Tail Docking ?

[boxerbaby]

Hm. Not only have I worked at a busy shelter/Animal Control, but I work at the largest vet clinic in the state (2nd only to LSU Vet School) & I have yet to see all these "many" dogs with bloody stumps for tails. In 5 years of working that this vet clinic, we've only had to amputate 1 tail due to injury from "happy tail syndrome".

And I'm curious, by the sound of your statement you would be for the docking of tails on all breeds?

Hm. So what? I don't care if you are blind to dogs getting happy tail or not, doesn't make it that I haven't seen many dogs that have gotten it while in our shelters. Are you incinuating that I haven't or some thing?
I am curious how my statement sounds like I would dock all dogs tails. I guess I should have been more specific, I forget the mind level some people are at Talking about specific breeds, so I am continuing to talk about the same certain breeds, not all of them, are you still following or should I use smaller words for ya?
Dogs with thin, long whip like tails that continuosly wag their tails until they are sore and bleeding, boxers, rotties, ect. But, now that you bring up a good point I would have to say, I would dock any dogs tail that is like that, not only boxers or rotts, but also pitts, danes, labs, ect. Yes I am a cruel person, I would dock almost any dogs tail I owned if it had a tail like that. I would dock a shepherds tail if it as like that too. I wound cause a little pain as a puppy to be sure it didn't get a broken tail, happy tail, ect. I think it is more painful if they end up with an infection and then have to have it amputated as an older dog. I had a shep/dobie mix as a kid, we almost docked his tail, but didn't because he was too old to do it. But, I wish I had, he nocked every thing over with it, had it shut in doors, got it too close to bonfires, got an infection, ect. We finally had a nice healthy tail again only to have it develop a tumur. So I wouldn't do EVERY breed, (DUH) but I would dock most. Just to make people like you PO'ED I would crop too
But that is MY opinion, I can have it, even if you think it is wrong, oh well. you keep your dogs tail and go away, and I will dock my dogs tail and not try to outlaw long stupid looking tails.

 

[Maxy24]

Boxerbaby were you serious about cropping ears too.That is more dangerous and painful then docking and is even more unnecessary then docking, which in some cases is necessary. As for cropping goes can people give me any good reason to have that done.

 

[chinchow]

There isn't a good reason Maxy. But you can bet money that people will claim it prevents ear infections and that all dogs need it done if they have drop ears.

 

[boxerbaby]

There isn't a good reason Maxy. But you can bet money that people will claim it prevents ear infections and that all dogs need it done if they have drop ears.

There is two reasons. I like it. I have a right to, until people like you have every thing they don't like out lawed, I will continue to. If I so choose.
I think it looks good on some of them (some times, I will admitt, I would get a rescued boxer already done, instead of cropping my own again) But it is still my choice and right to do so. I don't think any one has a right to say what people can or can't do.

He looks fine with cropped easr and a dockede tail. he didn't miss either and still lived an active full life.

 

[noludoru]

it prevents ear infections and that all dogs need it done if they have drop ears.

Of course it doesn't prevent ear infections! My neighbors do Dobie rescue, sometimes having 10 or so Dobermans at their house at a time, and they've had all sorts of ear trouble with both cropped and natural. Although, they did say that the cropped ears were absolute hell to clean because they got dirtier more often. (And yes, I did note the sarcasm.. I just had to speak up)

 

[joce]

Chinchow roll your eyes all you want

My pup came down with an ear infection a week after he came home and he was miserable. three vets couldn't get rid of it. Our first vet suggested removing the inner ear parts so he would not be in pain. He'd be deaf but no pain.

So my new vet said go get him cropped and he'd be fine-guess what-not a single ear infection since. And its not because I couldn't clean his ears or whatever nonscence-he went to the first vet for his ear cleanings and stayed at the other two to try to clear it up and it didn't do a thing.

If I woudln't have gotten him cropped he'd be deaf now. What is so cruel about a short surgery that knocked him out for a day and then he was up and running around like a new dog.

So everyone can say all they want that it isn't for health reasons but your wrong-I'll admitt the majority of the times its not going to make a diffrence but for my boy and some others it sure does!

And it all depends on the type of ear infection. the people across the street form me had to tye their bassets ears up for so many hours a day to let his air out. If it wans't for the ear being so vascular a lot of breeds with the flop probally would be cropped vs getting the inner ear removed.

And another ting I have noticed is a lot of city dogs probally would make it jsut fine but sitting in my vets office one day I saw three dogs come in with bad tails(one had the skin off from road burn or getting it run over-grossest thing I have ever seen-completely the owerns fault though). Dogs work around here-they get injured,for the labs they jsut ahve to deal but you better beleive my dobe won't be waving a tail around waiting for something to hurt it when a minute of squirming at three days old can prevent that.

 

[oc_spirit]

I'm with Joce, cropping does prevent ear infections but the breeds that are cropped the reason for cropping started for other reasons and the prevention of ear infections was an added bonus which is why some droopy-eared breeds are cropped and others are not.

As for tail docking, Boxerbaby is right in that many dogs with thin tails do frequently hurt their tails by getting them broken. However I do have to point out that Rotties do not have thin tails at all. Yes their tails are docked but again, for other reasons.

HOnestly if I ever own the appropriate candidates for docking/cropping they WILL get done. My CO's ears will be cropped, my PattStaffs ears and tail will be done etc. WHo kows what I will end up owning throughout my life bt I can garuntee you I will be doing everything I can to make my dog's life a little easier and since a little pain that they wont even remember as pups can save them a lifetime of intermitent (sp?) pain, why not have it done? Of course I will only have it done by someone who knows what they are doing and can provide the proper after-care.

And when I talk about getting a crop, I'm not talking about those looooong show crops. I personally do not like those at all. I'm talking about a nice short working crop even on a Boxer or Dobe.

 

[chinchow]

Mmmmmhmm

Next you'll be saying how much easier they are to care for too.:yikes:

 

[RD]

What IS it with people that they feel the need to create LAWS against things they personally don't like or support?

If you don't like tail docking, don't dock tails. But don't try to take away the right of ethical breeders to dock the tails on their puppies.

I, for one, do not want the government controlling what kind of dog I can own or what I can do with that dog. There will always be unethical people that will be unkind to dogs, whether there is a law against it or not; but why take away the rights of responsible, ethical dog owners to do what they wish?

And also . . . I have asked this so many times but I never get a freaking answer . . . WHY is this worth fighting over? Why, when there are so many more important issues out there?

 

[chinchow]

What IS it with people that they feel the need to create LAWS against things they personally don't like or support?

If you don't like tail docking, don't dock tails. But don't try to take away the right of ethical breeders to dock the tails on their puppies.

I, for one, do not want the government controlling what kind of dog I can own or what I can do with that dog. There will always be unethical people that will be unkind to dogs, whether there is a law against it or not; but why take away the rights of responsible, ethical dog owners to do what they wish?

And also . . . I have asked this so many times but I never get a freaking answer . . . WHY is this worth fighting over? Why, when there are so many more important issues out there?

There are a lot of laws against things deemed unethical, luckily. I don't believe in controlling what type of dog a person owns, but what they do with that dog is not just their business. If the animal is being harmed, it should always become someone else's business who can deal with the problem. And if the government realizes cosmetic surgery for animals is unethical, then good for them for realizing that. And more than just a few can say that is is unethical to do unecessary surgery on an animal, no matter how great the owner is.
And, it's worth debating over, to make people understand why these laws are passed, why people do it in the first place, get both sides of the story, etc. It's not worth fighting over, but a healthy debate is very educational.

 

[RD]

People do un-necessary surgery all the time. It's called spaying.

 

[chinchow]

I'm not sure how spaying is un-necessary.

The prevention of furture unwanted litters, control of the population, etc seems a lot more important than wanting your dog to look like the one you saw at crufts on tv.

 

[tempura tantrum]

I'm not sure how spaying is un-necessary

.

In all honesty, it IS unnecessary. It's done for human convenience. It ends the worry of unwanted litters or having male dogs after your bitch when she's in season. Even so, responsible breeders and owners (myself included) house intact bitches all the time, WITHOUT oops litters ever occurring.

I watch my girl like a hawk. I don't let her wander out of sight EVER. And when she's in season, she's even accompanied into my own backyard (Which is fully fenced- six feet high).

 

[chinchow]

YOU may watch yours like a hawk, but other people do not. The fact of it is, there are people out there who don't care, and that's why we have problems. So to say that spaying is not necessary all together is living in a lot of denial.

But, this thread isn't about spaying or neutering.

 

[joce]

Spays are not needed and you can argue its being lazy to not watch your dog like a hawk-spays do result in death. Only heard of one dog die after reacting to anesthesia form a crop-not even due to the surgery.


Its real cute that you think its funny. IT IS much easier having a dog that can move his head without crying and snapping out. Its also much easier to to afford things without going to the vet every day. Its also easier not having a deaf dog-But I guess I am horrible for it.

Debates are fun-I was in every debate club at school and your not debating very well-a fact is pointed out to you and you make a smart ass comment-good job.

 

[tempura tantrum]

The fact of it is, there are people out there who don't care, and that's why we have problems. So to say that spaying is not necessary all together is living in a lot of denial.

I'm fully aware that the general public is incapable of keeping an intact dog in a safe manner. I am not "living in a lot of denial" as you have suggested.

Read my statement *carefully*- the surgery is TECHNICALLY uneccessary- it is based on HUMAN CONVENIENCE, and not a medical NEED (unless we're speaking about something like pyo). Crops and docks too are based on human convenience/want.

I'm not advocating that people stop spaying and neutering- merely pointing out the fact that altering of pets is done mostly for the convenience of human owners- just as a crop or dock is.

And just as sometimes there ARE cases where spay/neuter is medically necessary- there are also cases where a dock or crop would be medically beneficial as well. Happy tail ISN'T pretty- and often extraordinarily painful. Some cases even resulted in AMPUTATION- which is a FAR bigger deal than a dock.

 

[chinchow]

And I'm still wondering why cosmetic surgery is so convenient.

And Joce, kindly stop jumping down my throat. If you actually read my posts, you'll see I have no problems with crops/docks done for ACTUAL medical reasons.

 

[joce]

But how would you know its medically needed when there is actually time to do a crop? If byrons would have come up a week later it literally would have been to late-it really almost was when it was done. He has a screwy ear because they were already floppy to long. Looks wasn't really what I was going for but it makes me feel bad sometimes.

And who decides if its medically necessary? The first vet I went to still thought the surgery was better than the crop.So which is better-cropped or deaf,I'll take cropped any day. Do three vets have to say crop or dock or a whole panel? Is there a waiting period?

And then ther eare the people on forums who say you obviuosly jsut didn't know how to clean his ears correctly adn anyone else could handle it.

there is no way to say what is and isn't a medical reason and its all really dependant on the vet.

 

[RD]

It's convenient because there is no risk of any tail-related problems. I've seen and HAD dogs with broken tails, which could have been avoided if they had been docked as the breed standard suggested.

This is about what people like. People LIKE a dog with a nonexistant or suppressed sexual drive, they like a dog without the risk of unwanted pregnancy or roaming. A dog that they can be a bit lazier with in terms of supervision. I don't blame them. It's why I'm neutering my dog.

Some people LIKE a dog without a tail. And mind you, there are very few naturally tailless breeds out there that would suit the average family. Some people have working reasons for cropping and docking, sometimes to protect guard dogs. Some have medical reasons and some people, having seen medical problems in dogs of their breed that were NOT docked, choose to do so. Breeders who are dedicated to the preservation and history of their breed will continue to crop and dock because this is part of the breed, APPEARANCE is part of the breed. Do I like it? Not necessarily. But I will fight for people's rights to keep their breeds as they have been.

In terms of stress and pain for the dog, spaying/neutering and cropping/docking are no different. Both are unnecessary, both are seen as inhumane in some countries, and both are done with a complete lack of respect for dogs as living creatues. I don't understand how you can defend one and detest the other when they have the same effect on the dog - modification. The only difference is that you can SEE the effects of one.

The dog does not understand human intentions for a surgery. The dog just knows being put under, and waking up in pain. All this stuff about ethics and what's cosmetic and what's not and what's cruel and what's necessary . . . Dogs don't know that. Dogs are not mentally scarred by these procedures and if done properly, they are not physically affected by them for more than a short period of time after surgery.

 

[chinchow]

I don't understand how you can defend one and detest the other when they have the same effect on the dog - modification. The only difference is that you can SEE the effects of one.

And at this point, I suppose I could ask you, and a few others, the same question.