Scotland sees sense at last......

[gunnergundog]

....and will be overturning the anti-docking law for HPRs and spaniels. https://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/179/15/369.2

I doubt that Crufts will follow suit, which is a pity for those that have true dual purpose breeds, but we can live in hope. I don't show and the division in my major breed is probably too great now, but it is at least a start...

 

[suebou]

....and will be overturning the anti-docking law for HPRs and spaniels. https://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/179/15/369.2

I doubt that Crufts will follow suit, which is a pity for those that have true dual purpose breeds, but we can live in hope. I don't show and the division in my major breed is probably too great now, but it is at least a start...

It’s been overturned for ages in Scotland, at least two years, I feel. We’ve had thee litters docked I think and don’t have more than one a year........

 

[tankgirl1]

As an RVN I see that as a step backwards

 

[blackcob]

It was 2017 and it was a step backwards for animal welfare.

 

[dixie]

As a non dog owner, why do these dogs need docking. I’m hoping you’re not going to say it’s tradition.

 

[ycbm]

Is it a step forwards to amputate thousands of tails so that one dog doesn't injure theirs and need the operation as an adult?
.

 

[Pearlsasinger]

Is it a step forwards to amputate thousands of tails so that one dog doesn't injure theirs and need the operation as an adult?
.

I really wouldn't have thought so!

 

[suebou]

You are, as is everyone, entitled to your opinion. In order to change the legislation we had to PROVE that docking of working spaniels and hpr breeds was a welfare issue.
We started by clearly demonstrating that working spaniels were consistently damaging their full length undocked tails. We then had to demonstrate that dogs with tails shortened by no more than 1/3 did not suffer damage.
We then gathered evidence to show that shortening as an adult dog is extremely stressful in terms of the operation itself, the recovery and the nursing process.
We then had to demonstrate that a minor procedure at no more than three days old causes NO distress to pups. All of the evidence was collated, peer reviewed and subject to intense scrutiny. No one wanted to see a short dock on any breed but it was a vital issue for Scotland’s working dogs that ten years of cruelty was changed.
Please look at YouTube Jodie’s tail for a video of a dog suffering having repeated amputation as an adult dog. There have been dogs put down because there was nothing left and the wound wouldn’t heal.
Many vets/vet nurses with high numbers of working dogs support the change in legislation. We were told numerous times ‘I would rather shorten tails on 100 litters than amputate an adult

 

[ycbm]

It might be an idea to stop breeding millions of birds so that people can shoot them out of the sky still alive to have them picked up by dogs that then injure their tails doing that work? All for humans to have some fun. I'm not a fan of shooting birds as a passtime either, as I'm sure you can tell.
.

 

[FinnishLapphund]

Personally, I don't understand how a dog breeder could claim that they breed dogs suitable for their intended job, when their dogs only are suitable if either themselves or the future owner is allowed to amputate a part of the dog's body first.

Did breeders seriously try to breed dogs who wagged their tails less while working, held their tails lower, had lower set tails, tried to breed in stumpy tails, managed to do the job without injuring their tails...
Or did they only want to once again be allowed to use their old way of solving their problem of not being able to breed dogs who truly are suitable for their intended job.

 

[MrsMozart]

But now so many dogs who really don't need(!) their tails amputating will be done irrespective of that fact!

Nope. Can't get my head around chopping off bits of animals to satisfy a human desire for something.

 

[suebou]

It might be an idea to stop breeding millions of birds so that people can shoot them out of the sky still alive to have them picked up by dogs that then injure their tails doing that work? All for humans to have some fun. I'm not a fan of shooting birds as a passtime either, as I'm sure you can tell.
.

Different conversation

 

[meleeka]

I know of a Springer who had ifs tail amputated as an adult (was damaged by accidentally getting shut in a car door!) It was straightforward and the dog recovered quickly.

I wouldn’t mind so much if it was a need thing, but docking all tails, whether working or not, isn’t something I agree with.

 

[ycbm]

Different conversation

Not at all. It is the people who support the breeding of millions of birds to be shot as a leisure activity for humans who also support the amputation of puppy tails. The "sport" is inextricably connected with "need" to dock.

In any other context, deliberately disabling animals, sending a dog to fetch them and then wringing their necks would be a criminal offence.
.

 

[skinnydipper]

You are, as is everyone, entitled to your opinion. In order to change the legislation we had to PROVE that docking of working spaniels and hpr breeds was a welfare issue.
We started by clearly demonstrating that working spaniels were consistently damaging their full length undocked tails. We then had to demonstrate that dogs with tails shortened by no more than 1/3 did not suffer damage.
We then gathered evidence to show that shortening as an adult dog is extremely stressful in terms of the operation itself, the recovery and the nursing process.
We then had to demonstrate that a minor procedure at no more than three days old causes NO distress to pups. All of the evidence was collated, peer reviewed and subject to intense scrutiny. No one wanted to see a short dock on any breed but it was a vital issue for Scotland’s working dogs that ten years of cruelty was changed.
Please look at YouTube Jodie’s tail for a video of a dog suffering having repeated amputation as an adult dog. There have been dogs put down because there was nothing left and the wound wouldn’t heal.
Many vets/vet nurses with high numbers of working dogs support the change in legislation. We were told numerous times ‘I would rather shorten tails on 100 litters than amputate an adult

Anybody that thinks that puppies do not feel pain needs to give their head a shake.

"Advocates of tail docking claim that it does not cause pain or discomfort, as the nervous system of puppies is not fully developed. This is not the case; the basic nervous system of a dog is fully developed at birth. Evidence indicates that puppies have similar sensitivity to pain as adult dogs. Docking a puppy’s tail involves cutting through muscles, tendons, up to seven pairs of highly sensitive nerves and severing bone and cartilage connections."

Aside from the mutilation and trauma are you forgetting, or are you not aware of, the role of a dog's tail in communication?

I remembered how you teach your dogs to walk on a lead and, all things considered, I am very pleased that I don't know you.

 

[OldNag]

I suppose one can hope that the numbers of dogs who undergo docking will be small if the letter of the law is kept to. I wonder how much it will be abused though.

Though I don't agree the ban should have been lifted at all.

 

[deb_l222]

I think this is old news but in no way is this a step forward. Tail docking is just 'tradition' and has little to do with welfare issues. There are so few spaniels that get their tails damaged actually out working it's negligible. The place they damage their tails is usually within the confines of a kennel. Maybe think about keeping your animals differently, rather than chopping off the bit that could get hurt on metal?

Any vet that will happily chop off part of a dog's spine, just in case it MAY injure itself at some POSSIBLE point in the FUTURE should take a long hard look at why they signed up to be a vet in the first place. Although having seen some horrendous injuries from 'have a go' home docking, I'm not sure if the vet is the lesser of two evils.

Hey ho, said my bit

 

[Cortez]

Having once assisted a vet in the docking of a litter of very young puppies I can tell you that they do indeed feel pain, and that it is a barbaric practice. I am by no means a softy, but I couldn't sleep for days.

 

[blackcob]

I've told this story on here before but it possibly bears repeating. I used to have no strong feelings about docking, and probably would had defended it somewhat if I thought that some 'townie-ish' person was chuntering on about something they didn't fully understand. Then I started work in a veterinary practice, saw it done first hand and knew it for the barbaric act of mutilation that it is.

Of course they feel pain and distress - anyone claiming otherwise is either blind and deaf or lying. And it is so often completely pointless; most end up in pet homes, indeed there's nothing to stop someone having a whole litter docked with the intention of selling to pet homes, so long as they produce some spurious bit of paperwork for the vet.

 

[Clodagh]

I have a labrador with a full amputation as a result of continually injuring her tail. It was an awful year (not helped by useless vets) between the original injury and the final removal of her tail bar a stump.
I still can't see the need for all litters (not labs I know, mine is an exception), few of which will work, to be docked. I think perhaps it would be better that if you actually do work your dog the vet should be able to remove the tail at the first injury, rather than with adults having to prove that it is needed. Not sure that is well worded, but generally a dog that damages its tail once (badly) will do it again. Yes it would be more expensive for the individual but I too have seen litters docked and dew clawed (before you had to get a vet to do it, so not even a dab of local) and it was awful. I hope it is better now that only vets do it.
Although being a deeply shallow person I do think that traditionally docked breeds look better docked, not that is a justifiable reason.