Do you like dogs with docked tails?
- Thread starter xpaeanx
- Start date
I have not read through this all, but as a thought to the OP, yes, I do like docked tails on breeds that historically have had docked tails. I also love a tail in full set on breeds that were meant to have tails. I don't see it as one way or another or harmful or this that and the other thing.
If your standard says docked tail, 9 times out of 10 I will agree with that whole-heartedly. Or make that 10 times out of 10. Personally, I don't need to rewrite historym nitpick or distinguish myself from those who have gone before me.
I also don't claim to have any knowledge on the matter, nor really want to...I just had an opinion.
If your standard says docked tail, 9 times out of 10 I will agree with that whole-heartedly. Or make that 10 times out of 10. Personally, I don't need to rewrite historym nitpick or distinguish myself from those who have gone before me.
I also don't claim to have any knowledge on the matter, nor really want to...I just had an opinion.
The only thing I would like to add to this thread is, as a breeder of a docked breed, there is NO WAY any breeder can predict at 3 days of age which pups are going to be show/pet or working quality. With the exception of a pup born with too much colour on it (JRT/PRT), must be at least 51% white.
Therefore as a breeder of such a breed, I am not going to not dock them because I can't tell at that age and to dock them later would be cruel based on that.
I have also had pups be far more vocal and upset as older pups that are getting microchipped than when being docked/dews done at 3 days.
And what is twisted about it, is the people who call about wanting a pup but don't want it docked. You tell them you can't do that and the reasons why.
And what do they do???? Go purchase from a byb who doesn't dock, but they also DON'T do any genetic testing, DON'T prove their dogs in anything, DON'T breed to the standard or try to improve on the their dogs, DON'T guarantee their pups and DON'T demand and enforce spay/neuter contracts on the pups.....go figure.
Then lets muddy the water further by getting vets involved and their opinions, which are often uneducated and along the same lines as asking most vets for behaviour or training advice, which they freely give :rofl1:
Therefore as a breeder of such a breed, I am not going to not dock them because I can't tell at that age and to dock them later would be cruel based on that.
I have also had pups be far more vocal and upset as older pups that are getting microchipped than when being docked/dews done at 3 days.
And what is twisted about it, is the people who call about wanting a pup but don't want it docked. You tell them you can't do that and the reasons why.
And what do they do???? Go purchase from a byb who doesn't dock, but they also DON'T do any genetic testing, DON'T prove their dogs in anything, DON'T breed to the standard or try to improve on the their dogs, DON'T guarantee their pups and DON'T demand and enforce spay/neuter contracts on the pups.....go figure.
Then lets muddy the water further by getting vets involved and their opinions, which are often uneducated and along the same lines as asking most vets for behaviour or training advice, which they freely give :rofl1:
I have not read through this all, but as a thought to the OP, yes, I do like docked tails on breeds that historically have had docked tails. I also love a tail in full set on breeds that were meant to have tails. I don't see it as one way or another or harmful or this that and the other thing.
If your standard says docked tail, 9 times out of 10 I will agree with that whole-heartedly. Or make that 10 times out of 10. Personally, I don't need to rewrite historym nitpick or distinguish myself from those who have gone before me.
I also don't claim to have any knowledge on the matter, nor really want to...I just had an opinion.
If your standard says docked tail, 9 times out of 10 I will agree with that whole-heartedly. Or make that 10 times out of 10. Personally, I don't need to rewrite historym nitpick or distinguish myself from those who have gone before me.
I also don't claim to have any knowledge on the matter, nor really want to...I just had an opinion.
Hmm... that's a tough question.
I prefer some traditionally docked breeds WITH tails. As much as I love bunny-butts, I like Corgis with tails. Fozzie has a hilarious tail, I cannot imagine him without it!
There are some working, utility breeds - Rotties & Dobies in particular - who I do like with docked tails. Although, I'm sure it is a matter of familiarity more than anything. The first time I saw a floppy-eared Dobie I thought it looked silly, but I like them now. I happened to love Boxers with tails, too.
Honestly, docking does not concern me nearly as much as cropping, which is a long and painful process. And, some breeds are born with many of the puppies having natural bobs. No breed that I know of can be born with cut ears. I think there are right and wrong ways to do both, but I would honestly not own/support/condone a docked dog.
I prefer some traditionally docked breeds WITH tails. As much as I love bunny-butts, I like Corgis with tails. Fozzie has a hilarious tail, I cannot imagine him without it!
There are some working, utility breeds - Rotties & Dobies in particular - who I do like with docked tails. Although, I'm sure it is a matter of familiarity more than anything. The first time I saw a floppy-eared Dobie I thought it looked silly, but I like them now. I happened to love Boxers with tails, too.
Honestly, docking does not concern me nearly as much as cropping, which is a long and painful process. And, some breeds are born with many of the puppies having natural bobs. No breed that I know of can be born with cut ears. I think there are right and wrong ways to do both, but I would honestly not own/support/condone a docked dog.
Definitely not true. It varies from area to area. Our entire town (which includes everything from some very busy shopping areas/intersections to some great wooded areas) permits dogs off-leash. The only rule is that they have to be under owner's voice control. The city I used to do animal control for (keep in mind, "city" is a loose term in Vermont) had the same law except in three certain parks, where dogs did have to be leashed.
Meg and her nubbin', enjoying the reservior and hiking trails off-leash.
Meg and her nubbin', enjoying the reservior and hiking trails off-leash.
I must say that coming from a family who has always hunted with Springers, that a docked or even 1/4 docked tail is a MUST!! Those Springers go diving through brambles, through barbed wire, through prickly hedges, and I have seen dogs with tails getting them ripped open HUNDREDS of times.. You can't train the natural instinct to go hairing off out of them, you can't when they are on the trail say to them "Excuse me pup, would you mind awfully going through that Barbed wire fence gently because I don't want you to hurt yourself" It's not going to happen..
Having said that, Gus wouldn't be Gus without his wagger.. It curls up onto his back like a teapot handle and I LOVE IT!!!
Like with everything, there are pro's and con's.. Live and let live is what I say..
Having said that, Gus wouldn't be Gus without his wagger.. It curls up onto his back like a teapot handle and I LOVE IT!!!
Like with everything, there are pro's and con's.. Live and let live is what I say..
My daughter just glanced through this thread and mentioned about a friend of hers who has two pointers he hunts with. He was telling her that they are constantly hurting their tails and they come home bloody and injured. He's constantly having to deal with messed up, wounded tails.
You must have understood wrong or someone gave you the wrong information. Taking my dogs on a leash is the rarity. The vast majority of our walks and hikes are done off leash. And this whole area where I live is the Panhandle National Forest.
You must have understood wrong or someone gave you the wrong information. Taking my dogs on a leash is the rarity. The vast majority of our walks and hikes are done off leash. And this whole area where I live is the Panhandle National Forest.
T
I guess I just can't help but to comment on the statement that suggested someone who s/n is irresponsible or somehow lazy(don't know if that was the exact word, but it was certainly the feeling that was portrayed across the post).
Part of being a responsible pet owner who does not have a breeding quality dog is to s/n it. Perhaps in some areas of the states or canada there aren't shelters filled and filled with animals dying every day, but in a good majority of places there are. And it does NOT take an terribly irresponsible owner to have an "oops" if they have multiple intact dogs in a home. And it doesn't take an irresponsible owner to decide they couldn't possibly go and get their dog spayed and kill her puppies. Accidents happen, and that is why it is best to completely eliminate the possibility by having it a 'standard' to s/n a great percentage of dogs owned by people . Yes, of course it is a convenience to people, but it does not make people lazy or irresponsible. I know that I will likely never own an intact animal for the rest of my life, and I'm far from a lazy or irresponsible dog owner. It is simply about being reasonable, and no person is infallible and things dont' always go 100% the way you plan. If even responsible breeders can have accidents, surely the general public can as well. I'm just not a breeder and never wish to be by "oops" either.
Besides, as far as the statement that the "only" reason is for convenience is terribly false. We had a dog almost die because we did not spay her early on in life. We are very lucky to still have her today. I'd never mess around with all the things that could go wrong with an intact dog again. Health, at least for me, is another part of the reason, making convenience far from the "only".
Part of being a responsible pet owner who does not have a breeding quality dog is to s/n it. Perhaps in some areas of the states or canada there aren't shelters filled and filled with animals dying every day, but in a good majority of places there are. And it does NOT take an terribly irresponsible owner to have an "oops" if they have multiple intact dogs in a home. And it doesn't take an irresponsible owner to decide they couldn't possibly go and get their dog spayed and kill her puppies. Accidents happen, and that is why it is best to completely eliminate the possibility by having it a 'standard' to s/n a great percentage of dogs owned by people . Yes, of course it is a convenience to people, but it does not make people lazy or irresponsible. I know that I will likely never own an intact animal for the rest of my life, and I'm far from a lazy or irresponsible dog owner. It is simply about being reasonable, and no person is infallible and things dont' always go 100% the way you plan. If even responsible breeders can have accidents, surely the general public can as well. I'm just not a breeder and never wish to be by "oops" either.
Besides, as far as the statement that the "only" reason is for convenience is terribly false.
We had a dog almost die because we did not spay her early on in life. We are very lucky to still have her today. I'd never mess around with all the things that could go wrong with an intact dog again. Health, at least for me, is another part of the reason, making convenience far from the "only".
What is it with people not reading my posts... ?
I said "there are few reasons other than convienence to s/n" And dogs DIE due to s/n as well.
Who said convience = lazy. Not me. I have 2 neutered dogs, and if Dekka isn't to be bred or afterwards she will be spayed. But it is convenience. So I dont' have to worry about crating, dripping and missing trials.
Tessa you really seemed to miss my whole point. S/n is for OUR benefit, for the convenience of not having to be diligent all the time. I have a dog who is more likely to run out the door and kill a cat than he was to run out and have sex (when he still had the parts) Yet I can some how manage to keep him from doing so (and it happens faster than sex)
No where did I say it was wrong. But IMO its hypocritical to say docking is bad and wrong but s/n is ok. Both are modifying the canine body for the convenience of humans. I support both. (tho docking is less dangerous and less painful over all)
I said "there are few reasons other than convienence to s/n" And dogs DIE due to s/n as well.
Who said convience = lazy. Not me. I have 2 neutered dogs, and if Dekka isn't to be bred or afterwards she will be spayed. But it is convenience. So I dont' have to worry about crating, dripping and missing trials.
Tessa you really seemed to miss my whole point. S/n is for OUR benefit, for the convenience of not having to be diligent all the time. I have a dog who is more likely to run out the door and kill a cat than he was to run out and have sex (when he still had the parts) Yet I can some how manage to keep him from doing so (and it happens faster than sex)
No where did I say it was wrong. But IMO its hypocritical to say docking is bad and wrong but s/n is ok. Both are modifying the canine body for the convenience of humans. I support both. (tho docking is less dangerous and less painful over all)
T
Maybe if it is such a problem with multiple people it has more to do with how you conveyed your point than with the words that we read and understood them to mean. If there is another person speaking poorly of s/n, perhaps it was them that said some of the remarks that I had commented on. No need to get all upset. I certainly did not name any names, no quotes, nor pointing of any fingers.
As far as I'm concerned, I s/n for the dogs' benefit as much as my own. When you've worked in a shelter and seen the horrors, there's just no question in mind that by s/n you are doing more than just making something more convenient for yourself, you're truly acting in a manner that will prevent one more accidental litter and consequently possibly help just a few more homeless animals.
And in my time working at a veterinary clinic, I can without a doubt say that docking is not without pain as some continually try to portray. Certainly not the recovery of a spay, but not painless. Those puppies you hear all across the vet clinic, and if you didn't know what appointment was in that room before, you know now that it is either removing dewclaws or docking.
I'm not saying I'm completely against docking. The puppies will never remember and it is hardly traumatizing, and less painful than amputating an adult dog's tail(because working in the field isn't the only way dogs get tail injuries), and in my first post in this thread I even said I prefer the look of a docked tail especially on cockers(who have some nasty tails if you leave them full). But I have to agree with GO who I think also said that s/n is much more necessary than docking; however, I personally never made any comparison of s/n to docking in my response regarding s/n. I was simply commenting on that because some do not want to even chance the possibility of an 'oops' litter doesn't make them less vigilant or less responsible dog owners, which had been said earlier in this thread.
As far as I'm concerned, I s/n for the dogs' benefit as much as my own. When you've worked in a shelter and seen the horrors, there's just no question in mind that by s/n you are doing more than just making something more convenient for yourself, you're truly acting in a manner that will prevent one more accidental litter and consequently possibly help just a few more homeless animals.
And in my time working at a veterinary clinic, I can without a doubt say that docking is not without pain as some continually try to portray. Certainly not the recovery of a spay, but not painless. Those puppies you hear all across the vet clinic, and if you didn't know what appointment was in that room before, you know now that it is either removing dewclaws or docking.
I'm not saying I'm completely against docking. The puppies will never remember and it is hardly traumatizing, and less painful than amputating an adult dog's tail(because working in the field isn't the only way dogs get tail injuries), and in my first post in this thread I even said I prefer the look of a docked tail especially on cockers(who have some nasty tails if you leave them full). But I have to agree with GO who I think also said that s/n is much more necessary than docking; however, I personally never made any comparison of s/n to docking in my response regarding s/n. I was simply commenting on that because some do not want to even chance the possibility of an 'oops' litter doesn't make them less vigilant or less responsible dog owners, which had been said earlier in this thread.
I haven't read all.
But I'm of the firm belief that freedom doesn't mean being able to just do what you want.
You can't tell me I FEEL or AM less free or have less rights because we don't crop or dock. You're looking at it from a view where you can, and so people do.
People can own guns in the US and do. They also USE them more, and like to SHOOT each other more.
See, I wouldn't feel free or safe if I knew my neighbours owned guns.
That "freedom" would make me feel oppressed by society. I'd rather be free to walk the streets knowing that if I get in the middle of something bad, I am not going to be shot.
Ok... I know that's a bit of a tangent, but it's how I feel.
As with docking and cropping. Well......... When I am CONVINCED it has purpose other than aesthetic, then maybe I'll think it's necessary. And yes... like I stated previously, I have come across many many gun dogs - springers/weims/cockers etc are what people own round here.
The working bred dogs can be docked, which may serve a purpose, may not.
If you want to dock your dogs, because you think it looks nice, then so be it....... But we can't just perfom an amputation on an animal because we fancy it might look better.... if that means we're oppressed.... well, I'll go sit in my house and wait for the government to take away my right to eat cheese or something else EQUALLY as oppressive as that.
But I'm of the firm belief that freedom doesn't mean being able to just do what you want.
You can't tell me I FEEL or AM less free or have less rights because we don't crop or dock. You're looking at it from a view where you can, and so people do.
People can own guns in the US and do. They also USE them more, and like to SHOOT each other more.
See, I wouldn't feel free or safe if I knew my neighbours owned guns.
That "freedom" would make me feel oppressed by society. I'd rather be free to walk the streets knowing that if I get in the middle of something bad, I am not going to be shot.
Ok... I know that's a bit of a tangent, but it's how I feel.
As with docking and cropping. Well......... When I am CONVINCED it has purpose other than aesthetic, then maybe I'll think it's necessary. And yes... like I stated previously, I have come across many many gun dogs - springers/weims/cockers etc are what people own round here.
The working bred dogs can be docked, which may serve a purpose, may not.
If you want to dock your dogs, because you think it looks nice, then so be it....... But we can't just perfom an amputation on an animal because we fancy it might look better.... if that means we're oppressed.... well, I'll go sit in my house and wait for the government to take away my right to eat cheese or something else EQUALLY as oppressive as that.
How common is it for a dog to die from s/n? FOHA has done hundreds of dogs in the five years I've been there. How many have died from s/n?
None.
In regards to cats, darn right its more convenient to s/n them! Female cats in heat howl and cry, they try desperately to get out of the house, they may urinate inappropriately. Female cats can come into heat every two weeks! Intact male cats spray and it STINKS. If the male gets in this habit, they may continue to spray after their neuter, which may result in them being PTS at the pound (inappropriate elimination is one of the top reasons people dump cats at the pound). Intact males may also howl, and have you ever heard two males fighting over a female? Its quite a cacophony. Someday, if I ever meet a reputable cat breeder, I'd like to ask them how they handle it all. Intact dogs, by far, are much easier to live with than intact cats!
None.
In regards to cats, darn right its more convenient to s/n them! Female cats in heat howl and cry, they try desperately to get out of the house, they may urinate inappropriately. Female cats can come into heat every two weeks! Intact male cats spray and it STINKS. If the male gets in this habit, they may continue to spray after their neuter, which may result in them being PTS at the pound (inappropriate elimination is one of the top reasons people dump cats at the pound). Intact males may also howl, and have you ever heard two males fighting over a female? Its quite a cacophony. Someday, if I ever meet a reputable cat breeder, I'd like to ask them how they handle it all. Intact dogs, by far, are much easier to live with than intact cats!
T
Good point about the "equally as oppressive" comment.
And as far as damaged tails go, the further I think back, the more I remember of UNdocked breeds being the ones I've always seen damaging their tails, such as labradors, great danes, or greyhounds. I'm awful for saying it I know, but if all cockers would have really cute fluffy tails like my Summer, I'd be all for not cropping cockers any more. But.. cockers tails are just soo.. nasty. The ones in the UK that I see in the show rings are... ugh.
And as far as damaged tails go, the further I think back, the more I remember of UNdocked breeds being the ones I've always seen damaging their tails, such as labradors, great danes, or greyhounds. I'm awful for saying it I know, but if all cockers would have really cute fluffy tails like my Summer, I'd be all for not cropping cockers any more. But.. cockers tails are just soo.. nasty. The ones in the UK that I see in the show rings are... ugh.
In Washington DC, you can't own a gun. You can't even carry your pocket knife around. The only ones with guns now are the criminals, and I can tell you those people are NOT any safer.
There are other areas with gun bans too, and on another forum a person posted about her neighbor's houses get broken into all the time, although hers doesn't because she has a dog.
But if we're bringing up this debate, perhaps we should start another thread...
There are other areas with gun bans too, and on another forum a person posted about her neighbor's houses get broken into all the time, although hers doesn't because she has a dog.
But if we're bringing up this debate, perhaps we should start another thread...
No it was only me, and it was only you and GO. (tho I think GO and I understood eachothers points and while we don't agree respect each other's opinion.
As far as I'm concerned, I s/n for the dogs' benefit as much as my own. When you've worked in a shelter and seen the horrors, there's just no question in mind that by s/n you are doing more than just making something more convenient for yourself, you're truly acting in a manner that will prevent one more accidental litter and consequently possibly help just a few more homeless animals.
Umm I have worked in a shelter.. my child hood best friend's mom has worked at our local shelter for as long as I can remember. I know lots of horrors. But they are due to irrisponsible pet ownership.. not the fact that the animals still have all the parts they were born with.
Why is it then that other countries who do not s/n everything that moves don't have the pet over population that the US, and to a lesser extent Canada does? My guess is they have a different level of responsible pet ownership. S/n in a way is a bandaid solution. Most of the excess pets I have met were not 'accidents'. (leaving two intact dogs together and hoping nothing happens is not an accident.. and many people do it on purpose to make cash)
I never said they were
but I would hazard people are less vigilant.. simply because such vigilance is not needed with s/n dogs. Not everyone WANTS to put forth that much effort.