Tail docking

[BamaFan121s]

Originally Posted by Lorrainelola

Here in the UK yorkies tails have never been docked. The yorkie originated from England. It would be interesting to know when it was decided that docking was a breed standard in America.

Actually, this statement is incorrect. Docking was not banned UK wide until May of 2007. The standard for Yorkies in England DID originally call for a docked tail. This was not a practice the US alone decided to change and adhere to.

[Cerise]

Originally Posted by Brooklynn

but so do baby human boys when they get circumsized and infant girls get their ears pierced but it's over with in a few minutes no harm done. I've seen it done many times and I've never had them whimper but for a few minutes just like a human baby boy getting circumsized...
OY VEY....some just want to make mountains out of mole hills and I love my babies more than I do humans so in my opinion well.... oh never mind I don't want to get suspended or banned

Donna

Thanks Donna!

I totally agree! You said exactly what I was thinking and was going to say.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by Lorrainelola

My personal opinion, as I have stated on other threads, is that I don't believe in docking.
Here in the UK yorkies tails have never been docked. The yorkie originated from England. It would be interesting to know when it was decided that docking was a breed standard in America.

Othe posters have stated that the tail does in fact show what a dog is feeling etc. A wagging tail doesn't always mean a dog is happy. When a dog's tail is held horizontally it is an agressive display.

I was very much under the impression that the yorkies tail was used to drag them out of the hole where they had been ratting, not the top knot but obviously they aren't used for this anymore anyway.

We all have our own opinions and beliefs and from what I have read it appears we can have these views in an adult sensible manner.

As I have said before long tail, docked tail, floppy ears, erect ears we are all on here because we love our yorkies. I just love looking at the avatars and pics of all your yorkies, they are ALL precious, beautiful and handsome.
x x

The tails were docked in UK......

[Lorrainelola]

Originally Posted by BamaFan121s

Actually, this statement is incorrect. Docking was not banned UK wide until May of 2007. The standard for Yorkies in England DID originally call for a docked tail. This was not a practice the US alone decided to change and adhere to.

Thank you for correcting me. Where did you get your information from. I DO know that tail docking was illegal from 2007 but that was for other breeds such as the doberman. I can assure you that yorkies here have had their tails prior to 2007. Tail docking in the uk was banned for cosmetic purposes. If medical purposes mean a tail has to be docked then it will be.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by Cares4Dogs

I like my yorkies tails docked.....especially for sanitary reasons. Think about how much garbage they could pick up on their tail fur when they are out and about if they were in medium to full length coat.
.

I think that is the dumbest reasoning, lol. No offense to you personally -- I just have never had any sanitary issues with Jackson having a full tail. If that were the case, ALL breeds of dogs would have docked tails. Most dogs have tails and no dog I've ever known in my whole life has ever had an issue because of HAVING a tail.

I'm not "against" docking per say. I just don't like it. I would own a dog with a docked tail, so it's nothing like that. I think the little nubs are cute.

I just find the procedure totally POINTLESS. Simply to appease what humans think looks better or cuter. Stupid reason to chop off a dogs tail in my opinion. And I do understand it's a standard so I do see why AKC breeders do it but that still doesn't make me think it's not stupid.

[mommadog1]

Originally Posted by Brooklynn

it's not actually off topic...just giving an example in what we could relate docking tails too

Donna

I am sorry, but the 2 are not the same!! My son was not done but by age 15 months he had seriously issues with the foreskin becoming blistered among other things. I kept my boy clean... He HAD to have the foreskin removed at 15 months. It was done under anesthesia and the next day he was up running around.

I had 2 other foster children who ended up with the very same issues. One of the you could not pull the skin back. I ran into this time and time again with foster children I had.

My first husband was also uncircumcised and he couldn't pull the skin back either. And he kept giving me infections.

When it is done correctly the skin is numbed and they do not feel it. Dogs however are never given anything to numb the tail.

So comparing these 2 things are IMO ridiculous!

[Cares4Dogs]

Originally Posted by Lorrainelola

Thank you for correcting me. Where did you get your information from. I DO know that tail docking was illegal from 2007 but that was for other breeds such as the doberman. I can assure you that yorkies here have had their tails prior to 2007. Tail docking in the uk was banned for cosmetic purposes. If medical purposes mean a tail has to be docked then it will be.

When I lived in the UK, I knew someone who had 4 yorkies and their tails were docked...that was about 15 years ago.

[mommadog1]

Originally Posted by Mardelin

Yes.....that was the function of the topknot.

OUCHIE...

[Britster]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

I don't understand how it is hurting breeders if a law is applied equally across the board. I've seen breeders who say they love long tails, and people from Europe who say it's strange for them to see docked tails on Boxers because they are not used to them now. I really can't believe that anything besides tradition dictates that yorkies should have docked tails. Can anyone truly say that yes, objectively a dog looks better with a long or short tail? No, because beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Also, while I don't know much about this, I'm not sure I believe that tail docking was ever done for function on the yorkie. Most terriers do not have docked tails. Westies, which also hunt vermin, where bred to have a nice, fat tail that you can use to pull them out of holes.

And by the way, there is a huge movement against male circumcision! And yes, circumcision is QUITE painful for baby boys, they don't just whimper when it's done. However, at least that practice has a hygienic benefit (lowers chance of infection and transmission of STDs).

[Cares4Dogs]

Originally Posted by Britster

I think that is the dumbest reasoning, lol. No offense to you personally -- I just have never had any sanitary issues with Jackson having a full tail. If that were the case, ALL breeds of dogs would have docked tails. Most dogs have tails and no dog I've ever known in my whole life has ever had an issue because of HAVING a tail.

I'm not "against" docking per say. I just don't like it. I would own a dog with a docked tail, so it's nothing like that. I think the little nubs are cute.

I just find the procedure totally POINTLESS. Simply to appease what humans think looks better or cuter. Stupid reason to chop off a dogs tail in my opinion. And I do understand it's a standard so I do see why AKC breeders do it but that still doesn't make me think it's not stupid.

You expect me not to take offense to "I think thats the dumbest reasoning" to my quote.

Did you read my other posts...not just for sanitary reasons. By all means-go read on.

[mommadog1]

Originally Posted by Brooklynn

You'll never see a show breeders/exhibitors position because you have no interest in it so your mind is closed to what we have to say and you have your mind so set against what we do...so therefore it probably never will come to you or will you get it. It's sad when one's mind stays so closed minded...Maybe you prefer puppymill/petstore or byb yorkies instead of what we put behind our breeding program?

Donna

I don't think that is fair...

[Lorrainelola]

Originally Posted by Lorrainelola

As I have said before long tail, docked tail, floppy ears, erect ears we are all on here because we love our yorkies. I just love looking at the avatars and pics of all your yorkies, they are ALL precious, beautiful and handsome.
x x

As I said.

[Cares4Dogs]

Brister you took what I said completely out of context and compared yorkies to ALL breeds.

I live in the desert where cactus is not only natural landscaping, but preferred. People have them lining the sidewalks. Not just that but goat heads grow wild here. If my yorkies had a full tail and fur on it and went wagging, they'd have 1000 goatheads or thorns from cactus stuck all up in their tails. Sanitary reasons YES--dogs with fur like Yorkies have their butt fur clipped really short so POOP doesnt stick to it.....I could only imagine what an unsanitary MESS a yorkie with a full tail, 2 inches of hair and an episode of diarrhea would cause. Your being 110% closed minded....

Yes-yorkies with full tails have injured them before as well.

[livingdustmops]

Cosmetic Surgery for Dogs and Cats
Tail Docking, Ear Cropping, Debarking, Declawing.
Tail Docking
Tails are usually docked on 2-10 day old puppies, without either general or local anesthesia. If the procedure is done by a veterinarian, the tail is clamped a short distance from the body, and the portion of the tail outside the clamp is cut or torn away. Many breeders dock their pups themselves using a method that has been proven to be far more painful - "banding," or tying off the tail. This stops the blood supply, which results in dry gangrene. The dead portion of the tail usually falls off about three days later. This can be likened to slamming your finger in a car door - and leaving it there.
Two cases involving home tail docking were recently reported by the Michigan Humane Society. One woman was tried and found guilty of cruelty for allowing rubber bands to become embedded in the tails of four puppies. In a similar abuse case, a four-week-old Rottweiler mix puppy's tail had been improperly rubber banded. His infected tail had to be amputated.
Puppies undergoing any method of tail-docking squeal and cry, yet advocates assert that the newborn's nervous system is unable to feel the pain. They point out that puppies immediately crawl to their mothers to nurse. But don't all hurt or frightened children immediately cry for their mommy? Moreover, research indicates that suckling causes the release of endorphins, the body's natural pain relievers, which may be a more realistic way to view the puppies' desire to nurse. Docking advocates ignore the fact that a newborn puppy simply is not capable of a wide range of responses. It is very difficult to accurately assess the degree of pain a newborn is experiencing. Just because a puppy is not actively vocalizing does not mean she isn't feeling any pain.
The pro-docking lobby claims that since puppies are less developed at birth (altricial) than, say, fawns or colts - which stand, walk and run within a very short time after birth (precocial) - their nervous systems are less sensitive, therefore tail docking is not painful. However, it is well documented in the human medical literature that newborn humans, who are also altricial, do feel pain - and neonatal pain management is taken seriously. "Clinicians believe that infants can experience pain much like adults, that [hospitalized] infants are exposed daily to painful procedures, and that pain protection should be provided . even very prematurely born infants respond to pain," states one report from the Department of Pediatrics at the Washington University School of Medicine.
Proponents of tail docking claim that their favorite breeds "often" have their tails damaged while hunting. No statistics or percentages of dogs so damaged are given. However, explicit photos of such injuries are prominently displayed in their literature and web sites. This vague potential risk for future tail injury theoretically justifies docking the tail of every single puppy of traditionally docked breeds. It does not matter whether any particular puppy will ever be used for hunting or any other activities that carry a significant risk of tail injury. One study of 12,000 canine cases over seven years found only 47 cases of tail injuries from any cause, or about 0.003% of dogs seen at that hospital. Another survey reviewed 2,000 canine emergency cases, and turned up only three tail injuries - all of them complications from docking.
One certainly wonders about the validity of the "tail injury" argument, when sporting breeds such as Labrador Retrievers, Golden Retrievers, Irish, English and Gordon Setters, Beagles, Foxhounds, and Pointers do not have their tails docked, while Vislas, Weimeraners, German Shorthaired Pointers, and Springer, Brittany and Cocker Spaniels do. Spaniels have long, heavy, furry ears that appear more hazardous in thorny, brushy terrain or water than a long tail. Spaniels are also notorious for severe, chronic ear infections. Does it make any sense that they are allowed to keep their pendulous ears, but not their tails?
The tail injury argument also doesn't explain why Rottweilers, Dobermans, Poodles, Schnauzers and Old English Sheepdogs (as well as Australian Shepherds unfortunate enough to be born with tails instead of without), routinely have their tails docked. These working and non-sporting breeds aren't running around in the brush and woods. Old English and Aussie breeders might offer that a tail is a liability around livestock. But why isn't this so, then, for Border Collies, Shetland Sheepdogs, Australian Cattle Dogs, Great Pyrenees, or other herding breeds? The argument seems very thin when examined logically.
Ear Cropping
Breeds whose ears are naturally floppy, like Great Danes, Boston Terriers, Boxers, Schnauzers, and Manchester Terriers, have traditionally had their ears surgically cropped to stand up straight. This custom has existed in some breeds for hundreds of years. Initially, some of these breeds, such as Bull Terriers, were fighting dogs, and their ears were cut to reduce or eliminate an easy target. Since dogfighting is illegal in the U.S. today, this rationale is no longer applicable.
Ears are cropped at 8-10 weeks of age. The puppy is put under general anesthesia, the ears are cut, and the sore ears are stiffly taped in position to make them stand up straight. They will be taped and re-taped for weeks to months. Postoperative pain medication is not routinely given, even though the ears have an extensive blood and nerve supply. Even after all the torment, some dogs end up with floppy, bent, scarred, wrinkled, twisted, or otherwise disfigured ears. There is no reason to perform this painful, mutilating procedure, other than for looks (or more specifically, to conform with American Kennel Club (AKC) or breed club standards). There is no health benefit to the dog. Contrary to pro-cropping advocates' claims, there is no scientific evidence that cropping has any effect on the incidence of ear infections.
Many dog show judges now allow "natural" (uncropped, undocked) dogs of traditionally cropped and docked breeds in their classes, and sometimes even reward them with blue ribbons. Many breed standards accept either cropped or uncropped ears. In 1998, an uncropped Boxer won every show leading to his championship, and went on to claim an AKC Best in Show award. Animal advocates have for years pleaded with the AKC and similar organizations to make cropping optional in the more rigid breed standards. However, AKC's reaction was in the opposite direction - it amended the Boxer standard to specify that deviations from the "ideal" (cropped and docked) appearance must be penalized in the show ring.
AKC, breeders, and breed clubs do not want to see a resolution passed in San Francisco that might impinge on their demands for specific alterations of appearance in certain breeds. Cropping advocates theorize that their breeds will become unpopular and wither away, because no one will want dogs that do not conform to the standard. However, a recent article in Dog World speculated that people who previously avoided some of these breeds due to cropping requirements will now be more interested in them as companions. The appearance of many breeds has changed and evolved over time, including the Labrador Retriever - the most popular dog breed in the nation despite its "new look." The historic tradition of cropping and docking should be made as obsolete as the equally historic tradition of slavery.
Debarking
Convenience devocalization (also known as debarking, bark softening, ventriculocordectomy and vocal cordectomy) is a controversial surgical procedure applied to dogs and cats, where a large amount of laryngeal tissue is removed from the animal’s vocal cords in order to permanently reduce the volume of their vocalizations. The procedure is outlawed as a form of mutilation in the United Kingdom and attempts have been made to outlaw the procedure in various U.S. States.
Risks and side effects include negative reaction to anesthesia, infection, bleeding, and post-op pain. There is also the risk of the removed tissue growing back, or of scar tissue blocking the throat, both requiring further surgeries.
Barking is a dog's means of communicating emotions—fear, frustration, pain, boredom, and happiness. This unnecessary procedure strips dogs of their natural ability to vocalize and communicate. Depriving them of their primary means of expression is unjustifiably cruel. If a dog is vocalizing excessively, proper training and attention can remedy the problem.
Dr. Nicholas Dodman of Tufts University, who has written several books on canine and feline "psychology," says of declawing that it "fits the dictionary definition of mutilation to a tee. Words such as deform, disfigure, disjoint, and dismember all apply to this surgery. Partial digital amputation is so horrible that is has been employed for torture of prisoners of war, and in veterinary medicine, the clinical procedure serves as a model of severe pain for testing the efficacy of anesthetic drugs."

Please go to the website if you want to read more on cats
Cosmetic Surgery for Dogs and Cats

[Britster]

Originally Posted by Cares4Dogs

You expect me not to take offense to "I think thats the dumbest reasoning" to my quote.

Did you read my other posts...not just for sanitary reasons. By all means-go read on.

You shouldn't take offense, it's really not that serious. I'm not calling you dumb. I did read through the rest of your posts and I just can't find any of those reasons good enough to cut off their tails. Everyone has their own opinions, obviously and there's no right or wrong.

I have known A LOT of dogs throughout my life, all of whom had tails, and they have never had ANY of the issues you posted with tails. I just don't think it's big enough of issues to dock a tail or every breed would've ended up having a docked tail throughout the years. Sure, my aunt's Pit Bull has a strong tail when he wags it, but I don't think it's good enough reason to not HAVE it.

I would probably think that 99% or 100% of our yorkies on this website are NOT official rat hunters or working dogs. So I just don't see that to validate docking tails.

I mean, it is done purely for cosmetic reasons to appease to a human standard. I don't see how anyone can argue that? And that's the reason I don't agree with it.

I don't see docking as cruel necessarily. I don't think it's ever traumatized a dog for life or anything and yeah, they forget it right after. My issue with it is that it's simply to appease the human eye.

I'm sorry if you took my posts offensively, it's just something I feel strongly about, just as you feel strongly that we should dock tails.