Tail docking ban in Scotland, causing animal suffering or preventing it? Delight As Ban On Tail-Docking In Scotland Confirmed Campaigners Call For Review Of All Other Animal Mutilations Advocates for Animals has welcomed today’s confirmation that the docking of all dogs’ tails will be banned in Scotland. The Scottish Executive today announced that the ban is to come into force on 30 April 2007. Advocates has campaigned for an end to tail-docking on the grounds that it is an unnecessary mutilation that causes pain and distress. The animal protection organisation has also called for all other animal mutilations to be reviewed.
THE Scottish Gamekeepers Association (SGA) is putting pressure on the Scottish government to end the ban on the tail docking of working dogs, claiming it is causing unnecessary suffering. Tail docking was outlawed under the 2006 Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act after consultations with veterinary bodies and the Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA). Animal Welfare Legislation covering the rest of the UK contains an exemption allowing working dogs such as spaniels, retrievers and terriers, to have their tales docked – but not in Scotland. The SGA claims the ban means that working dogs. which require to work over and under dense cover such as bramble, are now suffering avoidable injury, leading to costly and painful amputations. It is claimed that many gamekeepers and farmers are being forced to travel across the Border to source docked puppies. The Scottish Government has now commissioned Glasgow University Veterinary School to conduct research into the frequency and nature of tail injury in working dogs and terriers. Their figures will be published this summer, with many in the countryside hoping the evidence points to the ban being overturned.
The fact that some working breeds have always been docked for centuries, for good reason, now seems to be being borne out. About time this was reviewed again. All for preventing animal cruelty, don't get us wrong, just that docking is markedly less traumatic if done at birth rather than years later following injury/trauma and the obvious post-op care required whilst they re-learn walking/running without a tail (which upsets their balance in many cases).
We dock lamb's tails to avoid infection. There are sensible reasons for it, where a dog is a working animal, prone to damage as part of its 'job'. But if it is purely for aesthetics then no - no animal should be damaged (that's what this is after all) to satisfy a human's idea of what is attractive. If that means having 2 cartegories at Cruft's so be it - boxer-docked, boxer-undocked. Better still, only allow docked animals to be presented in the working dog categories. It goes hand in hand with stopping the ridiculous over-breeeding of deformities in the name of breed 'purity'. Dogs should be 'dog-shaped'. Exposed inner eye-lids, floppy mouths that can't close and constantly dribble, folds of skin that harbour infections, ears that drag on the floor, joint weakeness or disfunction - they are all deliberately bred for. And, in my opinion of course, a conscious act of cruelty against the poor buggers born like that.
if nature wanted certain dogs not to have a tail , then nature would have intervened. i find it a horrid practise in any circumstance to remove a dogs tail.
Quote by starlightcouple if nature wanted certain dogs not to have a tail , then nature would have intervened. i find it a horrid practise in any circumstance to remove a dogs tail.
I would agree with the sentiment, but there is good reason, based in my view on animal welfare grounds to dock a small amount of tail on certain breeds. Dogs with docked tails significantly less likely to sustain tail injuries says Veterinary Record Dogs with docked tails are significantly less likely to sustain tail injuries, finds research published in this week’s Veterinary Record. Among the 138,212 dogs seen by vets at the 52 practices during the study period, 281 were treated for a tail injury. The owners of 224 of these injured dogs, as well as a random sample of 799 owners whose dogs had not been treated for tail injury were sent a questionnaire on dog tail injuries and docking. Only 97 of the owners whose dogs needed treatment and 227 of those whose dogs had not been injured replied. But their responses indicated that around one in three tail injuries (36%; 35 cases) had occurred at home as a result of the dog knocking its tail against a wall, kennel wall or other household object. A further 17.5% (17 cases) were sustained outdoors, while 14.4% (14 cases) were caused by the tail being caught in a door. In 15 (15.5%) other causes were cited; and in 16 (16.5%), the cause was unknown. Almost half of the injuries (44%) were recurrent. Over half the cases were treated with drugs and dressings, but in almost one in three cases, amputation was required. Eleven dogs did not need any treatment. Certain breeds seemed to be more at risk, with springer and cocker spaniels almost six times as likely to sustain a tail injury as labradors and retrievers
I'm confused. In a survey of over 300 dog owners, only 17 reported a tail injury sustained outside. Even if we (wrongly IMO) assume all 17 were working dogs, it hardly makes a strong case for allowing tail docking of working dogs. "Dogs with docked tails significantly less likely to sustain tail injuries says Veterinary Record" - No shit Sherlock. Dogs with no legs less likely to break legs too.
Quote by MartnJewl I'm confused. In a survey of over 300 dog owners, only 17 reported a tail injury sustained outside. Even if we (wrongly IMO) assume all 17 were working dogs, it hardly makes a strong case for allowing tail docking of working dogs. "Dogs with docked tails significantly less likely to sustain tail injuries says Veterinary Record" - No shit Sherlock. Dogs with no legs less likely to break legs too.
That would depend upon whether you were the owner of one of those dogs i would guess. It is not the whole tail which is removed, spaniels are particularly susceptible to getting the end of there tails damaged. When I was younger and thought I new better than the older generation, I had a springer spaniel who's tail I did not have docked. Like many I thought it cruel and unnecessary. I lived to regret that decision, both for the welfare of the dog and my pocket. After repeated trips to the vet after working her in the undergrowth the end result was a badly damaged tail. I had to fork out to have part of it removed. It is not banned here in England, this is regards a Scottish law
" All UK legislation has now been passed and enacted as follows; The docking of dogs' tails was banned in England from 6 April 2007 and in Wales from 28 March 2007 but with exemptions from the ban for certain working dogs, and for medical treatment. A total ban in Scotland took effect 30 April 2007 There is also a ban on the showing of docked dogs (all dogs docked after the commencement date of 6 April/28 March) at events to which members of the public are admitted on payment of a fee. However, this ban does not apply to dogs shown for the purpose of demonstrating their working ability. The exemption for working dogs allows a dog that is likely to perform certain specified types of work to have its tail docked by a veterinary surgeon. The dog will have to be less than 5 days old and the veterinary surgeon will have to certify that he or she has seen specified evidence that the dog is likely to work in specified areas. Puppies being docked must be microchipped, either at the time of docking or when the vet considers they are old enough. The types of dog that are allowed to be docked and the types of evidence needed, is detailed below. Puppies from certain working dogs may be docked if evidence is provided to the vet that it is likely to be worked in connection with law enforcement, activities of Her Majesty’s Armed Forces, emergency rescue, lawful pest control, or the lawful shooting of animals. It is accepted that in a litter, not all puppies docked will be found suitable for work. "
Quote by Ben_Minx " All UK legislation has now been passed and enacted as follows; The docking of dogs' tails was banned in England from 6 April 2007 and in Wales from 28 March 2007 but with exemptions from the ban for certain working dogs, and for medical treatment. A total ban in Scotland took effect 30 April 2007 There is also a ban on the showing of docked dogs (all dogs docked after the commencement date of 6 April/28 March) at events to which members of the public are admitted on payment of a fee. However, this ban does not apply to dogs shown for the purpose of demonstrating their working ability. The exemption for working dogs allows a dog that is likely to perform certain specified types of work to have its tail docked by a veterinary surgeon. The dog will have to be less than 5 days old and the veterinary surgeon will have to certify that he or she has seen specified evidence that the dog is likely to work in specified areas. Puppies being docked must be microchipped, either at the time of docking or when the vet considers they are old enough. The types of dog that are allowed to be docked and the types of evidence needed, is detailed below. Puppies from certain working dogs may be docked if evidence is provided to the vet that it is likely to be worked in connection with law enforcement, activities of Her Majesty’s Armed Forces, emergency rescue, lawful pest control, or the lawful shooting of animals. It is accepted that in a litter, not all puppies docked will be found suitable for work. "
:thumbup: I had to provide a letter of intent to work my cocker from the shoot I now work her on, if that makes sense.
Maybe the heart of the problem is two-fold. Unscrupulous breeders and uncontrolled breeding. Surely common or garden pet owners should not be allowed to own un-speyed animals? Only a small number of properly licensed breeders should be allowed to even own breedable dogs and cats. I don't advocate chopping bits off animals for prettiness but I do advocate avoiding surplus animals being bred. There should be a simple rule - no owner-no pet. This isea of 'never put a healthy dog down' is ridiculous when you compare it with management of sheep. Every year there is a 50-50 split of male and female lambs. The vast majority of males are killed (and eaten in most cases I beleive) because they are not needed. Why do we treat animals we have labelled 'pets' any differently?
Quote by foxylady2209 I don't advocate chopping bits off animals for prettiness but I do advocate avoiding surplus animals being bred. There should be a simple rule - no owner-no pet. This isea of 'never put a healthy dog down' is ridiculous when you compare it with management of sheep. Every year there is a 50-50 split of male and female lambs. The vast majority of males are killed (and eaten in most cases I beleive) because they are not needed. Why do we treat animals we have labelled 'pets' any differently?
The sheep analogy doesnt work. Sure, if you are cross breeding to create breeding animals for meat producers (e.g. Mules and Scotch half-breds) then the male lambs are of limited value, but they still have a value as meat. If you're crossing suffolks with mules or scotch half breds to produce an animal purely for meat then male offspring have slightly higher value than females. How does this differ from animals we keep as pets? We don't breed sheep as companions in the same way we don't eat dogs. We keep pets for our enjoyment and pleasure and as a result it doesn't matter if they're male or female, entire or neutered. P.s for Ben. Beef price has been pretty good for a while now, so even dairy bull calves have some value now. We haven't shot one on farm for about 2 years now.
I don't advocate chopping bits off animals for prettiness but I do advocate avoiding surplus animals being bred. There should be a simple rule - no owner-no pet. This isea of 'never put a healthy dog down' is ridiculous when you compare it with management of sheep. Every year there is a 50-50 split of male and female lambs. The vast majority of males are killed (and eaten in most cases I beleive) because they are not needed. Why do we treat animals we have labelled 'pets' any differently?
The sheep analogy doesnt work. Sure, if you are cross breeding to create breeding animals for meat producers (e.g. Mules and Scotch half-breds) then the male lambs are of limited value, but they still have a value as meat. If you're crossing suffolks with mules or scotch half breds to produce an animal purely for meat then male offspring have slightly higher value than females. How does this differ from animals we keep as pets? We don't breed sheep as companions in the same way we don't eat dogs. We keep pets for our enjoyment and pleasure and as a result it doesn't matter if they're male or female, entire or neutered. P.s for Ben. Beef price has been pretty good for a while now, so even dairy bull calves have some value now. We haven't shot one on farm for about 2 years now. The analogy DOES work - a load of animals that no-one wants. Why keep them? the Dogs trust are basically storing unwanted animals until they die of old age - fluffy-minded nonsense. And who said you can't eat dogs? Ok I wouldn't want to eat cat - cos it is a carnivore and I have been told carnivore meat is rank. But the idea that some animals cannot be eaten cos they are cutesy-wootsy pets and others are ok to eat cos the are 'for eating' is a human invented nonsense.
Quote by MartnJewl Dogs are vegitarian? More to the point I can't see the relevence to tail docking?
Dog are omnivores - like pigs - so their meat is sweeter and more pleasant to eat. Not specific to the OP but then that is the joy of forum threads and conversations - they develop.
For me, as long as the docking is for the prevention of further problems I have no problem with this, If it is cosmetic i do have a problem. As already mentioned, sheep have part of there tail docked for there welfare. Factory farmed pigs have there's docked before the other pigs chew them off. Some poultry, ducks, and game birds have part of the upper beak removed(De-beaking) This can be a permanent thing or some thing that grows out, depending on how far up the beak the cut is made. These and many practices still continue all over the world for animal welfare Foxy is correct, we do have some strange double standards between pets, animals that we eat and our wildlife
the one thing that docking does have in common is the human. it is the human that determines this disgusting horrid practice. it is purely at the end of the day to the benefit of the human. as i have always thought, all of the problems and actions on this planet that are awful, are the actions of mankind.
Quote by foxylady2209 Dogs are vegitarian? More to the point I can't see the relevence to tail docking?
Dog are omnivores - like pigs - so their meat is sweeter and more pleasant to eat. Not specific to the OP but then that is the joy of forum threads and conversations - they develop. Can't see that dogtail soup will have the same appeal as oxtail somehow, so may as well chop 'em off
Quote by GnV Dogs are vegitarian? More to the point I can't see the relevence to tail docking?
Dog are omnivores - like pigs - so their meat is sweeter and more pleasant to eat. Not specific to the OP but then that is the joy of forum threads and conversations - they develop. Can't see that dogtail soup will have the same appeal as oxtail somehow, so may as well chop 'em off now that would depend of what part of the world you was in
Quote by foxylady2209 Dogs are vegitarian? More to the point I can't see the relevence to tail docking?
Dog are omnivores - like pigs - so their meat is sweeter and more pleasant to eat. Not specific to the OP but then that is the joy of forum threads and conversations - they develop. I knew where you were heading with this. It's why I specifically asked if they were vegetarian. Dogs are not true omnivores. A quick glance in their mouths will will show they have no grinding molars, just molars designed for slicing flesh. Just because their digestive systems can tolerate vegetables it's not their first choice of diet. Interestingly my cat has vegetables in her food. There's sound logic for not eating meat eating animals, but if you're happy to expose yourself to the health risks (Prion diseases), don't let me stop you.
Quote by Bluefish2009 if nature wanted certain dogs not to have a tail , then nature would have intervened. i find it a horrid practise in any circumstance to remove a dogs tail.
I would agree with the sentiment, but there is good reason, based in my view on animal welfare grounds to dock a small amount of tail on certain breeds. Dogs with docked tails significantly less likely to sustain tail injuries says Veterinary Record Dogs with docked tails are significantly less likely to sustain tail injuries, finds research published in this week’s Veterinary Record. Among the 138,212 dogs seen by vets at the 52 practices during the study period, 281 were treated for a tail injury. The owners of 224 of these injured dogs, as well as a random sample of 799 owners whose dogs had not been treated for tail injury were sent a questionnaire on dog tail injuries and docking. Only 97 of the owners whose dogs needed treatment and 227 of those whose dogs had not been injured replied. But their responses indicated that around one in three tail injuries (36%; 35 cases) had occurred at home as a result of the dog knocking its tail against a wall, kennel wall or other household object. A further 17.5% (17 cases) were sustained outdoors, while 14.4% (14 cases) were caused by the tail being caught in a door. In 15 (15.5%) other causes were cited; and in 16 (16.5%), the cause was unknown. Almost half of the injuries (44%) were recurrent. Over half the cases were treated with drugs and dressings, but in almost one in three cases, amputation was required. Eleven dogs did not need any treatment. Certain breeds seemed to be more at risk, with springer and cocker spaniels almost six times as likely to sustain a tail injury as labradors and retrievers
Pros and cons
I assume you mean these reasons Blue .... so a small number of dogs sustain tail injuries whilst working (a very small number) therefore all working dogs should have their tails docked .... a small number of dogs break their legs whilst working (leading to amputation) should all dogs then have their legs amputated as a precaution?? Blue I am a trustee of a dog rescue and have just returned from the N.E.S.S.R. Easter dog show (that's a Springer rescue organisation of which I am a member ) I do have a little knowledge myself ... and in my experience the docking of tails when argued down to the core, boils down to 'they just don't look right with tails'
Quote by Staggerlee_BB I assume you mean these reasons Blue .... so a small number of dogs sustain tail injuries whilst working (a very small number) therefore all working dogs should have their tails docked .... a small number of dogs break their legs whilst working (leading to amputation) should all dogs then have their legs amputated as a precaution?? Blue I am a trustee of a dog rescue and have just returned from the N.E.S.S.R. Easter dog show (that's a Springer rescue organisation of which I am a member ) I do have a little knowledge myself ... and in my experience the docking of tails when argued down to the core, boils down to 'they just don't look right with tails'
What a totally ridiculous comparison, if I may say. Most unlike you Staggs...
I totally disagree, my first spaniel had a tail, against my grandfather better judgement, because I felt they looked better with a tail. Sadly once she started working I was proved to be wrong, as she damaged it time after time, until it had to be removed. I felt very guilty for being so pigheaded. Spaniels are the worst for this kind of damage because of there enthusiasm and tail wagging Technic. Also the kind of cover they work in, plays a major role, and has a major effect. The shoots I currently beat on have woods full of bramble and areas of thick gorse. Therefore, in my view unless they have a small part of their tails removed, a considerable number of working gun dogs (notably spaniels) will suffer bloody and painful damage to the ends of their undocked tails. There has been an increase in the numbers of adult gun dogs requiring partial tail amputation in Sweden since docking was banned there. While the law allows, I will not risk putting a dog of mine through any unnecessary suffering, so will continue to have my working spaniels tails docked.
Swinging Heaven features sexually explicit material. To access this site you must be of the legal age to engage with the material of an adult site.
By entering Swinging Heaven you agree to the following;
I am deemed an adult where I live, and I am at least 18 years old
I am allowed to access & view sexually explicit material
0 likes
