Is Tail Docking Dog Torture?

If it were illegal to dock my dog and he kept injuring his tail -- I would feel pretty angry at the whole situation and government. 

if, and it's a big IF, you had a dog who kept injuring his tail you would now have a medical reason for a dock. It's the idea that one should just routinely dock thousands of puppies tails just in case one or two grow up to injure their tails that puzzles most people- gee let's inflict the severe pain of an anesthesia- and pain-killer- free amputation on all baby dogs in order to prevent an amputation-under-anesthesia-followed-by-pain-killers on a handful of adult dogs. Very strange concept.

Its not so much a question of whether or not we as people personally believe in tail docking/ear cropping, but rather if you think its ok for the government to legislate such procedures.

The government has gotten away with banning Pit Bulls in many states, provinces, etc. Why should they get away with this too? Its a very slippery slope when the goverrnment starts dictating what we can and can't do with our animals. 

mudpuppy

gee let's inflict the severe pain of an anesthesia- and pain-killer- free amputation on all baby dogs in order to prevent an amputation-under-anesthesia-followed-by-pain-killers on a handful of adult dogs. Very strange concept.

I agree with you on most things but this is a bit absurd.  Whatever one's views on docking pups, the dogs are barely developed enough to feel pain.  The puppy is a neonate and doesn't even have a fully developed nervous system.  I can't imagine that using anaesthesia on a pup that small/young who is still dependent on the mother for body temperature is in any way safe or even possible.  I don't think anaesthesia and pain meds make something hunky-dory.  I had embedded wisdom teeth extracted without anaesthesia and I was not prescribed pain meds afterward and I had a relatively easy recovery whereas some of my friends went the oral surgery route with anaesthsia and vicodin and were miserable for days.  I don't think even pro-dockers are condoning inexperienced people or people who apparently don't know what they are doing docking puppies that are old enough for any pain or discomfort lasting longer than a few seconds.  Personally, I stick to breeds that have naturally erect ears and full tails, so I don't really have an opinion one way or the other on docking tails, but I've seen/heard it being done at the vet's office and I've never seen a puppy in "severe pain".  If that's the case, then someone is not doing something right and it's gone beyond docking vs. undocked. 

mudpuppy

let's inflict the severe pain of an anesthesia- and pain-killer- free amputation on all baby dogs in order to prevent an amputation-under-anesthesia-followed-by-pain-killers on a handful of adult dogs.

(I thought I posted this awhile ago, but apparently not!)

So my dog would have to go through the severe pain of breaking his tail 2-4 times and then go through SURGERY and anesthetic to amputate his tail then the severe pain to recover from major surgery... when he could have been docked at 2-4 days of age when it would have been minor.

Now that's a very strange concept.
 

.stacer.

Its not so much a question of whether or not we as people personally believe in tail docking/ear cropping, but rather if you think its ok for the government to legislate such procedures.

The government has gotten away with banning Pit Bulls in many states, provinces, etc. Why should they get away with this too? Its a very slippery slope when the goverrnment starts dictating what we can and can't do with our animals. 

 

YES! Exactly -- and the true meaning of this legislation is brought back around.  Thank you, great post.
 

Liesje

but I've seen/heard it being done at the vet's office and I've never seen a puppy in "severe pain".  If that's the case, then someone is not doing something right and it's gone beyond docking vs. undocked. 

Exactly -- torture and docking are two very different things.
 

pudel

Since the majority of pure bred dogs are not working, what is the justificaiton for all these people you speak about to crop and dock their dogs, other than cosmetics? 

Really? What breeds are you personally an expert on? The vast majority of the GSPs and Viszlas I know hunt. I can't speak to many other breeds, but I can tell you that the GSP folks I know EXPECT their puppies to hunt. I've even been told that if you don't hunt and just want a companion then you shouldn't get a GSP.

polarexpress

pudel

Since the majority of pure bred dogs are not working, what is the justificaiton for all these people you speak about to crop and dock their dogs, other than cosmetics? 

Really? What breeds are you personally an expert on?

 Are you honestly saying that i have to be an 'expert' to state that most poodles, yorkshire terriers, rotteweilers, boxers, dobermans and cocker spaniels are not working?  It is a fact that the majority of docked dogs are kept as pets, and are therefore, not at a great risk for tail injuries

 I've seen/heard it being done at the vet's office and I've never seen a puppy in "severe pain". 

 The ability of an animal to communicate pain has no relation with its ability to feel pain.  As for the nervous system being less developed, it simply means that puppies feel less pain than adults, not no pain.  No one can say with any degree of certainty that no pain is felt from the procedure.

Its a very slippery slope when the goverrnment starts dictating what we can and can't do with our animals. 

To me, this is no different than the government legislating against animal abuse.  Unfortuantely, the helpless and voiceless, like animals, children and the disabled, need government protection as they cannot help themselves against those who feel it is their 'right' to have their way with them.

 Also, has it ever occurred to anyone that a dog's tail, like the tail of every other animal, might serve some function that is biologically and psychologically important to the dog? For example - counterbalancing?  Communication?

pudel, I wasn't going to come back but your post raises some things that I think about  concerning tail docking.  I do not agree about the pain issue but I concede that we really don't know. All we can go on is the actual reaction of the puppy and I have not seen a puppy docked at the proper age acting in great pain. Not to say I have seen so many that I feel like an expert but all I can go by is what I have seen.

Regarding the dog's use of it's tail, for all the myriad reasons that evolution provided it, I am very much in agreement.  But I have watched many docked dogs perform at Field Trials and in actual hunting scenarios, where the lack of balance would be very evident. I believe this is not a major issue for these dogs.  Same applies to dogs in agility. 

 The communication thing is trickier but I can't say I have ever heard any evidence stating that docked dogs have more problems interacting with other dogs.  Dogs have many ways to communitcate with each other and the tail, while used, is one of many available. 

I have said before in this thread and another that I am opposed to docking tails for cosmetic reasons.  I am more opposed to the idea of any sort of government entity controlling what I do with my dogs.  The legislation to protect innocent, helpless children has not stopped children from being abused, by any means.  Good people don't abuse children, dogs or any helpless being.  You can't legislate responsibility, it only serves as a form of punishment if caught. And we all know that punishment rarely works.

pudel

 

I've seen/heard it being done at the vet's office and I've never seen a puppy in "severe pain". 

 The ability of an animal to communicate pain has no relation with its ability to feel pain.  As for the nervous system being less developed, it simply means that puppies feel less pain than adults, not no pain.  No one can say with any degree of certainty that no pain is felt from the procedure.

OK well the post *I* was quoting referred to "severe pain".  

I guess I look at this from a totally different angle, since my breeds aren't docked and my dogs have never suffered tail injuries, nor do their tails negatively effect their ability to play and work.  I just don't think it's something that should or needs to be regulated.  There's a lot of things that I personally would not do myself that I feel the government should ban or regulate (docking, male circumcision, abortion, smoking marijuana....).  In general, when it's something that doesn't effect me one way or the other and something that I don't have a lot of first hand experience with, I will err on the side of people making their own informed decisions.

JackieG

 The communication thing is trickier but I can't say I have ever heard any evidence stating that docked dogs have more problems interacting with other dogs.  Dogs have many ways to communitcate with each other and the tail, while used, is one of many available. 

I gotta call BS on that one, too.  The only thing I've ever heard about was a "study" done with robotic dogs, stating that real dogs reacted differently to the robot dogs with docked tails.  I don't think any dog is going to react normally to a robot!  And, there are just way too many variables to really definitively say whether or not dogs react differently to docked v. non-docked dogs.

That being said, my dog has a "naturally docked" tail.  We're 99% sure he was born with it; at any rate, it's all we know of him, as he came that way to us when we adopted him from a shelter at 3 months old.  You can see it in the picture in my avatar.  I've never witnessed any dog freak out at him and not at a dog with a full tail.  The only dogs that have reacted negatively towards my dog do the same with other dogs, tail or no tail.

And I totally agree about the underlying factor of adding more government control over our individual lives.  I can't remember how many times I've seen episodes of Animal Cops where they find dogs on which someone has hacked at their ears with goodness-knows-what horrible instrument (scissors, box cutter, who knows?!).  So if people will do something like this when ear cropping is legal, then it stands to reason that they're going to do it whether it is legal or not.  Like others have said, the bad folk are gonna do what they want regardless of the law, so why not at least keep it legal so people have the option of a humane procedure performed by a licensed vet?

pudel

It is a fact that the majority of docked dogs are kept as pets,

Can you please show us where this is a documented fact?  Stating passionate unsubstatiated opinions as facts is potentially misleading and dangerously inept in the context of a discussion about what should be legislated.  Even though Yorkshire Terriers are currently the #2 purebred dog registered by the AKC in the US, that still doesn't prove the point you're trying to make.  (Btw, Yorkies are only docked for hygiene reasons - fecal matter caught in their hair.  I wonder how popular they would be with intact (unhygienic?) tails.)

pudel

and are therefore, not at a great risk for tail injuries

(oh, and we can "chop" parts OUT, ie spay/neuter, but not OFF??  Wait... are testicles "chopped off"...??)

As for dog-dog "miscommunication" as a result of docked tails, we just don't see that happening in real life.  (Apparently in robot dogs??)  However, *many* of us have experienced dog-dog "miscommunication" with those dogs who naturally carry their tails over their backs.  Tail presentation/carriage is only part of the intricate body language that dogs use - most heavily weighted seem to be eye gaze and body posture, among others.  If there is some change in body language due to a shorter tail, then these dogs enhance their communication skills through other means of body language.

As for counterbalance, consider that these dogs docked as pups developed their sense of balance withOUT their tails.  They knew no differently and show no impairment of balance otherwise.  Now, an adult dog who grew up with a tail which was later amputated *would* likely experience problems with balance as that tail had been part of its development and awareness of its own physicality.

I read an article once about docking in Rottweilers that explains the center of gravity on today's heavy-boned, muscular Rottweilers is toward the front of the dog.  This, a result of the "level topline, shorter back and medium length croup" which creates "an almost square, broad and deep dog who is capable of trotting for long time periods without tiring."
(to quote the article directly here:)
"To add a long, heavy tail to the structure described in the standards would change the center of gravity, moving it towards the rear of the dog.  This would lessen the Rottweiler's ability as an endurance trotter, unless the croup we desire today changes. Mechanically and kinematically speaking, it must be lengthened and rounded if the desired tail carriage is down to facilitate the mechanics of trotting tirelessly for a long time. Likewise, if the desired carriage is curled tightly over the back, a short croup would be necessary. The Greater Swiss Mountain Dog and Bernese Mountain Dog breed standards, the Rottweiler's closest relatives, call for a long, rounded croup. Alternatively, the Akita, who is also a broad dog, has a very short croup."
It goes on to explain that in order to accommodate an undocked tail, breeders would have to change the croup and tail set, which could result in a longer dog.  A longer back means a bounce in the Rottweiler's trott, thus decreasing his endurance.  (For those who don't know, Rottweilers were developed as cattle dogs and general farm duty including cart-pulling.  Easy to see how endurance is an important factor in the breed.)  

There are functional reasons why some dog tails are humanely docked under veterinary care.  What's the functional reason for that poodle being dyed hot pink?

And, Jackie, I am repeating your post here because I think it's great.  Although you are against docking for cosmetic reasons, your understanding of how that belief translates into legislation for all is very sound, indeed.  Kudos! 

JackieG

I have said before in this thread and another that I am opposed to docking tails for cosmetic reasons.  I am more opposed to the idea of any sort of government entity controlling what I do with my dogs.  The legislation to protect innocent, helpless children has not stopped children from being abused, by any means.  Good people don't abuse children, dogs or any helpless being.  You can't legislate responsibility, it only serves as a form of punishment if caught. And we all know that punishment rarely works.

Rottweilers were developed as cattle dogs and general farm duty including cart-pulling.  Easy to see how endurance is an important factor in the breed.

so? that's not relevant to today's rottweiler. They used to dock/crop dobermans to make them look more "fierce" which is also not relevant to today's doberman. They started docking a lot of dog breeds in order to avoid paying a particular tax, which is also not relevant to today. What you get is a lot of people making up strange "reasons" for continuing the amputation of puppy tails and ears, and none of them stand up to scrutiny.

Yeah but a lot of the reasons against it are equally irrelevant, absurd, or not at all based on fact.

Most people I know with docked dogs do it because the dog was done at 2 days old so they didn't have a choice, it came that way.  And most of the people I know with crop-eared dogs had it done because that's what everyone else does and/or they like the way it looks.  I understand the injury and utility arguments but I'm inclined to agree with Pudel in that at least in my experience, most dog owners I know personally do not "work" their dogs.  Where we differ is that I really don't care if someone else wants a cropped/docked dog and I don't see the purpose of the gov't stepping in to regulate or how that would even be possible since most AC divisions cannot even regulate laws and codes already in place.

pudel

polarexpress

pudel

Since the majority of pure bred dogs are not working, what is the justificaiton for all these people you speak about to crop and dock their dogs, other than cosmetics? 

Really? What breeds are you personally an expert on?

 Are you honestly saying that i have to be an 'expert' to state that most poodles, yorkshire terriers, rotteweilers, boxers, dobermans and cocker spaniels are not working?  It is a fact that the majority of docked dogs are kept as pets, and are therefore, not at a great risk for tail injuries

Your argument is that the majority of dogs are kept as pets and not at great risk for tail injuries, therefore docking all dogs in order to protect a tiny number is wrong---------am I correct here?

If that is your train of thought, then let's take it down to litters and for this example, litters of a hunting breed with a tail that has a fragile tip.

If ALL the pups in a litter were expected to hunt and therefore be at risk for tail injuries, would you find docking okay then?

Also, has it ever occurred to anyone that a dog's tail, like the tail of every other animal, might serve some function that is biologically and psychologically important to the dog? For example - counterbalancing?  Communication?

My dog's tail serves several functions. BTW It wags just fine and he uses it when he POINTS which requires excellent balance.

Honestly, I wonder if developing the pointing ability created tails with fragile ends that are susceptible to injury. Combine that with a GSP's high drive and you get a dog that will ignore injuries and keep going---even when playing.