Originally Posted by Lovetodream88 (Post 4676733)

I hate the whole argument for looks thing it's kinda like making people wear make up for looks or getting plastic surgery for looks. I think natural in most things are bueatiful. My pup is extremely fast with no balance issues so not sure that really holds up. I just don't think there are health issues with not docking a tail or even docking a tail.

Originally Posted by Lilah Charm (Post 4677264)

Like ear piercing and circumsicion I am sure this is a hot debate. I would wonder in response to the 'immorality' of tail docking if that belief was consistently upheld with other behaviors of the like; such as dew claw removal, spay and neuter, infant ear piercing and circumsicion. One could relate dew claw removal and tail docking for its injury prevention concept to the common issue known as 'happy tail'

What is Happy Tail Syndrome in Dogs? | CANIDAE®

And if one believed dew claw removal was acceptable to prevent injury then would one consider tail docking to prevent injury acceptable as well?

I realize I stated a value in the aesthetic being part of what makes a breed a breed and I still very much feel that way- a brown dog with a short coat is not a golden retriever even if it retrieves- all these things said I think long tails are lovely and I chose not to have my three sons circumcised. To wrap my head around the logic of the opinion though, and if I were to be persuaded to share the same opinion for example, I would expect to see consistency across the board with a series of beliefs that upheld the core of the one up for debate and I am curious if that is consistent and if not, why not? Is an injury prevention tail docking an acceptable circumstance for tail docking? Is it not? Then is it cruel to preventatively remove dew claws? Or circumcise babies? And I know we are talking about animals and humans seperately but if the question is cruelty to an animal by performing an unnecessary medical procedure then I am sure the ethic holds across the board to humans having the same right to cruelty prevention doesn't it? Or if that is acceptable to subject a human to, then why? And why would that level of treatment be acceptable for a human but not for an animal- again if it is a matter of the act itself being a cruel act and not just a matter of cultural practice or religious or breed preference?

Although I hope it is clear in my communication style I really value the opinions on subjects like these and I think it is important to help us all think and make informed decisions- one way or another- about ethics and conciousness and our behavior. I know people are passionate about their feelings and opinions and I want to be respectful of people's different positions. I don't ask these questions to spark any negativity but just the opposite: I genuinely desire to consider the different viewpoints and why a person feels one way or another so that I can consider diversity more thoroughly and shape my own plane of consciousness as part of my beliefs and value system. I appreciate hearing everyone's different viewpoints on the subject.

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 4677355)

Lilah you are a very thoughtful and articulate woman. I so enjoy your posts and varying points of view. It is the rare person who is open to challenging their beliefs.

I believe for what it is worth that tail docking and dew claw removal at age appropriate done by a vet is not harmful. How ever if I was interested in a performance dog I might not do either.

Originally Posted by Teegy (Post 4677508)

It's no longer a breed standard and discouraged. I know dog shows in the UK now have dogs with full tails. Yayyy. I do love a Yorkie with a tail. They look so delightful and I believe the standard is moving to North America too

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 4677354)

Actually Dr Chris zinc believes a natural tail actually provides critical functions in agility dogs to give functional balance to the dog. At a performance workshop I attended we saw slo mo movies of dogs in action and how important the tail was.

Originally Posted by MyFairLacy (Post 4677588)

I no longer remove dewclaws on my puppies (although would remove rear dew claws if any puppies ever have any). I bought two dogs from Canada who still had their dewclaws and after having them, saw no reason to remove them any longer. Removing dewclaws caused bleeding and screaming puppies whereas docking tails is bloodless and quick. My 5 1/2 month old puppy with dew claws really uses her paws to grip things and uses her dewclaws to help hold onto toys and chews.

So far as tails, I'll continue to dock tails as long as I'm allowed to as I believe it is a much more balanced look. While i have gotten used to the look of an undocked tail, I very much prefer a docked tail and always will.

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 4677354)

Actually Dr Chris zinc believes a natural tail actually provides critical functions in agility dogs to give functional balance to the dog. At a performance workshop I attended we saw slo mo movies of dogs in action and how important the tail was.

Originally Posted by gemy (Post 4677579)

Training the canine athlete a must read by dr Chris zinc. Amazon might have it cheap.

You want to have in good shape before first class. Long walks some hill work etc. Sit beg stand amazing back strengthener.