Jackson has a full tail AND his dew claws... the shame! lol, just kidding.
I mean I am not a fan of legislating things in general when it comes to what I do with my dog. I think it should be left up to the breeder to decide. However I find the process completely useless. Jackson has survived eight years with a full tail and zero issues. I LOVE his tail... he uses it as a propeller to swim, I see how he uses it when it runs, and I believe his dew claws help him gain traction as well when he's running.
I just dislike when people try to find excuses for it like health reasons etc when in today's day and age, they are not working dogs and it is strictly for looks or a standard. Just own up to what it is. The one breed I prefer a crop/dock look on is the Doberman. I do not like the looks of a Doberman au natural. However I'd never have that breed so it's a moot point for me.
I guess I look at tail docking like everything else - we do a lot of 'unnatural' things to do including spaying & neutering. The dog has to go under anesthesia and have a surgery -- I am not sure if it's that is any better than docking when they are 2 days old and won't remember it and have no down time. And while spaying & neutering is looked upon as okay and normal because it's 'healthier' (though that's debatable too...) certain practices such as tail docking are looked at as cruel.
I guess I am all over the place. I find it completely unnecessary and wouldn't choose to have it done to a dog of mine. I wish the standards would allow for both. I find it dumb and pointless. But I don't want to start banning things or legislating things. For example, Golden retrievers have had major studies done showing increase in cancers by being neutered too young. Puppies that I watch, their new owners have a contract that they can NOT neuter prior to 18 months old. I would not want a law to dictate what age my dog is fixed and I think the lines begin to get blurry when things get banned. |