Tail docking

[Lovetodream88]

Besides it being the standard why are yorkies tails docked? Joey my pup does not have a docked tail and I absolutely love it and there doesn't seem to be any cons to it so I'm just wondering why we do it. Is there anything we can do to have it outlawed in the US?

[Lilah Charm]

I am not sure how it all started with Yorkie's but for many sheep breeds tail docking is commonly done as a cleanliness and disease prevention decision. Long tailed sheep breeds are more prone to fly strike/maggot infestation and other issues.

Although I wish we could have the tail dock/not dock as an optional for showing under the AKC standard (especially because so many other countries do not have docked tails as the breed standard for their shows) I am hesitant for legislation that takes away my option as a pet owner to make that decision. I see a lot of legislation that pulls at my heart strings then upon further inspection has things slipped in that I don't see as encouraging continuation for the common right to pet ownership. I think it is a delicate topic because we want to promote animal welfare and advocate for animals but a lot of things that seem to be on the table are discouraging that.

We are so blessed for the relationship that we get to share with animals, I know everyone here feels passionate about that relationship and that is how we ended up here- or in animal related careers like you and me Taylor - but I am very hesitant to write in stone some of these things. Dewclaw removal for example is, I feel, very beneficial as a preventative health measure to support our dogs, I would hate to lose the right to make the choice to remove those dewclaws. In Norway spay and neuter is illegal without Documentation of a specific medical requirement for it because they feel it is cruel to animals, isn't that interesting? But we also know about the higher risks of mammary tumors, pyometra and testicular challenges that dogs are more likely to face if left intact. I know we all have different thought processes and opinions but within safe and reasonable protection for the animal I would like to see some limitations on government oversight in regard to our pets especially when it comes down to minimal procedure like tail docking.

[airplane]

One interesting viewpoint about docking tails came from a breeder I had a lengthy chat with. She was of the opinion that a natural tail can throw off the balance of the dog. I don't know if I necessarily agree with that. And even if that's true, I think that its just another thing then that breeders have to breed for. I also think there is an aesthetic component to tail docking as well. In my opinion a docked tail looks more proportionate to the dog and gives a more harmonious look as opposed to a natural tail, assuming its been docked to the correct length. So that's a couple things that may perhaps contribute to the reasons why tails are docked. But who knows.

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by Lilah Charm

I am not sure how it all started with Yorkie's but for many sheep breeds tail docking is commonly done as a cleanliness and disease prevention decision. Long tailed sheep breeds are more prone to fly strike/maggot infestation and other issues.

Although I wish we could have the tail dock/not dock as an optional for showing under the AKC standard (especially because so many other countries do not have docked tails as the breed standard for their shows) I am hesitant for legislation that takes away my option as a pet owner to make that decision. I see a lot of legislation that pulls at my heart strings then upon further inspection has things slipped in that I don't see as encouraging continuation for the common right to pet ownership. I think it is a delicate topic because we want to promote animal welfare and advocate for animals but a lot of things that seem to be on the table are discouraging that.

We are so blessed for the relationship that we get to share with animals, I know everyone here feels passionate about that relationship and that is how we ended up here- or in animal related careers like you and me Taylor - but I am very hesitant to write in stone some of these things. Dewclaw removal for example is, I feel, very beneficial as a preventative health measure to support our dogs, I would hate to lose the right to make the choice to remove those dewclaws. In Norway spay and neuter is illegal without Documentation of a specific medical requirement for it because they feel it is cruel to animals, isn't that interesting? But we also know about the higher risks of mammary tumors, pyometra and testicular challenges that dogs are more likely to face if left intact. I know we all have different thought processes and opinions but within safe and reasonable protection for the animal I would like to see some limitations on government oversight in regard to our pets especially when it comes down to minimal procedure like tail docking.

I agree with dew claw removal because I have had two dogs who had serious dew claw issues but I just don't get tail docking and docking certain breeds ears it seems kinda unnessisary. I'm guessing that to a certain extent docking tails hurts and I just don't see a reason for that unessisary pain ya know? It's like with spaying or neutering or even dew claw removal we know that there are health benefits. I guess the first step would be to try and get the standard changed?

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by airplane

One interesting viewpoint about docking tails came from a breeder I had a lengthy chat with. She was of the opinion that a natural tail can throw off the balance of the dog. I don't know if I necessarily agree with that. And even if that's true, I think that its just another thing then that breeders have to breed for. I also think there is an aesthetic component to tail docking as well. In my opinion a docked tail looks more proportionate to the dog and gives a more harmonious look as opposed to a natural tail, assuming its been docked to the correct length. So that's a couple things that may perhaps contribute to the reasons why tails are docked. But who knows.

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.

[TxVicki]

My late Molly had a BEAUTIFUL full tail feathers. My Allie also has a BEAUTIFUL full tail as well. Not once has it ever thrown her off balance.

I love the full tail.

[Lilah Charm]

I think the full tail is indeed quite beautiful that said, part of having a breed standard is having a consistent 'look'. while i don't want to devalue any other dog and their wonderful personality- even if they don't have the look I like- there is definitely a preference I have for my dog.

For me, I find exactly what I want in the yorkie. Their size, stunning silky coat in that amazing Steele blue color with that sassy personality and regal golden head- I mean, it is amazing! I love it! I am so passionate about 'my breed' that I have calenders celebrating it, that I go to dog shows and call to find out the ring time for 'my breed'. For me personally, I could go tail long or tail docked ( and my guess would be the balance was the aesthetic balance the breeder was referring to) but I don't want to downplay the role of aesthetics in choosing a dog breed. Clearly, there are so many other reasons that a dog is your match or not – and I can go on and on about how Lilah fits my lifestyle with her personality etc. in so many ways that a different dog breed could not that have nothing to do with how she looks – well except for size I guess because that is a huge factor for me- but focusing solely on the aesthetic point, I just want to note that I think that it is important and should not be disregarded. Do we love our off standard Yorkie brothers and sisters? Absolutely! And again there is so much more to Yorkie love then just aesthetic… But I don't want to forget that aspect because I believe it is a valuable one and a defining role in what makes a breed.

[airplane]

Yes, the balance in regard to aesthetics makes much more sense to me. That must be what she was referring to. Whenever I hear the word 'balance' I just assume it's in reference to actual balance on your feet when you're moving. But we were watching dogs walking in the show ring at a dog show when she made that comment, so I guess my silly misunderstanding is understandable.

[Wylie's Mom]

There are huuuuuuge threads on this argument here, with lots of data and articles within. I'll try to find them when I get some time.

[Russpilot]

I always heard that the tail was shortened so it could be used as a "handle" to be able to drag the dog out of a hole or a den without breaking the tail.

[Mercgirl]

Docking for anything other than 'Working' dogs is illegal here in the UK, and I for one am more than happy that Wookie hasn't been docked. I just don't understand the concept that cutting bits off a puppy purely for looks is acceptable.

When I get home and Wookie is there to greet me, her tail wagging so hard it's a blur, that is one of the best sights in the world.

[Wylie's Mom]

Originally Posted by Mercgirl

Docking for anything other than 'Working' dogs is illegal here in the UK, and I for one am more than happy that Wookie hasn't been docked. I just don't understand the concept that cutting bits off a puppy purely for looks is acceptable.

When I get home and Wookie is there to greet me, her tail wagging so hard it's a blur, that is one of the best sights in the world.

I too do not understand the continued support for amputating a dog's body part for no valid reason. Bc some humans decided it was the "breed standard" - it does not, in any way, shape, or form - make it right or moral.

It's a barbaric, cruel practice that should've been outlawed a looong time ago.

[Lilah Charm]

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.

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by Lilah Charm

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.

I think tail injures in dogs are very rare especially in small dogs so I don't think it's a reasonable reason to dock tails. Dew claw issues not so rare, I have grown up and had 6 dogs which I know and remember at least 5 had dew claws and two had serious dew claw injures/issues. I rarely ever hear about tail injures but often hear of dew claw injures. In my opinion it would be like removing a part of the human body because lots of people get cancer in that part. I just don't think there is reason enough to do it.

[gemy]

Like almost everything with dogs there are lots of opinions and personal experiences one can share and very little hard research. Although there was at least one study done in Europe that compared tail injuries before and after the ban on tail docking. I believe it was a sporting dog.

Tail amputation on an adult dog is a serious and painfull procedure with relatively long healing times. At least that is my understanding.

The argument made against tail docking is often one of don't interfere with nature. A specious one given the common practice here of a much more invasive and prevalent major operation of neutering.

We have the beautiful and varied breeds we have because of human interference. Passionate breeders who strove to create a breed, and yes that involves a certain look, temperament, size coloration etc.

So for me I support the CKC position of breeders choice.