Docking Tails (dogs- want your oppinon).

[m_herrington]

I don't think that anyone should dock tails on dogs... its just not right.

that said, I have a Rottweiler who has a docked tail, it was that way when I got him... I can imagine what damage he would do with one if he had it and it would not be pretty

, but I still would not have chosen to have his tail docked.

 

[walkswithdog]

Quote:
Breeding for a shortened tail is literally shortening the spine of the dog. It significantly alters the total structure of the dog. You'd almost have to remake the breeds to do it and breeding for shortened tails has UGLY consequences often, ask the English Bulldog people.

You can't just pluck a single feature out of the air and decide to breed for it. Animals are a totality of many polygenic traits (more than one gene makes the trait) altering one part of that strand can have huge structural and health consequences. Dogs not solid state hardware, breeding even for a different color can cause even lethal consequences.

Changing genetically the length of the spine might shorten the colon, subjecting a dog to a life time of poor digestion. Might alter the lay or angle of the pelvis resulting in crippling dysplasia.

Docking done early, done humanely, done correctly by a veterinarian has a lot fewer consequences.

 

[walkswithdog]

Quote:
I separate bred from pets, for pets only whether that is a BYB or puppymill dog as different from -

Purpose or show bred dogs.

Because purpose bred/working or sport and show bred dogs are more often screened prior to breeding for HEALTH - TEMPERAMENT - and nearer The STANDARD.

Yes, working/sport/therapy and show puppies may or may not make it for the purpose for which they are bred and become available to pet homes.

But usually if you ask a working or sport or show breeder what health testing they do, they don't tell you the dog got all its vaccines and sees a vet once a year.

If you ask a working/sport or show breeder why they are creating the litter it's usually NOT to sell puppies. But to create more show, working or sport or therapy dogs with a specific goal in mind.

I just bred Fluffy so my kids can see the miracle of life, to sell puppies, because I didn't know she could get pregnant when she was tied out at six months - all reasons I've heard.

People who breed Fluffy so the kids can see the miracle of life need to then take them to a shelter to see the miracle of death due to over population.

What sets a good breeder apart is goals, caring, testing and responsibility. Not whether or not they are a show breeder.

Knowing what the genetic problems of your breed are, testing, breeding to avoid them, intelligent placement, follow up and good record keeping are all part of being responsible for the lives created.

We only ever bred ONE liiter in over 20 years in dogs. Laura just went back to Calif. where we lived and visited with three of them, they're eight now. I know the other two we placed are in the same homes, we keep in touch.

Of the nine, not a single one developed HD/ED or any other serious medical condition. We did good.

When we placed rescue puppies we did chip, and it made a huge difference in our peace of mind, and did allow us to recover two over the years.

Responsible breeders are careful, both with the lives they create and where the pups end up, they follow up, they care. I think contracts are at least good reminders.

Good luck with the pups, whatever you decide about docking.

Oh and you want insanity? We kept all nine pups to five months. It looked like this in our house.

 

[patandchickens]

Quote:
Saying 'oh, traits are interrelated, so breeding for change in one trait can cause unwanted changes in another trait' (which is really what you are talking about, moreso than polygenic traits -- heck, SIZE is polygenic and it is straightforward enough to breed for THAT

) does not have anything to do (that I can see) with tail lenght in particular. I mean, almost all other traits that breeders select for are controlled by suites of genes, too. If you are exercising ANY sort of artificial selection (i.e. if you are an actual breeder not just letting everything mate randomly), then you always have to be alert for unwanted side-effects of your selection program. For ANY trait. I don't see how tail length is necessarily any different.

Different breeds *already* have different length tails, no? (I mean, even if you take the overall size of the dog into account). So clearly there is a reasonable amount of 'safe' flexibility in the trait. Plus there are curly 'up out of the way' tails, which might be equally practical for some of the contexts where docking is said to be necessary.

BTW, dunno about in dogs, but there is more variation in # vertebrae in horses than you might think -- with absolutely NO discernable effect on the animals' health.

It seems rather odd to me to dismiss the idea out of hand while continuing selecting for lots of other traits. Especially when some of which are KNOWN to cause significant physical problems, like short faces, but nobody seems to be changing the breed standard to give those traits a wide berth...

It sure looks to me like it is just the tradition thing, pure and simple. (edited to add: if trying to select for shorter tails in English Bulldogs has had detrimental side-effects, then point taken, but there are most likely a variety of different ways to select for shorter tails (different genetic bases) so problems in one instance does not really imply it can't be done in any dogs. Also, just to be clear, I am not talking about trying to get nothing more than a docked-looking stub; I only mean, selecting for a shortER tail. For the majority of practical purposes for which people say docking is necessary, a merely shortER tail, rather than a nearly absent one, should work perfectly fine).

JMO,

Pat

 

[rebecca10782]

Quote:
Ditto. I wish people would think of an animals well being instead of their need for a "stylish" dog. I am sure I'm going to receive lots of not so nice responses for my next comment but I feel very strongly about this kind of thing. If someone can actually pick up a knife and chop off a new born's tail with out anesthesia, hear that cry and not feel any remorse, they are seriously disturbed and should get help.

 

[ninjapoodles]

Quote:
Ditto. I wish people would think of an animals well being instead of their need for a "stylish" dog. I am sure I'm going to receive lots of not so nice responses for my next comment but I feel very strongly about this kind of thing. If someone can actually pick up a knife and chop off a new born's tail with out anesthesia, hear that cry and not feel any remorse, they are seriously disturbed and should get help.

I wouldn't be mean to you for stating your opinion! No one should. I will say this, though--We have docked tails on our 3 day old pups, because when we breed a litter, we always have a waiting list for show homes. (We've been considering skipping this for some time now, simply because poodle tails are being docked pretty darn LONG as it is, and all the European dogs being imported have natural tails anyway, but that's beside the point here.)

What I have to take issue with is your "pick up a knife and chop off a new born's tail...hear that cry..." statement. As I said before, I don't know how the procedure is done at a vet's office, because I've never had a litter docked by a vet. I'm assuming there is cutting, though, because there are usually stitches afterward.

We learned docking and dewclaw removal from our breed mentor, and do it ourselves. There's less risk to the pups, since we're not exposing them to a vet clinic potentially full of sick animals, or the stress of the trip to get there. THERE IS NO CUTTING INVOLVED. There is no blood. There is usually no crying at the moment of removal of the tip of the tail--the biggest protest we get is while immobilizing the puppy (holding it still) or while pinching off the blood-flow to the tail prior to removal...and that's usually a single protest-whine, but it's never loud or prolonged "crying."

The whole thing takes LESS than one minute (usually closer to 30 seconds). There is NO BLOOD. There are no stitches. There is no lasting trauma. Maybe some veterinarians need to re-examine the process they're using.

I'm not some militant pro-docking person. I've explained in a previous post the reasons that we've done it with our pups, but it wouldn't bother me one bit to see the procedure ended here, as it has been in Europe. Once people get used to seeing natural tails (and ears), it won't seem at all unusual. It's a matter of fashion, not function. But if everyone stopped doing it all at once, that would solve both the problem of judges overlooking otherwise fine dogs because they look "different," and the problem of potential pet adopters overlooking otherwise fine dogs because they don't look they way they're expected to look. It's all what you're used to.

I wish I had video of any of our previous tail-dockings, though, just to show everyone who's crying "BARBARIC." That's just so far from the truth for most breeders. But again, I don't know what's going on at the vet's office, and if there is, in fact, CUTTING involved, then yeah, I'd imagine that could be fairly traumatic, though brief.

 

[rebecca10782]

How is it possible to dock a tail without cutting it?

 

[rebecca10782]

I don't know my poodles orgins and I don't know what a docked tail looks like, is her tail docked?

 

[hensdeliverthegoods]

JayBird+16 :

I wanted to see my new avatar. They're my dobbies. They don't have tails.

Your Dobies are beautiful!

 

[ninjapoodles]

Quote:
I haven't seen anything in this entire thread that suggests (convincingly, anyway) that docking/cropping has any justification BUT "tradition." That's certainly the case in my breed of choice (where we dock only the last 1/4 or so of the tail). Our governing breed club is pathologically resistant to change, and it has the added charm of being a CLOSED parent club, meaning that for a new person to get in, an existing member has to quit or die...almost. New member applicants must be sponsored, and when it comes time to vote, they can still be "blackballed." It's nuts. There has been a STRONG movement among exhibitors for years lobbying to allow a sporting trim in AKC shows, but the Poodle Club of America's Old Guard will never, ever allow such a change, not for the foreseeable future, anyway, regardless of the fact that probably the majority of poodle owners/exhibitors would be in favor of it.

We already breed poodles for short backs (and consequently, shorter tails), with the standard calling for the dog to be "square," that is, no longer than it is tall...which is really not how Mother Nature wants a canid to be shaped. So a poodle is a short-backed dog with a high-set tail, as seen in the breed standard. However, when you shorten the back and level the topline (again, as specified in the standard), that has the direct effect of curving, and even curling, the tail. BUT GUESS WHAT ELSE our standard calls for? That's right--a straight tail. How you're supposed to pull that off while breeding for a shorter back, I've never understood, and I've kind of suspected that's one of the reasons we continue to dock. After all, the longer the tail, the more chance for the natural curvature of it to be pronounced.

In our breed standard, docking is not mandatory, per se. Plenty of undocked dogs from other countries have been shown here. The standard reads, "tail straight, set on high, and carried up. Docked of sufficient length to ensure a balanced outline. Major faults: set low, curled, or carried over the back." I think you can see that in a short-backed animal, a tail is pretty much gonna want to curl and/or be carried over the back. I defy anyone to show me an otherwise properly-conformed poodle whose tail doesn't curl--most dogs in the showring today have tails that are carried over the back. I think one reason that people still dock poodles is for fear that a totally natural tail might curl right on up like a Basenji's (I exaggerate, but you get my meaning).

I say, re-write the standards, and let the dog be. Keep the structure, lose the restriction on tails. I can't believe that something like a gay tail, a fault of fashion, is considered a "MAJOR FAULT," while a serious fault of function like a straight shoulder/ewe neck, something that could actually interfere with proper movement and soundness, is not. It's crazy.

But if I'm promising someone a show-quality puppy, I owe it to them to start them on a level playing field, I feel, so I've been going ahead and popping the tops off those tails. We have our first litter in three years coming soon, though...and I just may skip the tails on these. I know they'll curl, but I'm considering it anyway.