Ban on tail docking

13 Apr 2012

Quote by Lizaleanrob
Of course because castration and spaying does reduce risk some insurance companies charge lower premiums for such dogs.

what a complete crock of misguided, misinformed troll material
dog insurance pricing is done on post codes, age and breed type no more no less
if you have any doubt phone pet plan as kc reg accredited breeders of two breeds of dogs we have considerable knowledge in this field
as pet insurance dose not cover pregnancy or any costs related please tell how spaying a dog will make its insurance cheaper ?????
If this is the case then why did petplan need to know if our dog was castrated when preparing a quote?
I would imaginethat the health benefits associated with spaying would reduce premiums. One in four unspayed bitches will suffer from breast tumors and spaying virtually eliminates the risk. Also unspayed bitches are at high risk from pyometra and other uterine infections as well as cancers of the reprodructive tract.
ring pet plan or one of the others to find out!! your insurance is based on what i said above we talk to pet plan regularly to sort out peoples dog insurance and have never been told that that spaying/neutering would bring it down, as the insurance is based on breed /post code and age
just as a footnote your dog would need to be spayed before its first season to to gain any benefit from reduced cancer risks
but many vets wont spay a dog until after its first season and many prefer it to be two seasons
but i feel you already know this wink

the insurance thing is down to the fact that a done dog or bitch won't be running across the road or biting a person to get sex with another dog. not being rude, but read your public liability section

14 Apr 2012

Quote by NEEDFORFUN
the insurance thing is down to the fact that a done dog or bitch won't be running across the road or biting a person to get sex with another dog. not being rude, but read your public liability section

did you write this sober :silly:

14 Apr 2012

Quote by Bluefish2009
curiously of all the dogs I met over the last weekend only one had an injured tail ... a spaniel with a docked tail

Curious indeed, of all the dogs I met over the weekend none had a tail injury all were docked.
This coming weekend I shall be at a working dog test, I shall probably see several 100 dogs, most with tails docked. I shall keep my eyes open for any with injury for you, and report back staggs :thumbup:
As promised, I have spent the day with many dogs, 99% with docked tails, no dogs were seen with tail damage. For anyone interested we entered the Novice section which the dog is and got a third. In the afternoon we entered the open and were placed second.. Great day lol

15 Apr 2012

does anyone really give a shit?

15 Apr 2012

Quote by Bluefish2009

What a beautiful dog Blue.

15 Apr 2012

Quote by annejohn
does anyone really give a shit?

about what ?

15 Apr 2012

Quote by annejohn
does anyone really give a shit?

well you obviously do, as otherwise you would not have felt the need to write anything., flipa

15 Apr 2012

Quote by Bluefish2009
As promised, I have spent the day with many dogs, 99% with docked tails, no dogs were seen with tail damage.

If 99% of them have had their tails removed, doesn't that mean 99% damaged dunno

Whether they are damaged by choice or by accident it has still gone
Dave_Notts

15 Apr 2012

Quote by starlightcouple
a rabbit is a rabbit is a rabbit GNV. is it not?

A rabbit is a pest and all land owners should kill them humanely
Dave_Notts

15 Apr 2012

Quote by Dave__Notts

As promised, I have spent the day with many dogs, 99% with docked tails, no dogs were seen with tail damage.

If 99% of them have had their tails removed, doesn't that mean 99% damaged dunno

Whether they are damaged by choice or by accident it has still gone
Dave_Notts
No Dave, it means that an unacceptable 1% have the potential to suffer avoidable injury.

15 Apr 2012

Quote by GnV
No Dave, it means that an unacceptable 1% have the potential to suffer avoidable injury.

Quote by GnV
Not once in this thread have I professed any superior knowledge in this subject, nor will I.

:doh:
blimey GNV you can be very easily swayed, still nice to see that it is only an opinion and not some " superior knowledge " on your part. :giggle:

15 Apr 2012

Quote by starlightcouple

No Dave, it means that an unacceptable 1% have the potential to suffer avoidable injury.

Quote by GnV
Not once in this thread have I professed any superior knowledge in this subject, nor will I.

:doh:
blimey GNV you can be very easily swayed, still nice to see that it is only an opinion and not some " superior knowledge " on your part. :giggle:
GnV is clearly a man of common sense and logic, not all posses such divine powers wink

15 Apr 2012

Quote by Bluefish2009

Not the pic of Spaniel's ears I expected to see on this site.

15 Apr 2012

Just going to put this little reminder here so you can all read it fully, before you post anything else.
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/324334.html

Quote by st3v3
I don't think I'm the only one that's noticed the mindless snide remarks, back biting, point scoring and the general attempts to wind people up.
Its "mildly annoying" to some and extremely annoying to others.
So whilst the mod team have been lenient in an attempt to allow greater freedom of speech on what is after all an adult site, those that continually like to skirt the AUP to the limits and like to push boundaries, "walk up to them, piss on them and then calmly walk away giving us the Vs" should take note that the time for that has ended.
Some of you have exhibited what I can only call anti-social behaviour, I've been keeping notes and have been deciding on an appropriate course of action.
We could;
a) Ban a few people and let everything settle down.
b) Remove the playground for while.
c) Do something else
I'm going with c) for now, I'm going to see how many more complaints I get with regards to posts made after this one, any that I count as wrong will be one strike, when anyone reaches 3 they are out.
The usual AUP rules also apply, I would also draw your attention to;
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/main/aup.html in particular;
Swinging Heaven have the right to withdraw membership without notice or explanation.
Swinging Heaven's decision on any matter set out in this AUP shall be final.

Please be sensible and ensure you have read and understood the above post by St3v3.

15 Apr 2012

:giggle:

Quote by MartnJewl

Not the pic of Spaniel's ears I expected to see on this site.

15 Apr 2012

Quote by Naughty Wigan Couple
Just going to put this little reminder here so you can all read it fully, before you post anything else.
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/swingers-forum/viewtopic/324334.html
I don't think I'm the only one that's noticed the mindless snide remarks, back biting, point scoring and the general attempts to wind people up.
Its "mildly annoying" to some and extremely annoying to others.
So whilst the mod team have been lenient in an attempt to allow greater freedom of speech on what is after all an adult site, those that continually like to skirt the AUP to the limits and like to push boundaries, "walk up to them, piss on them and then calmly walk away giving us the Vs" should take note that the time for that has ended.
Some of you have exhibited what I can only call anti-social behaviour, I've been keeping notes and have been deciding on an appropriate course of action.
We could;
a) Ban a few people and let everything settle down.
b) Remove the playground for while.
c) Do something else
I'm going with c) for now, I'm going to see how many more complaints I get with regards to posts made after this one, any that I count as wrong will be one strike, when anyone reaches 3 they are out.
The usual AUP rules also apply, I would also draw your attention to;
http://www.swingingheaven.co.uk/main/aup.html in particular;
Swinging Heaven have the right to withdraw membership without notice or explanation.
Swinging Heaven's decision on any matter set out in this AUP shall be final.

Please be sensible and ensure you have read and understood the above post by St3v3.
:thumbup: Duly noted

15 Apr 2012

Quote by GnV

What a beautiful dog Blue.
Thank you, I think so also, even with her short tail wink

15 Apr 2012

Quote by GnV

As promised, I have spent the day with many dogs, 99% with docked tails, no dogs were seen with tail damage.

If 99% of them have had their tails removed, doesn't that mean 99% damaged dunno

Whether they are damaged by choice or by accident it has still gone
Dave_Notts
No Dave, it means that an unacceptable 1% have the potential to suffer avoidable injury.
You have a wonderful way with words GnV

15 Apr 2012

Quote by GnV

As promised, I have spent the day with many dogs, 99% with docked tails, no dogs were seen with tail damage.

If 99% of them have had their tails removed, doesn't that mean 99% damaged dunno

Whether they are damaged by choice or by accident it has still gone
Dave_Notts
No Dave, it means that an unacceptable 1% have the potential to suffer avoidable injury.
Or indeed G that 99% have already suffered an avoidable injury

15 Apr 2012

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
Or indeed G that 99% have already suffered an avoidable injury

OOh remind me never to bandy legs with you.

15 Apr 2012

Quote by Staggerlee_BB

As promised, I have spent the day with many dogs, 99% with docked tails, no dogs were seen with tail damage.

If 99% of them have had their tails removed, doesn't that mean 99% damaged dunno

Whether they are damaged by choice or by accident it has still gone
Dave_Notts
No Dave, it means that an unacceptable 1% have the potential to suffer avoidable injury.
Or indeed G that 99% have already suffered an avoidable injury
Or indeed that 99%, have had a surgical procedure to avoid injury, for the benefit of the dog.
I am sure you will be familiar with other surgical procedures performed, we are told for the benefit of the dog.
We are constantly told that Neutering will make a better and more affectionate family pet. It is a medical fact that in some cases spaying and castration can prolong the life of our pets and may reduce the number of certain health problems in later life.
Females may benefit from spaying by reducing the incidence of uterine, mammary, and ovarian cancers. It can also reduce the incidence of infections such as Pyometra.
Castrating a male dog we are informed reduces the risk of prostrate cancer. This, like many other claims for the benefits of neutering is a total fallacy. In reality castrated dogs have a 4 times greater risk of developing prostate cancer than intact animals. spayed or neutered dogs also have a 1.5 to 3 times greater chance of developing bladder cancer
We are also told that they are less likely to develop unwanted behaviour's such as marking, sexual aggression, and mounting, they are also less likely to escape, roam, or fight with other male dogs. I will accept that these are in some instances correct, castration can help reduce some of these problems.
Some vets recommend that our dogs are spayed or castrated anywhere between 5 to 16 months. In America some are being done as early as 8 weeks and they routinely neuter at between four and six months. Many of the Vets, Trainers and Behaviourists in both America and the UK are recommending this course of action without understanding the numerous problems this advice may create.
Some rescue centre's such as the RSPCA often spay and neuter as a matter of course, whatever the age.
What is the policy at your rescue center on this kind of mutilation?

15 Apr 2012

Quote by Bluefish2009

As promised, I have spent the day with many dogs, 99% with docked tails, no dogs were seen with tail damage.

If 99% of them have had their tails removed, doesn't that mean 99% damaged dunno

Whether they are damaged by choice or by accident it has still gone
Dave_Notts
No Dave, it means that an unacceptable 1% have the potential to suffer avoidable injury.
Or indeed G that 99% have already suffered an avoidable injury
Or indeed that 99%, have had a surgical procedure to avoid injury, for the benefit of the dog.
I am sure you will be familiar with other surgical procedures performed, we are told for the benefit of the dog.
We are constantly told that Neutering will make a better and more affectionate family pet. It is a medical fact that in some cases spaying and castration can prolong the life of our pets and may reduce the number of certain health problems in later life.
Females may benefit from spaying by reducing the incidence of uterine, mammary, and ovarian cancers. It can also reduce the incidence of infections such as Pyometra.
Castrating a male dog we are informed reduces the risk of prostrate cancer. This, like many other claims for the benefits of neutering is a total fallacy. In reality castrated dogs have a 4 times greater risk of developing prostate cancer than intact animals. spayed or neutered dogs also have a 1.5 to 3 times greater chance of developing bladder cancer
We are also told that they are less likely to develop unwanted behaviour's such as marking, sexual aggression, and mounting, they are also less likely to escape, roam, or fight with other male dogs. I will accept that these are in some instances correct, castration can help reduce some of these problems.
Some vets recommend that our dogs are spayed or castrated anywhere between 5 to 16 months. In America some are being done as early as 8 weeks and they routinely neuter at between four and six months. Many of the Vets, Trainers and Behaviourists in both America and the UK are recommending this course of action without understanding the numerous problems this advice may create.
Some rescue centre's such as the RSPCA often spay and neuter as a matter of course, whatever the age.
What is the policy at your rescue center?

No responsible rescue would allow an un-spayed or neutered dog to leave their kennels .... this is to prevent further irresponsible breeding not for any health benefits it may or may not bestow upon the animal ... so not for the dog per se more for dogs in general

15 Apr 2012

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
No responsible rescue would allow an un-spayed or neutered dog to leave their kennels .... this is to prevent further irresponsible breeding not for any health benefits it may or may not bestow upon the animal ... so not for the dog per se more for dogs in general
oops missed my edit Blue .... it is for the benefit of dogs in general it prevents us as rescues from having to deal with even more unwanted dogs and the dogs from suffering the abuse and hardship that comes with being unwanted or a stray ... kind of common sense really

Sorry post crossed in edit.
Me thinks you are now just playing with words. Double standards spring to mind. The end result is to stop the suffering of dog or dogs. Both surgical procedures and both in my view to benefit the dog. :thumbup:
No responsible dog owner would allow a working dog to enter cover without this procedure

15 Apr 2012

Quote by Bluefish2009

No responsible rescue would allow an un-spayed or neutered dog to leave their kennels .... this is to prevent further irresponsible breeding not for any health benefits it may or may not bestow upon the animal ... so not for the dog per se more for dogs in general
oops missed my edit Blue .... it is for the benefit of dogs in general it prevents us as rescues from having to deal with even more unwanted dogs and the dogs from suffering the abuse and hardship that comes with being unwanted or a stray ... kind of common sense really

Sorry post crossed in edit.
Me thinks you are now just playing with words. Double standards spring to mind. The end result is to stop the suffering of dog or dogs. Both surgical procedures and both in my view to benefit the dog. :thumbup:
No responsible dog owner would allow a working dog to enter cover without this procedure
No Blue I'm not playing with words ... I do not believe docking is a worthwhile procedure it does not in my opinion serve any purpose in the vast majority of cases (most of which will never come to light as they have already been docked).It is impossible to say whether a docked tail is less of a liability to a dog as it is a docked tail you will never know whether the dog would have injured its tail or not.
Spaying and neutering are common sense and any dog owner (who is not a responsible breeder) should insist that their dogs are 'sterile',unplanned breeding creates unwanted dogs and there are already far too many of is to anybody obvious.
There is little or no evidence to support docking you have been unable to show any other than your belief that it is the right thing to do,there will remain little or no evidence either way until docking is and has been banned in ALL cases for some time ... as I said earlier I am surprisingly unsentimental about animals soo I for one believe that it is an acceptable risk to ban docking in order to find out,you may even be right (I doubt it) but you'll never find out whether you and thousands of others are putting your animals through an unnecessary surgical procedure (with all the risks inherent in that)or not until it is banned ... so in short you may care for your dogs and their welfare ... I am in the position of having to care for all of them, and, cruel as you may see it, some may well have to suffer for the lasting benefit of all... it is indeed a dogs life

16 Apr 2012

A well constructed counter argument Staggs, but it still doesn't alter my view.
I could certainly accept your view if it were the case that 'docking' is carried out in an 'inhumane' (if that is not a contradiction in terms) way - like using a rusty old pair of tin snips to undertake this procedure but when it is carried out professionally by, or under the supervision of a qualified person, it surely carries the same weight as spaying and castration does; procedures which you suggest are entirely common sense.

16 Apr 2012

Quote by GnV
A well constructed counter argument Staggs, but it still doesn't alter my view.
I could certainly accept your view if it were the case that 'docking' is carried out in an 'inhumane' (if that is not a contradiction in terms) way - like using a rusty old pair of tin snips to undertake this procedure but when it is carried out professionally by, or under the supervision of a qualified person, it surely carries the same weight as spaying and castration does; procedures which you suggest are entirely common sense.

You seem G to be labouring under the assumptions that all vets are competent, all dogs are cared for and that all dogs are docked by vets .... spend some time in dog rescue and you'll soon find that non of these are correct

16 Apr 2012

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
A well constructed counter argument Staggs, but it still doesn't alter my view.
I could certainly accept your view if it were the case that 'docking' is carried out in an 'inhumane' (if that is not a contradiction in terms) way - like using a rusty old pair of tin snips to undertake this procedure but when it is carried out professionally by, or under the supervision of a qualified person, it surely carries the same weight as spaying and castration does; procedures which you suggest are entirely common sense.

You seem G to be labouring under the assumptions that all vets are competent, all dogs are cared for and that all dogs are docked by vets .... spend some time in dog rescue and you'll soon find that non of these are correct
i think the same could be argued for any trade or industry staggs ? especially where medicine is concerned blink

16 Apr 2012

Quote by Staggerlee_BB
A well constructed counter argument Staggs, but it still doesn't alter my view.
I could certainly accept your view if it were the case that 'docking' is carried out in an 'inhumane' (if that is not a contradiction in terms) way - like using a rusty old pair of tin snips to undertake this procedure but when it is carried out professionally by, or under the supervision of a qualified person, it surely carries the same weight as spaying and castration does; procedures which you suggest are entirely common sense.

You seem G to be labouring under the assumptions that all vets are competent, all dogs are cared for and that all dogs are docked by vets .... spend some time in dog rescue and you'll soon find that non of these are correct
Now you are suggesting that because there may be some who do not follow procedure and break the law, that the rest of us and our dogs should be punished because of them. That does not sound like logic to me. Some people have been clubbed to death with a hammer, should we ban people from using hammers?
As far as I can see now your argument has fallen down, it is an attempt to justify a surgical procedure based on your beliefs for what may or may not be best for the dog, bread, human race, rescue center.

16 Apr 2012

@ Staggs:
That doesn't say a lot for doctors does it, as (I believe) vets spend more time in training than doctors treating humans do!
I think you might be a tad ungracious towards the vetinary profession. Given the current failures in the NHS, I think I might prefer to be treated by a vet these days.

16 Apr 2012

Quote by Bluefish2009

You seem G to be labouring under the assumptions that all vets are competent, all dogs are cared for and that all dogs are docked by vets .... spend some time in dog rescue and you'll soon find that non of these are correct

Now you are suggesting that because there may be some who do not follow procedure and break the law, that the rest of us and our dogs should be punished because of them. That does not sound like logic to me. Some people have been clubbed to death with a hammer, should we ban people from using hammers?
As far as I can see now your argument has fallen down, it is an attempt to justify a surgical procedure based on your beliefs for what may or may not be best for the dog, bread, human race, rescue center.
No Blue I'm saying the same as I have done all along ,that docking is an unnecessary surgical procedure,that all surgical procedures carry a risk,that it is not a painless procedure (nip down to the hospital and have them cut your thumb off... I doubt you would enjoy the process).I was merely pointing out to G that docking is not always the clean clinical process that he seems to believe.
It is you Blue who is trying to justify a surgical procedure not you mean castration and spaying of dogs then I really don't need to justify them ... ban them by all means and then deal with the strays,abuse and neglect that would ensue,deal with keeping your kids and dogs indoors to avoid the increased number of dog attacks that would follow ... my argument hasn't fallen down or altered yours it would seem is skidding along on it's arse

Quote by GnV
@ Staggs:
That doesn't say a lot for doctors does it, as (I believe) vets spend more time in training than doctors treating humans do!
I think you might be a tad ungracious towards the vetinary profession. Given the current failures in the NHS, I think I might prefer to be treated by a vet these days.

It says nothing about doctors G ... they after all only need to learn to treat one species
Not ungracious just realism borne of experience as Rob points out there are charlatans and incompetents in most professions