Cocker with natural tail
- Thread starter Shannerson
- Start date
Every breeder knows that sometimes even entire litters do not turn out prospects. It's a fact of life. The two greatest dogs in the world are not guaranteed to produce 100% everytime, to think so is just silly.
opcorn:
opcorn:
Not docking their tails doesn't mean anything.
If it did, it wouldn't be banned in several places in the world.
I don't know any breed that works better simply because it has no tail, either. And I am not a show dog person, I like working dogs, and prefer them to be able to work regardless of how long their tail is. I have yet to have any dog have bad working skills because it's tail was present.
If it did, it wouldn't be banned in several places in the world.
I don't know any breed that works better simply because it has no tail, either. And I am not a show dog person, I like working dogs, and prefer them to be able to work regardless of how long their tail is. I have yet to have any dog have bad working skills because it's tail was present.
why would they be worthless? In that country (which I don't know if they have a JRTC anyway) of course dogs could show with tails..they can't in north america unless they are imported. And personally I want my dogs as safe as possible when working. I would hate to have my dog hurt and I couldn't easily grab tail and pull them out. So what you are saying is that we shouldn't dock, so I can't sell my pups to working people, or conformation people (not that the last is very likely)? And that a little danger is ok, cause they need tails?
I am asking, but you're not really answering. Dogs cannot have docked tails in Germany. Does that means that the JRT's there are worthless?
Are people there ruining the dogs by letting them work with tails? Is it really necessary to say they are putting their dogs in danger?
I never, EVER said you shouldn't/couldn't dock. Nowhere in any of my posts did I even mention it. I am making a point that a docked tail does not make a dog, especially a working dog, no matter how much you think it does. There are dogs out there of every docked breed with tails that are doing work without any hassle that so many claim there is. It's even been proven that undocked tails are not any more damaged in docked breeds than dogs than tails that are not present.
Are people there ruining the dogs by letting them work with tails? Is it really necessary to say they are putting their dogs in danger?
I never, EVER said you shouldn't/couldn't dock. Nowhere in any of my posts did I even mention it. I am making a point that a docked tail does not make a dog, especially a working dog, no matter how much you think it does. There are dogs out there of every docked breed with tails that are doing work without any hassle that so many claim there is. It's even been proven that undocked tails are not any more damaged in docked breeds than dogs than tails that are not present.
I would love to see where that has been proven, especially in hunting breeds. I have yet to see a dog with a shortly docked tail breaking its tail or getting cuts, bruising, severe gashes, etc. It's funny how vets never have to dock the tails of docked dogs due to injury.
Edit: And I'm quite sure Dekka would never see a JRT (or ANY dog for that matter) as worthless--she wasn't the one suggesting it, you are. She loves her breed. She is responsible and educated and most likely (correct me if I am wrong, D) would not send a dog with a long tail into an Earthdog trial due to the likely hazards.
Edit: And I'm quite sure Dekka would never see a JRT (or ANY dog for that matter) as worthless--she wasn't the one suggesting it, you are. She loves her breed. She is responsible and educated and most likely (correct me if I am wrong, D) would not send a dog with a long tail into an Earthdog trial due to the likely hazards.
I would love to see where that has been proven, especially in hunting breeds. I have yet to see a dog with a shortly docked tail breaking its tail or getting cuts, bruising, severe gashes, etc. It's funny how vets never have to dock the tails of docked dogs due to injury.
Actually quite a bit on that site all together that is rather interesting.
But, I'm sure you will probably dismiss it because just so happens to be a site against docking.
I also have proof in my own experiences, but I doubt that would be taken into account either.
Just to add, it does well to note that there are breeds that are not docked that have identical tail styles and sets (as well as fringe if you're trying to use that argument) with no more injuries reported than undocked dogs of traditionally docked breeds.
It's just not a sound argument. Simple as that.
It's just not a sound argument. Simple as that.
What makes you so quick to think I'll ignore everything you say? I'm not going to dismiss the site off the bat, but listening only to the information of someone (or an organization in this case) with something to gain is never wise.
But I'd love to hear of your personal experience in tail injuries to dogs who have shortly docked tails.
Edit: the page isn't loading for me. I'll try again tomorrow, it's probably my internet again.
But I'd love to hear of your personal experience in tail injuries to dogs who have shortly docked tails.
Edit: the page isn't loading for me.
I'll try again tomorrow, it's probably my internet again. 
http://www.anti-dockingalliance.co.uk/page_27.htm
Actually quite a bit on that site all together that is rather interesting.
But, I'm sure you will probably dismiss it because just so happens to be a site against docking.
I also have proof in my own experiences, but I doubt that would be taken into account either.
Actually quite a bit on that site all together that is rather interesting.
But, I'm sure you will probably dismiss it because just so happens to be a site against docking.
I also have proof in my own experiences, but I doubt that would be taken into account either.
I have seen the photos of damaged tails.
However, they are not higher than the number of undamaged tails. If they were, every dog with a tail would be docked. No hounds would have tails, Pointers would never have tails, especially spindley tailed English Pointers.
It's not logical, and I do not accept that as a reason to dock. I have nothing against the practice, but I do have something against the ignorant reasoning behind it.
However, they are not higher than the number of undamaged tails. If they were, every dog with a tail would be docked. No hounds would have tails, Pointers would never have tails, especially spindley tailed English Pointers.
It's not logical, and I do not accept that as a reason to dock. I have nothing against the practice, but I do have something against the ignorant reasoning behind it.
What makes you so quick to think I'll ignore everything you say? I'm not going to dismiss the site off the bat, but listening only to the information of someone (or an organization in this case) with something to gain is never wise.
But I'd love to hear of your personal experience in tail injuries to dogs who have shortly docked tails.
Edit: the page isn't loading for me. I'll try again tomorrow, it's probably my internet again.
But I'd love to hear of your personal experience in tail injuries to dogs who have shortly docked tails.
Edit: the page isn't loading for me.
I'll try again tomorrow, it's probably my internet again.
Anywho, I have had undocked herding breeds and hunting dogs who have never had tail injuries. I have had setters and the like, and all I did was keep the hair on their tail trimmed. Simple and effective. They got no injuries, and no more burrs than they got running around my yard on the rest of their bodies (actually they got more injuries on their legs than anywhere else, I guess I should have cut those off too). The only dog I have ever seen with a serious tail injury was a mix of unknown origin, so it couldn't have been breed related, and I live in an area with a ton of hunters and hunting dogs (specifically here, setters are a favourite).
Um, are you serious? Do you think every dog in the world is put out into a situation where it is more likely to have its tail damaged? No. So of course there are going to be more long tailers without injuries. I have 2 dogs with tails and neither have gotten damaged. They are also companion animals.. they do not go into situations where they are more likely to damage their tails.
Did you consider the fact that different breeds may <gasp> have different jobs? There are different factors that may cause one dog to damage its tail and not the other.
I'd like to know what magic hat you pull your information out of because I'd like one too.
Did you consider the fact that different breeds may <gasp> have different jobs? There are different factors that may cause one dog to damage its tail and not the other.
I'd like to know what magic hat you pull your information out of because I'd like one too.
As for the different jobs comment...I specifically use groups as an example. Meaning, they have the same jobs. So, no, that argument against my post makes no sense, sorry.
No sense in getting snotty, talking nonsense about magic hats, just because you do not share my viewpoint. That's rather childish.
No sense in getting snotty, talking nonsense about magic hats, just because you do not share my viewpoint. That's rather childish.