Thanks everyone so much for all the information. I wasn't really sure how I felt about it before but now I know how I feel about it and I think they should leave the full tails.

Thank you for starting this thread. I enjoyed reading the different points of view, and I really liked reading the information that Shannon linked and Ann posted. It really made me think. Although I love the look of the medium docked tail, it really hurts me that we are doing this to our babies who we love so much just for the sake of beauty. It seems so painful for them, and it made me so very sad. I love the long tail on the Biewers, and I am constantly reminded of AprilLove's beautiful video of the Biewer tail wag. We might have a difficult time getting undocked tails from show breeders in North America who are breeding for their next show pup. My breeder, however, that entrusted our precious Katie with us has been showing Yorkies with docked and undocked tails (so that she can also compete in Europe), and she has done quite well attaining championships for these Yorkies in North America. I think it says a lot that throughout the rest of the world, tail docking is banned.

Although the comparisons to human medical studies/evidence is absolutely correct, the difference here is that dogs are still chattle -- property. So the same rules will never apply no matter how much pain a puppy must tolerate.:( People can do to whatever they want to a given breed. Change is slow. People fear change.

It won't take a study to change the rules. It will just take time.

My question was more rhetorical than literal. What I was trying to get at was more about why people accept the practice bc that's the "way it's always been done" and why they're asking for studies before ceasing these practices, but never asked for studies/solid proof prior to allowing them to happen to their dogs. We'd never let this kind of thing happen to ourselves, our kids, our family etc (major medical interventions without proof of real efficacy), so it concerns me when we have such a vastly different standard for those in our care, our dogs.

We all prob realize we won't get many studies in the animal field except as they pertain to vaccines, meds, food trials, and a few other things...unfortunately.

*Guys, I was thinking about adding Concretegurl's article to the library (or, do you want to add it concretegurl...? Lemme know)...and then if someone had some good opposing info we could add that as well so both sides of the issue are represented.

Lisa, I swear AprilLove's babies' tails are some of the most gorgeous ever! Stunning :love:. I bet your breeder has a very unique perspective into both sides of this issue. I hope someday she'll be able to lead the way toward a new way of thinking about docking; that would be wonderful. Maybe her little undocked kiddos will change a little piece o' the world :).

Actually, we do... to our little boys when they are born :(

The title of the article you quoted is “Why the Tail Docking of Dogs should be Prohibited”, this is a paper that describes one side of the argument only, which in my opinion is just to sway someone’s opinion in one direction only, not a good way to find the truth. There have been studies to determine the pain involved in tail docking.
Here’s another point of view:
Tail Docking - The Fritsch Report
Since the classic research by Adolph Portman (1944/1990), which verified the work of Herder, Gehlen and Plessner, the
validity of the Altricial/Precocial differentiation in animals has become a well-established scientific fact. More recently, this
gained new attention with research on artificial intelligence in information-processing systems ('Altricial self-organising
information-processing systems', Aaron Sloman & Jackie Chappell, School of Biosciences, University of Birmingham,
UK).
Briefl y, animals belonging to the Altricial group (dogs, cats, some birds, rodents, etc.) are born relatively immature,
with a nervous system not fully developed. They have very little feeling of pain during the fi rst fi ve days after birth. The
blood circulation and the bones of the tail are relatively undeveloped or 'primitive'. This is in contrast to animals in the
Precocial group (pigs, sheep etc.), which are born fully developed.
Performed on altricial neonatal puppies, 3 days postpartum, the procedure is regarded as significantly less intrusive
than toe-clipping in rodents for laboratory identification. In the event the procedure is to be undertaken on other than
neonatal animals, there must be a strong scientific c reason for using this technique and the procedure must be done on
an anesthetized animal (Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.,
1996). Tail docking in neo-natal puppies is certainly far less intrusive and painful than the shortening or docking of tails
in Precocial pigs and lambs, because the latter have a fully developed threshold of pain. . http://www.k9alliance.com/resources/...-FactSheet.pdf

Since docking was banned in Sweden in 1989, there has been a massive increase in tail injuries amongst previously
docked breeds. Within the 50 undocked Pointer litters registered in that year with the Swedish Kennel Club, 38% of
dogs suffered tail injury before they were 18 months old and two years later, by 1991, the number of individuals with
tail injuries had increased to 51% in the same group (Gunilla Strejffert, Report to the Swedish Breed Council for German
Shorthaired Pointers, 1992, Borlange, Sweden). Even more alarming is the fi nding that only 16% of injury cases had
improved, 40% showed no improvement and more than half of dogs with tail injuries had regressed during the
two year period!
An ad hoc survey amongst owners of English Pointers in South Africa, also a shorthaired breed, indicate that at least
one out of fi ve English Pointers suffers from some sort of tail injury during their life. The English Pointer’s tail is traditionally
not docked mainly because of a relatively short tail in proportion to its body, with a lower risk of tail injury (Fig 2).

A docking ban is no cure at all
If tail damage occurs during adulthood it often does not heel well or does not heal at all. This is mainly due to the
injury being constantly banged against objects, poor blood circulation in the tail and constant licking and chewing by the
dog (Fig 6). The healing process can be painful and protracted with considerable distress to the dog. Injuries often result
in necrosis of the tail tip.
This can sometimes be treated with partial amputation but secondary problems can occur in the healing process,
which actually makes it necessary to amputate the tail several times before the healing process is achieved.
A docking ban is no cure at all
If tail damage occurs during adulthood it often does not heel well or does not heal at all. This is mainly due to the
injury being constantly banged against objects, poor blood circulation in the tail and constant licking and chewing by the
dog (Fig 6). The healing process can be painful and protracted with considerable distress to the dog. Injuries often result
in necrosis of the tail tip.
This can sometimes be treated with partial amputation but secondary problems can occur in the healing process,
which actually makes it necessary to amputate the tail several times before the healing process is achieved.
It's not just working dogs
Sweden banned tail docking over ten years ago. Swedish veterinary reports indicate that 17% of Boxers are
Swedish veterinary reports indicated that 17% of Boxers are sustaining tail injuries in and around the home
environment. Wagging tails cannot be immobilised, and these injuries frequently result in tail amputation.

FACT SHEET
5
damaging their long tails in and around the home environment. While less than the 51% incidence of tail damage
sustained by pointer breeds in Sweden following the ban on tail docking, 17% still highly signifi cant.
The damage range from broken tips to total fractures further up the tail, just distal to the point where docking would
normally be carried out. Because treatment of the injury does not address the aetiology, the injuries keep recurring and
frequently end up requiring amputation.
Conclusion
Tail docking of the gundog breeds is practised not for cosmetic reasons but to prevent serious injury. Field
working is a human induced activitiy for which we must accept the responsibility. It is our duty to prevent
distress in our animals.
From the veterinary point of view, no scientifi c studies have been submitted to show why the docking of
gundogs' tails are benefi cial. Indeed, the treatment of tail injuries in adult dogs is a costly, protracted and
repetitive process compared to docking — and, in conclusion, infi nitely more painful and stressful to the
very animal whose welfare we seek to protect. After all, the reason for tail docking is a cornerstone of good
medicine and animal care. It is called:
Prophylaxis.
Policy Statement
It is the policy of the undersigned organisations that
1. From a professional veterinary point of view, failure to dock and clip in the prescribed manner the tails and
dew-claws of specifi c gundog breeds intended for fi eld work, is considered unethical; and
2. From a legal point of view, such failure is regarded as constituting animal cruelty.

Tail Docking - The Fritsch Report
There follows a letter from Prof. Dr. R. Fritsch, Leader of the Clinic of Veterinary Surgeons, Justus-Lieberg-University, to the German Kennel Club.
Quote
I have been asked by the German Kennel Club to give a professional opinion on the following questions:
• Will the removal of the tail and dew claws without anaesthetic on a four day old puppy, cause considerable pain?
• Is it necessary from the veterinary point of view, to shorten the tail or amputate the dew claws of certain breeds of dogs?
The docking of tails and the removal of dew claws in puppies less than 4 days old without anaesthetic, is not connected with any serious pain in such a way that it cannot be allowed from the point of view of the protection of animals.
The reason for this is (there are two expressions in German for which there is no English equivalent: "Nestfluchter" which means a young bird or young animal which very soon will leave its nest or its mother and therefore will have to find its own food; and "Nesthockern" which means a young animal that stays for a long time in the nest with its mother and is fed by her) the new born puppy belongs to the Nesthockern, in contrast with the horse, cow, sheep, pig and goat which are regarded as Nestfluchter.
The animals in the Nesthockern group are born relatively immature, completely naked, blind, deaf, very immobile and very helpless. Their nervous system at birth is not even fully developed. There are still cell divisions in the brain and some of the nervous threads are not fully developed. In psychological tests, it has been determined that the time between the nervous impulse and reaction (chronaxie) takes 3-4 times longer than it would in an adult. After about 10-14 days, when the animals eyes are opened (until then it has been more like an embryo) it is possible to determine the normal value of the impulse. In 1941, Volkhov determined that animals, at this period of life, had very little feeling of pain. The conscious feeling of pain is still not very likely at that age.
Schmidker wrote in his doctorate in 1951 about the feeling of pain in new-born puppies: "Incomplete development of the nervous system at the time of birth and the very high chronaxie value in connection with the fact that the animal is not able to react effectively to pain, gives us every reason to believe that the actual feeling of pain is very low in the new-born of this group of mammals (dogs). In other words, at this age and biological condition, it would have no absolute meaning to talk about pain". You therefore do not have to worry or fear that the dog will be made to suffer pain or psychological pain, if the tail has been docked or the dew claws removed, in the first few days after birth.
It is completely different though, with the Nestfluchter (animals which leave their nest or mother just after birth). In these animals, the nervous system id fully developed just after the moment of birth. All senses that serve to get rid of enemies and pain are fully developed. One can neither from physiological knowledge nor from just observation, say that these young animals feel a lot less pain than adults.
It would therefore be a contradiction in the law, for the Protection of Animals, to permit the shortening or docking of tails in pigs and lambs without anaesthetic, because they have fully developed threshold of pain, and , at the same time, forbid the docking of dogs. It is absolutely certain that the docking of tails on small lambs and pigs and also the castration of young pigs, goats and calves during their first days of life, will cause considerable pain if done without an anaesthetic. However, from the point of view of the docking of dogs, whose nervous system is not fully developed during the first few days of life, is completely acceptable from the point of view of the protection of animals.
The removal of dew claws is necessary in order to avoid later damages and illnesses. It is also recommended to dock the tails inbreeds which have long thin, weak and sparsely coated tails, in order to avoid later sickness and damage. At the same time tails should be docked in breeds that are used in such a way that there is a risk of injury to a tail e.g. hunting dogs. It is beneficial to avoid painful; injuries and therefore in the interest of the PREVENTION OF CRUELTY to animals.
The dew claw is the rudimentary first toe. They are often injured and the nail can grow into the skin causing considerable inflammation. The dog can easily catch them on different objects because they just hang on the side of their paws a non-functioning objects and can therefore damage themselves quite seriously. It is therefore in the interests of the law to recommend that these claws are removed as early as possible. Their removal is best done in the first week with a little clip with scissors.
The dogs tail on the other hand, whether it be in kennels or around the home, is in constant danger of damage by being hit against hard objects like walls, fences, tables, chair legs, radiators and of being trapped in doors. These injuries usually result in sores at the tip of the tail, which do not heal well because there is a poor blood circulation in this part of the tail.
By licking and chewing, the dog makes the condition worse and the skin and tissue will die. These conditions of necrosis of the tip of the tail is often seen in Great Danes and Dalmatians. German Shepherds are also often seen in veterinary surgeries.
This can sometimes be treated with partial amputation but secondary problems can occur in the healing process because the very poor blood supply is not conducive to this. This actually makes it necessary to amputate the tail several times before the healing process is achieved.
Hunting dogs are in great danger of damaging their tails when thrashing through thick undergrowth and young forest. Only tails that are thick and covered with long hair are protected, such as those of the wolf and fox.
Apart from the dangers that the dog is constantly confronted with in the human environment (as well as the fact that they have less hair than the wild dog) many breeds have a very lively temperament which often cause tail tip damage in the course of their exuberance, e.g. an undocked Boxer will constantly be subject to injury when using its tail when he expresses happiness.
As far as the behaviour of dogs is concerned, I cannot see that their ability to express happiness should in any way be altered by the docking of the tail.
From the veterinary point of view, therefore, there is absolutely no reason why the banning of the docking of dogs tails should be beneficial to them. In actual fact, it would be detrimental to their well-being if docking was abolished. Tail docking protects the dog as it is done to avoid problems with tail injuries and subsequent painful treatment that would often occur.
It is called Prevention!!

Dont other small breed dogs have their tails like maltese and what is the incidence of injury with tails that havent been docked. If maltese have docked tails Im sorry not trying to offend just really curious to know

No go ahead, it was sufficient I guess hope to find more there are significantly more studdies on the tail docking issue going on in Europe.

You can't compare them just because they are a toy breed, the Maltese has been around for almost three thousand years, and early breeders may have bred for tail, or the Maltese may have always had a thicker tail. Another consideration is that the Maltese's tail is carried over the back not upright or down. My point is Yorkie breeders have never had to breed for tail, and many Yorkies tails are extremely thin. I do hate the way some breeders make such a short stub and many breeders aren't trained to do this property.

You can say that again Chachi has the smallest tail I have ever seen there is like no expression in it at all. And hes a bigger yorkie so it just looks odd on him. It is sad

Ann first I want to say I JUST NOTICED your siggy line..:D:D:D 5 out of 4 ppl. So not only are fractions not understood, (teehee), but mathematically it is impossible to have more than 100 concrete things/ppl etc. http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/images/icons/love.gif

As I alluded to in an earlier post, the YT club of Canada is reworking the standard for just this issue. And I will be fowarding some of these articles, for that committees review and edification.

There are very real concerns here on both "sides" of the issue. But beyond this is how to we "figure out" how to change to standard. One way is to say simply undock tails are not to be penalized. But the reality is that, none of us have the knowledge base here, to say the tail if left long, must be so many inches long, or .50 of body length as measure from withers to tail set. The tail is to be carried aloft when in movement. A gay tail is to be penalized, as well as a tail carried below back height at movement.

Then there is the impact to the breeding pool. Trust me I know this, as we are in the middle of wrapping our brains around the BRT standard changes. The difference in tail length, width, carriage, etc is pretty amazing when you look at some of the International Specialties. Quite frankly I have no idea how a tail left long would turn out if I mated Magic, and wanted to keep all tails undocked.

We are of course are communicating with our Russian friends, some folks in Germany, and some in Sweden. As they have a good 5-10 yrs more experience with this undocked tail business.

If you want to make a difference with your breed, join your Breed Club! In the USA you would be joining one of the Regional and or Local Breed Clubs. Get involved. All active members get to vote on standard changes!!

And btw, I do believe that docking should also include a standard length. With the BRT's it is suggested to leave 3-4 vertebrae intact.

I know there are several members here on this forum, who if they were Canadian, I'd be ringing your doorbell;)

True in America, but not so for the rest of the world. Years ago I remember reading a study as to why it was done and it came done to $$$$. The piece cut off is used and needed by the medical profession.

On you tube there is a vid (i'll see if I can find it) were men who had circumcisions later in life, said it was a bit like being colour blind now that it was cut off. They'd lost so much extra sensation or something like that.

Cont... couldn 't find the youtube vid, it was several years ago, but this one pretty much covers it. WARNING -(it is not for the fainted hearted as it shows what is actually done to a baby and the baby screams)

Cutting off something 'in case it gets damaged' be it a dog's tail/ears or a humans parts, just sounds crazy. I'm glad docking is banned here, having witnessed it being done to poodle pups. I wonder how the ban effected the breeding show dogs lines over here?