Older Tail Docking
 

Pilot had his tail docked Tuesday, the day he turned 9 weeks old. For those who have done this, how long did it take for the hair to grow back? It was bandaged until today, when the vet took it off, said it was healing nicely. No infection, we have to keep doing his antibiotic until it's gone. He is pain free, he just got the bandage off and keeps trying to play with his tail. It looks gross right now to be honest, like a black rat tail. Anyone who did a tail docking around this age, how long until the hair started growing back? Will keep ya'll updated and will answer any questions.

Your not going to find many if any who have had it done at that age. Usually it is done by the breeder. Why didnt yours do it

Mine were all done as newborns so can't help but wishing the best for your little one.

As long as no damage has been done, the hair should start growing right away, did the vet shave it? Why did you decide to get it cropped at this age, it's much more serious operation than if done the first few days. Hope it heals quickly.

I didn't know the breeder didn't do it when I paid my deposit, her website didn't mention it and I didn't know until I went and saw him. He is healing well, yes the vet shaved it. I'm unsure why the breeder didn't do it, but I strongly preferred it and decided to get it done. My vet had experience with it, we talked through the procedure and I felt comfortable getting it done. Pilot has handled it very well

I'm glad he's doing well, I know people have different views on this, I believe that breeders should follow standard which means cropping and it's important to support those breeders who breed to standard. I hope if you decide to get another Yorkie, you’ll find a breeder who does this. I would hope that breeders who decided not to do this, would make it clear to their customers. Best of luck! What a darling little face!

I hope your baby heals really quickly and wags his little tail profusely soon.

We don't dock in UK at any age or any breed now so our standard doesn't require it. I personally do not understand why this practice started in the first place as I believe that unless there are life threatening or quality of life medical circumstances there is no need at all to amputate any mammal, animal, bird, fish or reptile. I also particularly despise the acceptance of little children pulling the legs off insects or squidging worms or even cockroaches.

I know there is a constant debate around this in US and really do hope that the registrative bodies will continually review this practice.

I love my baby's tail, curling over his back and continually on the move. But really do hope your baby feels better soon.
Xoxo

I don't think docking is anyhting like pulling legs off of an insect. He was sedated, given pain pills (can't remember the name) for three days and monitored for pain and infection. He's still taking his antibiotic. This was a strictly cosmetic procedure, as he's not a ratter like the ancestors. I think, but am not sure it originated from them being ratter and acted as a handle for the person handling them to get them out of rat tunnels (seem to recall reading that somewhere). Pilot is doing great. He didn't yelp, squeal or show discomfort when the vet removed the bandage. The only time he showed pain was when he would bite his bandage like it was a toy. He did that two, maybe three times. He's still his spunky self, He is wagging it already, just it looks funny as it's bald. I wanted him to match the standard, so wanted his tail docked, the US standard still requires it.

Sorry, maybe I shouldn't have added the insect bit. I really didn't mean to infer any cruelty to your baby at all, I understand that this procedure was carried out with all the best veterinary procedures and your baby was in the best hands, I was just stating my alternative opinion about why we do this at all.
I really didn't mean to upset you and am sorry if I did. I have always been very confused and uncomfortable about tail docking.
Xoxo

I'm not upset, I don't get hyped up over conversations :) Just sharing my opinion. I like the look of the standard yorkie, short tail, up ears. Does that mean I wouldn't have loved him with his tail? No, but my personal preference is docked. I'm not exactly sure why, I wish they were born that way, but alas, they aren't.

My Hueys mother was a silky with an undocked tail. I'm glad Hueys is docked, because his mother's tail just wasn't pretty. It was skinny with thin hair and did not add to her appearance. I have seen yorkies and silkys with beautiful full tails and like that look, too. I think that like anything else, the breeding is important to get the look you want.

Our Bella has her tail and it is beautiful..........the breeder just did not dock tails, that is all she said. We didn't care, can't imagine her without it. Good luck with your baby!

This is becomming a "trend" now, and some breeders opt to not dock. I believe the most responsible thing they can do, is TELL people buying their babies that they do NOT dock tails, rather than keeping quiet until they get that non refundable deposit in their fist. Not very ethical, in my opinion....
When you did see the baby, before you picked the baby up, did you ask about the undocked tail? Perhaps if you had indicated you would rather have a docked tail, she would have dissolved the contract and returned your money, keeping in mind it is much more painful to have that done in an older pup.

That poor baby :( I don't know why this is continued. As a country, I believe in the US we are behind ... Like we are with many other things. They were born that way because they were meant to have full tails!

New study says dogs with docked tails significantly less likely to sustain tail injuries says Veterinary Record

Tail Docking - The Case for Tail Docking

I think I would much rather put a 3 day old puppy through a few minutes stress than having to deal with an adult dog having an amputation due to tail breakage.
Some studies are now finding that certain breeds of dogs in particular, are having larger and larger numbers of adult amputations, which are more traumatic and painful for the dog due to tail breakage, particularly dogs with thin whippy tails. I do look at them with somewhat of a skeptical eye, because I do not know of any that do not have an agenda.

And what about dewclaws. Yes, they are there for a reason, but most breeders remove them for a reason as well, and that being to reduce the likelihood of the dews getting ripped off, which I have seen on more than one occasion.
What's the difference between getting the dews done and the tail?

Not only that, but I resent the anti-docking agenda which is being funded and propagating in large part by the animal rights extremists.
It completely boggles my mind that docking a tail at 3 days old equals cruelty in some minds, yet sterilizing an animal is completely acceptable, and even expected, and no one sees how much more damaging THAT is.

Is the US behind on some things? Yes, I think it is. I believe that ALL cropped and docks breeds should have the option to show uncropped and undocked. The Beauceron standard, for example, allows for cropped and natural, with definitions for what the natural ear should look like.
Beauceron breeds have a CHOICE in what they can do with their dogs, and BOTH ear types are (or should be) judged equally.

The same should be done in all breeds for tails and ears. Right now, docked breeds in Europe have tails all over the place. They have high carriage, low carriage, fringe and feathers, thick and otter like and thin and whippy. In yorkies, there are some that have very thin feathering on the tail, making the tail look unappealing, because we have not had anything in the standard that says what the yorkie tail should look like, and the look of the yorkie tail has not been bred into the breed in the ENTIRE HISTORY of the breed. Now we're supposed to know what a yorkie's tail should look like?
Have you SEEN what the UK has as an accepted look for the yorkie tail? Have you SEEN what they have now added to the yorkie standard as what the correct and proper yorkie tail, (that no one in the history of the breed has ever seen) should look like?
Have a look at their picture.
The Kennel Club]
And the standard description?
Previously customarily docked
Docked: Medium length with plenty of hair, darker blue in colour than rest of body, especially at end of tail. Carried a little higher than level of back.
Undocked: Plenty of hair, darker blue in colour than rest of body, especially at end of tail. Carried a little higher than level of back. As straight as possible. Length to give a well balanced appearance.


Sounds like an Irish setter tail to me. And they look all over the place, as this gallery of winners show.. when you can find a tail, since most of the pics, the handler is clearly hiding the back end for some reason.
Limit Show Jan 2013
The nicest tail in my opinion is that of the number 5 dog. But here on this forum, most people seem to have dogs with tails that curl over their backs.



You have low swooping tails, you have tails being held high like a field bred setter, you have tails held out, then dropping down... Even on dogs that looked to me to be young dogs, so they should have had their tails, there was a lack of evidence of tails visible.
Northern Counties Yorkshire Terrier Club
I see two tails. The first picture seems to have a dog with a natural tail, but if you LOOK at the picture, that's not a tail, it's the bottom opening of the handler's blazer. But if you go all the way to the bottom right picture there is a visible tail. Standing straight up like a flag pole.



Last of all, in the US there is this VERY important thing to consider. Backyard breeders rarely dock tails. When they do, it's a piss poor job. If you know what a good docked tail is, you can tell by the length of the tail, and the look of the tail, (as in if the tip is bald) if the dog came from someone halfway decent. This is because backyard breeders dock too short, usually, and they often will do something as barbaric as rubber banding the tail, which leaves a bald spot, OR when they DO cut the tail, they usually don't pull the skin back, cut the tail, and then stitch the top skin flap over the bottom, making an aesthetically pleasing dock.


Because of that, I'm glad that docking is still required, though as I have said, I would much rather it be a choice that breeders can utilize, and be acceptable in the show ring.

I find this argument hilarious. Of course there are more injuries with dogs that have their tails. If we amputated all infant hands when they were born, there would be fewer hand injuries... But what about the fact that you amputated the limb to avoid the injury!? Oh my goodness...

Keep discussion civil please.


I docked the tail because I wanted to. Not to avoid injuries, not to be able to show him. Because I wanted to. I like the docked look, he's my dog, I spent my money, and my vet was experienced and comfortable doing it.

That is an appeal to ridicule fallacious argument. Now can you address what has been found? That dogs of DOCKED breeds are having to have amputations when dogs of UNDOCKED breeds are not having the same issue.
What has changed?
We don't see a lot of GSDs and collies needing tail amputations. However, in breeds of dogs with thin whippy tails in breeds that have traditionally been docked, there has been a marked increase of amputations because these dogs are breaking their tails.

We're not talking incidental injuries, and because a full amputation is not being done in the first case, a number of these dogs end up having 2-3 amputations to their tail, to get the tail to the point where the dog stops breaking it. Two or three major surgeries, with all the accompanying pain and confusion that comes from an amputation.
Ironically enough, that point is just about where the breed was traditionally docked, but I'm sure that was just a coincidence, and has nothing to do with the originators of the breeds and standards knowing what they were talking about and setting that as the point of docking for a reason.

I don't think you need to moderate this discussion :) It is plenty civil. People are allowed to express their opinions. This is something I am rather passionate about... I have a dog with a tail and one without. My little girl has a full, beautiful tail and it has never been injured. She also has her dew claws and they have never once caused an issue.

I see this as mutilation and while you chose to do it to your dog... It is not something I would choose for mine. I understand that it is the standard, but it is something that should be changed. More civilized countries have done this, and I believe that we should follow suit.

I don't feel as though those other countries are more civilized. More.. misguided.. More.. authoritarian, more.. easily swayed by animal rights activists, but not necessarily more civilized.
Those anti-docking laws didn't come through because the breeders wanted them. They were forced on the breeders by lawmakers who passed them because of lobbying from ARAs.

I really don't care about the "look" of the breed. I care about the choice. I don't understand that you don't get that I'm saying the same thing, but from a different angle, which is why I would LOVE it if breeders had a CHOICE in if their dogs were docked or natural.
How nice would it be if yorkies could be shown with a natural tail?
But that should be an option, a choice, and neither natural or docked should be penalized in the show ring.

Also, as I stated, at this point in time, a docked tail, as HOW it's docked can help determine the provenance of a dog. You can get a good read on if the dog came from a decent breeder or not, since MOST back yard breeders do NOT dock tails. And if they're not going to put the money out for a vet to dock their puppies tails, how much do you think they spent on health checks for their dogs.
Just saying.

At least around here, bybs do dock. They just dock them themselves, and often reallly short. My mom rescued a female from the shelter who has a nub for a tail. It obviously bothers her and she has licked it to the point that she has an infection. The vet has said she might decimate her tail, so they are keeping an eye on it.

I respect that you have a different opinion, and appreciate that we are able to discuss this :)

I understand your passion, but it's not an argument to say that your dog has a full tail and dew claws and has never been hurt, and therefore docking isn’t needed. That's like saying, I smoked and never got cancer, therefore smoking doesn't cause cancer. Or I drove drunk and never got in an accident, therefore drunk driving is safe. Safety is decided by gathering a large group of numbers in a systematic study, and this is different than a “survey”. This isn't a decision that should be made because we like one look over the other, this is a decision done purely for the safety of the dogs. Dog breeds are a manmade thing, there is very little natural about their physical looks. In nature, dogs with long skinny tails, might not survive so well, and they would naturally be weeded out and their thicker tailed relatives would survive. I hope people on both sides keep an open mind about this and read the studies without dismissing them just because they have formed an opinion based on personal preferences.

Yes, back when they were ratters and went into holes to chase rodents... It was safer for them to have nubs. Yorkies are now pets and live in homes. They are not in the wild and natural selection isn't really relevant. Things have changed and so should the standard. It's not that I prefer the look of the full vs docked, I just think it's unnecessary to chop off a body part that could be left intact.

I was trying to explain why it’s important for breeders to continue to make decisions regarding the safety of breeds physical traits and it’s because natural selection has not played a part. Natural selection has NOTHING to do with WHERE the dogs live. Humans have lived indoors for years and natural selection is still the major component of our breeding. Only in the last 50 years or so has science played more of a role. I think the important part of this research is that 1/3 of the dogs whose tail has been injured needed full amputation of the whole tail, including some butt muscle; this is what I call amputation. Most of the injuries are done inside, only 17% of the injuries happen outside. Fourteen percent happen with a dog's tail being caught in a door. I think people should have a choice, but no law should be made until we gather more facts.

Have read all comments I'm from the UK and no we don't dock tails or remove dew claws, I love my babies tails and think seeing a yorkie without a tail looks funny (before any1 jumps) when I was growing up we had 2 yorkies that had tails docked as then it was still allowed again we loved those 2 yorkies without tails, all I would worry about is the fact they could get infected when this is done as very small puppies just having had my first and only litter it was a scary worrying time to start with without an added worry of something I would be doing causing an open wound meaning I had caused the puppy to get sick without question.

why would you even think about doing it ?

Not sure if this comment was for me if yes, I wasn't and wouldn't, was only saying that for breeders that do its and extra worry regarding infection

no the comment was meant for the original poster ,leahndmp or anyone else who would even think about it .I had Dobies in the past both docked and i have a Jack Russel which has a docked tail thankfully my yorkie has a beatufully long tail . If they were meant to have tails that way they would have been born with them . i just think it is wrong and that just my opinion.