a collie he'd look stupid docked. But i also look after a springer who is forever getting her tail caught up in brambles and yanking big patches of fur out because she won't wait to be untangled.

 

[raptorrex]

Your argument of the dogs tail being natures way is pretty flawed. Due to the fact that most dog breeds arent actually nature. They were all specifically bred by us crossing this with that to get a certain thing in a certain breed. Infact nature has little to do with most dogs, we did it all. Have you not read the kennel club thing? They have so many specific things you need in a breed that if you left it up to nature to do you'd never get a show worthy dog. I know plenty of breeders that have had puppies put to sleep because they are not just right. (wrong colour, wrong size,wrong anything) That is not nature. The runt of a litter dying maybe, but just because that puppy is a little off show colour nature wouldnt make it die.

I agree with docking tails although when it's illegal I wont miss it or kick up a fuss I have a collie he'd look stupid docked. But i also look after a springer who is forever getting her tail caught up in brambles and yanking big patches of fur out because she won't wait to be untangled.

wild or domesticated all dogs have tails, or the breeds that have their tail docked,. would not need it done. as it would have been removed via selection if that were possible. so i would say it is you that has the faulty argument.

killing any animal because it is too big or the wrong colour? who are these morons?

just another point, if these breeders, continue to produce dogs with congenital defects, like the German shepherd (bad hips) or the boxer (bad breathing) and so on. are they not involved in cruel practices? you now have to prove that you dog is well kept, by law. so if you continue to breed dogs with these fault, it stand to reason, these people should be prosecuted.

if it was not for the patronage of the pet food makers, the KC and it vile cohorts, could not even keep themselves solvent. so why the hell are they allowed to exercise, the control they do? sack them and make the idiots follow the rules the rest of us have to.

and though it is many years ago, i spent a lot of time with a very successful Afghan hound breeder, the conditions the dogs were kept in was terrible. they say things have improved, but that is not the case if you get to the kennels before the tidy up starts.



guess you can tell i'm sitting on the fence here!! lol

 

[babybell911]

I'm completely agree with you about the KC morons they ruined many a good breed of dog. The alsation for instance there is a flat back variant which has less trouble with the hips but the KC say the breed needs a sloping back to be shown where the hip problems come in. Also the bulldog and other squash faced dogs all have breathing problem but they'll never breed them out.

Anyway this a completely different debate. I think there will never be a clean cut view on docking, everyone will have there opinions on it. I was just voicing mine.

My auntie has a weirama (sp?) that she had to rescue from being put to sleep as the breeder said it was the wrong colour for showing.

 

[geo7x]

Your argument of the dogs tail being natures way is pretty flawed. Due to the fact that most dog breeds arent actually nature.

well yeah, everyone knows that, but does that mean to say that we should go "oh what the heck, theyre not natural anyway, lets just go and chop their tail off because we can"

Please explain why we should chop a dog's tail off just because the dog isn't natural anyway? So wht if the dog isnt natural, "natural" dogs have tails, and big bushy ones at that, theyre natural, it's mainly things like colour and body shape that are bred into dogs.

But i also look after a springer who is forever getting her tail caught up in brambles and yanking big patches of fur out because she won't wait to be untangled.

this is more of a training thing than a problem with the dog, there wouldnt be much of a problem if the dog was actually properly trained to come to you and wait on command. My springer spaniel does, and yeah, he gets brambles stuch in his fur from time to time, but its not always in his tail, and what dog doesnt have things stuck in them on a walk?

 

[l.michelle]

Quite true, regarding the brambles, my old dog (who has since passed) was rather large, he was a lab retriever/german sheperd/collie and he had tufts of hair behind his ears and had a rather pretty tail that had lkong fine hair, he would get things stuck both behind his ears and his tail, but that is no reason for wanting to cut off a dog's tail, if stuff gets stuck in their ears, do you cut those off too? I know that in dobermans people like the dog to have pointed ears, why? what is the reason for a dog to have pointed ears?

It is natural for any dog with longer hair that likes to run around to get things stuck in their fur, including their tails, it happens, and in my opinion is no reason to have the dog's tial docked just because things might get stuck in it.

 

[raptorrex]

for what its worth i feel we need to commend the posters on this thread. with a subject like this, im sure the mods were keeping a eye out for fallouts! put everyone, though making strong point at times, has kept it civil. and because of that the thread has been both entertaining and informative. from me at least congrats all lets keep it up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[William]

I have a working springer and her tail is docked. I've seen undocked spaniels and by the end of the day working in thick undergrowth their tails are usually red as well as their sides from blood. I don't think they particularly notice it, but it does make them vulnerable to infection, and secondary amputation, which I think is worse than having the tail removed within 36 hours of birth.

That said, for cosmetic reasons- I'm against tail docking.

 

[Archer]

I think theres 2 issues here.
1/ tail docking.Doesn't affect me directly since my breeds have natural tails however I think within the breeds that are docked at the moment the next few years are going to be very hard.Trying to breed a dog with a certain type of tail/tail set when the breeding stock have all been docked is going to cause problems since it will be impossible to know whta the docked dogs tail was like before amputation.I think there are pros and cons to docking...but as from this month it doesn't matter.
2/The KC ruining breeds....I would just like to say that the KC doesn't ruin breeds.It does not write the breed standard nor does it breed dogs.Breeds are governed by the judges and breeders and there interpretation of the standard.As for the GSD(Alsation) its sloping back(which the KC breed standard says should be GENTLY sloping) has nothing to do with Hip displacia.The incidence and severity of HD in well bred GSD is very good.However the backyard and hobby breeders who breed from their pet dogs/bitches without health tests and research are doing the bred no favours.

 

[raptorrex]

I think theres 2 issues here.
2/The KC ruining breeds....I would just like to say that the KC doesn't ruin breeds.It does not write the breed standard nor does it breed dogs.Breeds are governed by the judges and breeders and there interpretation of the standard.As for the GSD(Alsation) its sloping back(which the KC breed standard says should be GENTLY sloping) has nothing to do with Hip displacia.The incidence and severity of HD in well bred GSD is very good.However the backyard and hobby breeders who breed from their pet dogs/bitches without health tests and research are doing the bred no favours.

can you actually show a boxer or any other dog with a tail in a KC show?

ok so all the breed problems are not the fault of the breeders trying to please the judges its the people who keep them as pets that do it
if the KC has no part in the breeding perhaps they should do their job and stop it. all shows are under the control of the KC, if they let their judges define breeds they are just as guilty as the breeder.

one more point. are you saying these disgusting bald dogs were not the work of people in the KC or its world wide equivalents? cant see Paris Hilton popping down to town to buy a dog from the American equivalent of a council estate!

 

[pica_nuttalli]

i have to say that in the vast majority of cases, i think that tail docking is unnecessary and purely cosmetic. i'm not certain that i buy the argument that docked dogs have communication problems as that should lead to a corresponding arguement that docked dogs are more difficult to socialize and more prone to getting into fights. unless the latter is also the case, any communication impediment caused by docking is effectively minor and does not impair the dog's daily experiences.

however, i am not certain that i support a blanket ban on docking. in my portion of the world (i can't speak for others), i know that there are many breeders who dock the tails of their dogs not because of any breed standard but because they breed working dogs. my grandfather, for example, has bred many a mongrel hound and has a very positive reputation in his circle. i would not call him a backyard breeder, as all of his pups have homes prearranged and none of his bitches are bred more than 2-3 times. but these are definitely not pure-bred dogs and all of them are homed to work as hunting dogs. the larger, more retriever-like dogs are not docked because they have very stout tails and also use them as rudders while swimming (so i am told). however, all of the smaller hounds are docked within hours (not days) of birth. these dogs are docked partially because they have delicate, whip-like tails and also because tail-wagging would impede their effectiveness as hunting dogs.

in the 10+ years that my grandfather has been breeding and training these dogs, i can think of not one instance where an at-home docking has lead to a pup's death or any sort of detectable paralysis/nerve damage. i also fail to see any obvious communication troubles between these dogs. (he always has 3-4 of them wandering the enclosed garden area to deter nuisance animals and vermin.) there aren't problems with fighting, although i will admit that they are more prone to play wrestling than other dogs. but since there aren't any injuries as a result of the rough play, i don't percieve it to be serious aggression--which is what i would expect to be the result of the poor communication implied by Kathy's arguement against tail docking.

this is what i think:

• there are legitimate health and safety concerns when it comes to the removal of any part of an animal's body
• most of these removals (such as docking) are conducted for purely cosmetic reasons
• however, certain types of working dogs are docked for both the safety of the dog and the needs of the work
• thus a blanket ban is probably unnecessary and may even cause more suffering to true working dogs than the actual docking process
  
  if you truly feel that your breed needs to be docked, then i would encourage you to form up a society which collects data on tail damage in undocked individuals. i would also encourage you to attempt to collect data on damage resulting from docking. the easiest way to earn a legal exception for your breed will be to show that the statistical likelihood of docking-related injury is less than the statistical likelihood of ultimate tail amputation in an intact animal. since essentially everyone agrees that adult amputation is more harmful than docking within the first hours of life, if you can find concrete evidence that amputation is also more probable, then you would have a legitimate arguement against the ban on docking. however, since both of these types of injury are relatively rare, it would require some pretty extensive research and data collection in order for you to form a cohesive argument that docking (by definition, a type of deliberate disfigurement) is beneficial.
  
  what i would be interested in hearing is a debate about the relative merits of dewclaw removal.
  
  

  these disgusting bald dogs

  
  what disgusting bald dogs? where on earth did that come from? you're starting to get a bit off-topic, boboboy, and you're also getting pretty antagonistic towards anyone that participates in the breeding of show dogs.

 

[Bloo]

can you actually show a boxer or any other dog with a tail in a KC show?

Any dog with a tail?
But of course - that was a silly question.

And yes - you can show a boxer with a tail.

 

[raptorrex]

the bald dog was right on IMO as it answered the comment that KC have nothing to do with the genetic faults dogs have. and i very much doubt nature ever intended dogs to be bald. so someone made it. and people who aren't breeders, are unlikely to be able to achieve this. im sorry you feel its off topic, because i feel docking and the dreadful state of some so called pedigree dogs are one and the same problem and all controlled by the KC. anyone who holds the views i do is bound to antagonise, KC breeders. by definition we hold opposing views. i made the statement right at the beginning, i believed they should be stopped and held to account for their actions.

you will notice though i put my case forcefully, i have avoided abuse, or actually deriding anyone who posts. if someone from this world is antagonised, let the defend their action in words, and put their point of view forward.

can you actually show a boxer or any other dog with a tail in a KC show?

Any dog with a tail?
But of course - that was a silly question.

And yes - you can show a boxer with a tail.

lol not sure why that is a silly question. KC papered boxers have docked tails. i just wondered if you could show one undocked. i now know you can. so why dont breeders just leave the tail on the dog if no one shows a dog without a tail, it matters not what the judges think, they would still have to pick a winner.

 

[Archer]

I think theres 2 issues here.
2/The KC ruining breeds....I would just like to say that the KC doesn't ruin breeds.It does not write the breed standard nor does it breed dogs.Breeds are governed by the judges and breeders and there interpretation of the standard.As for the GSD(Alsation) its sloping back(which the KC breed standard says should be GENTLY sloping) has nothing to do with Hip displacia.The incidence and severity of HD in well bred GSD is very good.However the backyard and hobby breeders who breed from their pet dogs/bitches without health tests and research are doing the bred no favours.

can you actually show a boxer or any other dog with a tail in a KC show?

ok so all the breed problems are not the fault of the breeders trying to please the judges its the people who keep them as pets that do it
if the KC has no part in the breeding perhaps they should do their job and stop it. all shows are under the control of the KC, if they let their judges define breeds they are just as guilty as the breeder.

one more point. are you saying these disgusting bald dogs were not the work of people in the KC or its world wide equivalents? cant see Paris Hilton popping down to town to buy a dog from the American equivalent of a council estate!

Yes you can show a boxer,rottie etc under KC rules with a tail.
Did I not say that breeders and judges are at fault? Maybe I didn't make myself clear.The breed standard for every breed is open for individual interpretation.What one considers as say 'moderate stop' to another may be slight or overdone.Hence it is not the breed standard that is at fault but the people who breed and judge.
As for pet breeders..yes they are responsible for most of the inherited problems being a problem,A responsible breeder/shower health tests all breeding stock and would never breed from a dog with a problem .Pet owners(of which I am one) rarely health test before breeding and hardly ever research breed lines etc.
And no those 'bald' dogs are the work of the same as any breed..they are an old breed that were bred for a purpose...just because they are not your cup of tea doesn't make them worth any less or more than any other breed.

the bald dog was right on IMO as it answered the comment that KC have nothing to do with the genetic faults dogs have. and i very much doubt nature ever intended dogs to be bald. so someone made it. and people who aren't breeders, are unlikely to be able to achieve this. im sorry you feel its off topic, because i feel docking and the dreadful state of some so called pedigree dogs are one and the same problem and all controlled by the KC. anyone who holds the views i do is bound to antagonise, KC breeders. by definition we hold opposing views. i made the statement right at the beginning, i believed they should be stopped and held to account for their actions.

you will notice though i put my case forcefully, i have avoided abuse, or actually deriding anyone who posts. if someone from this world is antagonised, let the defend their action in words, and put their point of view forward.

You miss my point...PEOPLE create breeds...they then apply to the KC for recognition...the KC DOES NOT invent breeds.

 

[Bloo]

and i very much doubt nature ever intended dogs to be bald. so someone made it.

Just perhaps you should do a tiny teensy bit of research before you say things that are quite untrue.

Guess those guys 3000 years ago bred them for the judges hey?
Just perhaps nature sometimes has a reason for things after all.....

Mexican Hairless Dog - Xoloitzcuintli

One of the world's oldest and rarest breeds, the Xolo can justly be called the first dog of the Americas. Archaeological evidence indicates that Xolos accompanied man on his first migrations across the Bering Straits. Highly prized for their curative and mystical powers, the Xolo's breed purity has been maintained throughout the ages. Ancient clay representations bear witness to the fact that the breed has remained virtually unchanged for centuries. Modern day Xolos bear a striking resemblance to these primeval artifacts.

The name Xoloitzcuintli (pronounced show-low-etz-queent-lee) is derived from the name of the Aztec Indian god Xolotl and Itzcuintli, the Aztec word for dog. The Xolo held a place of special religious significance for many ancient cultures. Clay and ceramic effigies of Xolos date back over 3000 years and have been discovered in the tombs of the Toltec, Aztec, Mayan, Zapoteca, and Colima Indians. The famous pottery dogs of Colima provide evidence of the intricate bond which has existed between man and Xolo for centuries. All of these relics give testimony to the civilizations' fondness for these wonderful dogs. They are truly a living link to the glory of these primitive cultures.

can you actually show a boxer or any other dog with a tail in a KC show?

Any dog with a tail?
But of course - that was a silly question.

And yes - you can show a boxer with a tail.

lol not sure why that is a silly question.

A silly question because of they way you worded yourself. You asked if any dog with a tail can be shown

 

[karmagl]

I have an Austrailian cattle dog that is 50% queensland dingo. He had his tail docked at about 2 days old. I would normally be against it but the last one I had wasn't docked. He was so muscular if his tail hit you it left bruises. He would clear the coffee table when he walked by. I think some of the stronger breeds rottie's ect have them docked for this reason