Tail docking

[Kayceeh]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Exactly...pain that you are using YOUR judgment to determine...not the dogs'. So you feel that YOU should be able to assess the pain of a dog when contemplating euthanasia, but breeders should not be able to make their own assessments regarding any pain felt when docking tails. The "comparisons" are shocking...one supports your line of reasoning, one completely contradicts it.

No I would use the judgement of a qualified vetenarian to make that judgement. I certainly wouldn't go ahead and decide off my own bat whether my dog was suffering so much, that it was cruel to prolong it's existance. Just as I would never assume to go ahead and try to perform an amputation on an animal without the necessary training..

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Kayceeh

Sorry but I disagree wholeheartedly as to it not being about selling and at the end of the day dollar signs.

If you honestly feel that the bottom line for breeders is monetary profit, then I am sorry to say you are very misinformed. If that were the case, there would be many breeders who didn't breed at all as they never see the first resemblance of profit, or even breaking even for that matter. It's very disheartening to see such an unfair assumption and generalization made about ALL breeders based when it is, in fact, a mistruth.

Originally Posted by Kayceeh

No I would use the judgement of a qualified vetenarian to make that judgement. I certainly wouldn't go ahead and decide off my own bat whether my dog was suffering so much, that it was cruel to prolong it's existance. Just as I would never assume to go ahead and try to perform an amputation on an animal without the necessary training..

And you don't think that breeders base their decisions on docking the judgement of their vets as well? I can assure you that some certainly do. The point, which is apparently a valid one since it's being swept under the rug and ignored, is just the same and one that apparently no one has an answer for: Whether the judgment being used is that of the owner/breeder, or the vet. If it's good for one, it's good for the other. Why can the pain and suffering in one instance be assessed, and not the next? Like I said, there is no "difference" other than the fact that one supports your argument, the other disputes it. Principles can be accepted for the basis of one thing, and then shunned in the next instance. (Well, I suppose they can...but it really speaks for itself in that case.)

[Britster]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

So is that what makes it different? That it is "pointless." So is dressing your dog up in clothes. But I can see from your avatar pic that you are not opposed to that....but I guess that doesn't count, eh? It's "different."

LOL, he was COLD. We had about 13 inches of snow in that picture. He wears a coat in the snow because he gets cold. And putting a coat on a dog is a lot different than cutting off it's tail. Sorry.

[QuickSilver]

There is no comparison between putting a sweater on a dog and cutting off part of its tail.

One more time: we have to make decisions for our animals based on our own personal preference, the good of the individual dog, and the good of animals in general. I give Thor baths even though he hates them because to my human nose, he smells better after one. This is a minor decision, as ones based on personal preference should be.

The more pain / limitation an action places upon an animal, the more carefully we should weigh it. Grooming: not a big deal, total freedom of choice. Yet we all seem to agree that certain types of tail docking are cruel, and should be illegal. We don't consider them legitimate choices for the owner to make on behalf of their dog. Putting an animal to sleep is obviously a very difficult decision that most people agonize over. And then there are some people who have their dogs PTS for really minor reasons, including, yes, looks. Do we consider these legitimate choices?

I can understand if someone believes that tail docking causes minimal pain and does not interfere with the dog's function, that it's okay to make the alteration just for aesthetics. I don't agree, but I can understand the perspective. I do have one question though: what recourse would I have if I receive a dog like Thor, whose tail has been docked way too short? His tail is not performing the function it should, because it's practically invisible. I don't think you could realistically put a restriction that tail docking must be done "properly", because how would that be enforced? I'm seriously asking here.

I am wondering about mommadog1's observation that yorkies seemed less distressed by the docking. Perhaps it depends on the thickness of the tail?

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Britster

LOL, he was COLD. We had about 13 inches of snow in that picture. He wears a coat in the snow because he gets cold. And putting a coat on a dog is a lot different than cutting off it's tail. Sorry.

Ha ha ha...nice try. Snow...yeah...just look at it all.
And no...if your basis of argument is that it's "pointless", then no, there is no difference, except that one supports your reasoning, the other doesn't.

[Kayceeh]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

If you honestly feel that the bottom line for breeders is monetary profit, then I am sorry to say you are very misinformed. If that were the case, there would be many breeders who didn't breed at all as they never see the first resemblance of profit, or even breaking even for that matter. It's very disheartening to see such an unfair assumption and generalization made about ALL breeders based when it is, in fact, a mistruth.

If you're trying to tell me that most breeders are in it only for the satisfaction of carrying on the breed then I'll disagree with you again. If that were the case why on earth do they sell for such high prices? Why even breed when there are so many Yorkies in need of homes in rescue shelters? What I find "disheartening" is more and more being reproduced when there are so many being mistreat in puppymills and petshops.



And you don't think that breeders base their decisions on docking the judgement of their vets as well? I can assure you that some certainly do. The point, which is apparently a valid one since it's being swept under the rug and ignored, is just the same and one that apparently no one has an answer for: Whether the judgment being used is that of the owner/breeder, or the vet. If it's good for one, it's good for the other. Why can the pain and suffering in one instance be assessed, and not the next? Like I said, there is no "difference" other than the fact that one supports your argument, the other disputes it.

Many countries have banned docking, many vets do not approve the practice. Why should they, it's simply cosmetic enhancement, it does nothing to add quality of life to the animal at all. I believe breeders base their decisions on docking because of supply and demand and as I stated earlier I would bet my bottom dollar that if full tail pups sold for higher bucks than docked tailed pups, then the situation would rapidly change.

.....

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

The more pain / limitation an action places upon an animal, the more carefully we should weigh it. Yet we all seem to agree that certain types of tail docking are cruel, and should be illegal.
I can understand if someone believes that tail docking causes minimal pain and does not interfere with the dog's function, that it's okay to make the alteration just for aesthetics. I don't agree, but I can understand the perspective.

I appreciate your point of view and value your opposing opinions because of it. You have your stance, yet you actually take the time to consider the opposing one's with an open mind.

I understand what you mean about Thor. I have one who just has a nub. It was not as apparent as a puppy that it had been docked shorter (although I know why it was), but as she grew as an adult, it became more obvious. I don't know the solution to that, but I do understand your concern for it.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Ha ha ha...nice try. Snow...yeah...just look at it all.
And no...if your basis of argument is that it's "pointless", then no, there is no difference, except that one supports your reasoning, the other doesn't.

I was wrong, there wasn't snow on the ground yet at that point that that exact pic was taken, it came later that day and I believe this photo is from the next day. Regardless of if there is snow or not, it was COLD outside... therefore there's a point to his coat. You will never see Jackson in clothes in the summer because it's not necessary. You can't chop a tail off and then decide to just put it back on. Amputation and a coat are two different things. And like I said, in MY OPINION taildocking is pointless and in MY OPINION putting a coat on dog when it's under 30 degrees is NOT. Hence my opinion. There's no need to get snappy with me. I'm simply stating my views and opinions just as you are

[Kayceeh]

Originally Posted by Britster

And like I said, in MY OPINION taildocking is pointless and in MY OPINION putting a coat on dog when it's under 30 degrees is NOT. .

Exactly!!

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by Kayceeh

Sorry but I disagree wholeheartedly as to it not being about selling and at the end of the day dollar signs. If breeders were told tommorow that Yorkies with tails are now selling for big bucks, bigger than Yorkies with docked tails, then I'd bet my bottom dollar that just about all would stop the practice. Supply and demand, like most other areas of life is the biggest issue IMO.

As for it being harmful to the puppy I agree it doesn't leave lasting damage if done correctly but obviously it hurts to have a part of your body amputated, so yes I would call that harmful and unnecessary suffering.

Will disagree with you....since I breed for myself, and the time and money spent on tests prior to ever breeding two dogs as well as vet care for mom and pups, is far more than I could ever recover. As I stated before, I don't breed to fulfill a pet market, that's not what I'm about......Breeding at the most 2 litters a year, keeping 1 or 2 pups out of a litter of 3......So, there is no supply and demand in my breeding program.

[Kayceeh]

Originally Posted by Mardelin

Will disagree with you....since I breed for myself, and the time and money spent on tests prior to ever breeding two dogs as well as vet care for mom and pups, is far more than I could ever recover. As I stated before, I don't breed to fulfill a pet market, that's not what I'm about......Breeding at the most 2 litters a year, keeping 1 or 2 pups out of a litter of 3......So, there is no supply and demand in my breeding program.

If you keep 2 pups out of two litters a year then you're certainly a rare breed yourself Good on you but I seriously doubt many breeders do the same.

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by Ellie May

I'll probably regret posting on this thread later, but here goes.

So we should "not" dock tails because it is painful and potentially harmful and only for cosmetic reasons?

Yorkies have a higher c-section rate than a lot of other breeds, probably because they are small. Size is appearance. Appearance is vanity. So now we are back to a cosmetic issue, really. So it could be said that by breeding larger Yorkies, there would be less risk (pain and potential harm) to the mother(s). So we should change this standard too then?

Originally Posted by Mardelin

You know Dr. Centers says that breeding smaller has caused a lot of the issues that are facing our breed.

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

Coming back to the party....

Second: whelping for yorkies seems exceptionally dangerous, and if that could be made less dangerous by increasing the standard size, then I reeeeeeeally hope this is at least being considered. How could a breed club claim to support the welfare of the animal if things like this AREN'T considered??

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

It could be made less dangerous if people actual research and educate themselves on the breeding process in advance. If they make sure they are breeding females from lines of free whelpers and who have a pelvic structure suitable for breeding. Instead of just breeding and then trying to pick up on it as they do....coming to YT and not listening to advice or after the fact determined to find someone to just tell them what they want to hear.

Even in the best situation where everything is done 'by the book,' there are still going to be instances where there are complications along the way with the whelp. Just the way it is and would still happen if the 'breed standard was bigger.'

Okay, so the earlier quotes about yorkies having more c-sections and health problems because they are smaller, these are incorrect?

Here is one of the big problems I have with this type of discussion. If, as a pet owner, someone came to me and said, "doing X to your dog causes them incredible stress and pain, and you should never, ever do it again" -- I think I would at least look into the claim. Maybe I would decide it was baseless and not worry about it, but as a breeder, does it not concern you that possibly the puppies experience a great deal more pain during docking than you realize?

Similarly with the breed standard of 7 lbs - I don't know much about whelping, so maybe the 4-7lb recommendation is fine. But I would think that this would be a topic of active discussion at the YTCA if increasing the breed size WOULD make whelping easier. Is this in fact a topic of discussion at all?

Speaking personally, I feel like when these kinds of topics come up, rather than prompting a discussion about what is truly best for our dogs, a lot of the responses are along the lines of "you shouldn't challenge the wisdom of the breed standard / YTCA / AKC / established breeders." The responses often seem quite defensive and designed to STOP discussion and investigation. That really bothers me. I think such questions should be welcomed, frankly addressed, and then maybe it would be easier to put them to bed.

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Kayceeh

If you're trying to tell me that most breeders are in it only for the satisfaction of carrying on the breed then I'll disagree with you again. If that were the case why on earth do they sell for such high prices? Why even breed when there are so many Yorkies in need of homes in rescue shelters? What I find "disheartening" is more and more being reproduced when there are so many being mistreat in puppymills and petshops.

Well I will both agree and disagree with you on this one. No, I don't think that most breeders are in it for the satisfaction you mention. Then again, I disagree with the motivations and practices I see with the majority of breeders these days. But is money the factor for those I DO agree with and support? No, far from it. I KNOW there are some that charge ridiculous prices just because they know they will get it. Just as I know there are some who charge higher prices because they actually did take the time to perform medical testing, invest in show costs and registration fees and quality food, vaccinations, etc.
And yes, I do think there are way too many dogs in petshops and puppymills, but do you think that if reputable breeders stopped breeding altogether that would change? Nope. It would remain a constant and those dogs, rather than well bred ones would be the ONLY option out there for people. In the meantime, the breed would be lost.

Originally Posted by Kayceeh

Many countries have banned docking, many vets do not approve the practice. Why should they, it's simply cosmetic enhancehemnt, it does nothing to add quality of life to the animal at all. I believe breeders base their decisions on docking because of supply and demand and as I stated earlier I would bet my bottom dollar that if full tail pups sold for higher bucks than docked tailed pups, then the situation would rapidly change

This...is absolutely irrelevant to the comment that you were responding to. But that's OK, it served it's purpose of diverting attention away from my point well...just as I'm sure it was intended to do. No worries...it's kind of a difficult one to just "explain away", so ignoring it really is probably the best option.

In any event, your overall opinion on "most" breeders I can't exactly disagree with because as I stated, I don't agree with "most" breeders myself. But I can't relate when you extend the sterotype to include ALL breeders who don't even come close to falling into sterotype you seem to have drawn. There really is no way to reason with that line of thinking, no middle ground, and nothing to be learned, I'm afraid.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Well I will both agree and disagree with you on this one. No, I don't think that most breeders are in it for the satisfaction you mention. Then again, I disagree with the motivations and practices I see with the majority of breeders these days. But is money the factor for those I DO agree with and support? No, far from it. I KNOW there are some that charge ridiculous prices just because they know they will get it. Just as I know there are some who charge higher prices because they actually did take the time to perform medical testing, invest in show costs and registration fees and quality food, vaccinations, etc.
And yes, I do think there are way too many dogs in petshops and puppymills, but do you think that if reputable breeders stopped breeding altogether that would change? Nope. It would remain a constant and those dogs, rather than well bred ones would be the ONLY option out there for people. In the meantime, the breed would be lost.

Definitely agree with this!

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Britster

And like I said, in MY OPINION taildocking is pointless and in MY OPINION putting a coat on dog when it's under 30 degrees is NOT. Hence my opinion. There's no need to get snappy with me. I'm simply stating my views and opinions just as you are

Hey, no getting snappy here. I didn't interpret your comments as snappy...should I? If you feel that there is a "point" to it, then sobeit. I personally see the logic as being the same and used it as an example to make a point...no need to take it personally when it certainly wasn't meant that way. Yes, it is your opinion, which you are entitled to, just as I am entitled to disagree with. If I was that worried about people disagreeing with my opinion of things, well, then I would probably just keep them to myself and not post them online...