Thank you darling, that's very kind of you. I have to say, as tough an old cookie as I am, I am getting thoroughly fed up of being jumped on whenever I make a posting, (just because I use a VIBRATION collar on Ben. No need for stims now - fancy that!!)

Like you, I am totally anti chopping bits off dogs - even testicles, unless there is a good, sound medical reason. To cut a puppy's tail off with scissors and without anaesthetic is to my mind absolutely BARBARIC - FAR FAR MORE CRUEL than a couple of split second zaps of an e collar. There can be no comparison, and I find it extraordinary that ANYONE would half an ounce of commonsense - even if they deplore what we have done with ben, which clearly most people do (and that is fair enough, that is their right) - could say that using such a device twice is as cruel as docking.

Of course it is not, and clearly I am just being attacked and villified for the sake of it.

Incidentally, poor abused Ben has had two more walks today, off lead, wearing his e collar. The fields on the other side of the wood that he kept running into now have lambing ewes in them. Guess who walked right along the footpath (hole in the fence has now been wired up!) along the edge of the wood, off lead, with his good friend Tai. According to OH, neither dog showed the slightest bit of interest in the sheep. I am amazed that Tai didn't - perhaps ben has told him to watch it else HE will be electrocuted with an e collar just like he has

Whatever,this thread is NOT about e collars, it's about docking, and I think that docking is barbaric and cruel and anybody who thinks otherwise IMO should have a part of their body cut without anaesthetic and see how they like it.

I was expecting this thread to cause some debate on the pros and cons of tail docking. It is an emotive issue. I know I feel strongly against it. But I respect and will listen to the opinions and the arguments of the pro-docking people. I certainly wont bring up their pro-docking stance on every other thread I read them on, or decide not to allow them to have any other opinion on any other thread, or even allow them any room to change their mind, nor will I assume that because because they are pro puppy mutilation, they must be anti-dog.

I am interested to learn what it is about this practice that makes otherwise very dog loving people suddenly turn a blind eye to something I cant see as anything other than barbaric... I have yet to hear an argument that has caused me to question my position or change my mind at the moment, but I will allow that other people are allowed their own views. I'm glad I don't own a traditionally docked breed and if their tails are really as fragile and prone to screaming agony as some here have said, then I don't think I will consider one of those breeds until this terrible tail weakness can be bred out, rather than cut off.

I do not agree with the use of an e collar by Gnasher, I believe I said that on the thread about it. We cant all be right all the time. I bought a crossbreed puppy from backyard breeders, my house is far to glass to go around throwing stones. We are all entitled to our opinions and to make the occasional mistake. Live and let live.

Who the hell is Peter Green? Do you mean Peter Scott, he of Slimbridge fame?

My husband is not well reknowned at all. He was a penniless graduate looking for a job. He had a first class honours degree in Zoology, Physiology and Biochemistry, specialising in Mammalian Physiology. At the time, Peter Scott was advertising for well qualified Zoology graduates, and Mike applied, was interviewed and offered a job. The idiot turned it down, as it would have meant he wouldn't have been able to tour the Middle East, Yugoslavia and Turkey on his motorbike!

I do hope you are not pro docking, 'cos if you are YOU should be ashamed of yourself - cutting puppydogs tails off with scissors and no anaesthetic

pot and kettle and all that

I have never agreed with it for looks alone, but I do support it for gundogs. I guess the thing is, its difficult for the gundog supporters to demonostrate just how many injuries there would be without tail-docking as there are so few that are not docked (and which work regularly in cover).

But I do know that having to amputate a tail on an adult dog is a painful and difficult procedure which does often go wrong. There have been two or three threads on Dogsey regarding the removal of a tail (or part) in older dogs since I've been on Dogsey and not one had gone without a hitch and at least 2 I can recall have required more than one operation. The dogs have been miserable for weeks and weeks.

I guess its weighing up the risk. What percentage of docked gun dogs would end up with tail injuries if they were left undocked? To me, the risk wouldn't have to be even as much as 50/50 before I'd chose to pre-empt the possibility.

A bit like spaying to avoid pyo (by the way is spaying barbaric? yes it is done under antistetic, but the dogs undoubtedly suffer for a few days afterwards).

I do agree that in an ideal world bob-tails would be better and I like the idea of this in principle. But then breeding towards it brings its own issues - how many unwanted pups would have to be born before you got to a good working dog with a naturally short tail...and what happens to all the unwanted ones?

When i first bought Meg i was gutted that she was docked, but has time has gone on i have changed my position, personally here are the ones i know of, on the shoot i work on which is woodland in Huddersfield, there are 4 dogs with tails all of them damage them on a fortnightly basis, not good for them, my friend has 2 full tailed dogs one springer and one working Cocker, Archie has had about a third of his tail amputated and it took months to heal properly, Lela regularly comes back from the woods with a bloody tip, (no one told her she wasn't working) in rescue, we have had at least 1/2 dozen full tailed dogs that have needed amputation, another friend had problems with her full tailed springer from being a puppy again amputated at a later date, for me personally this is reason enough not to have a springer with a full tail, why put them through all that stress and pain later on when it can be done at a very young age and be forgotten about.

As Hali says we routinely spay our dogs to prevent pyo, and even worse for our own convenience, because we don't want a bitch in season, its preventative surgery as is for me tail docking.

I will back out now, because this is an emotive subject and one that is only looked at subjectively by people that own those breeds

Bob tail would be one way to go, but surely just working dogs with tails and not breeding from those who suffer tail injuries, may go some way towards breeding dogs with hardier tails, or tails less prone to splitting?

Spaying is a different issue... I have spayed/neutered all of my dogs. But I'm not 100% comfortable with myself for doing it. It does seem dangerously intrusive and close to knuckle of 'mutilation', and despite of all the good reasons for doing it the real reason I speyed Selkie is because the vet just told me to as part of her jabs and i just went along with it. Pharaoh had to be neutered mainly for aesthetic concerns (for a little yellow doggy he had the biggest blackest nads) and Kismet was just such a trauma girl through her season, trying to escape, howling the place down, I couldn't face another one..

But that is probably a whole other thread.

thanks Lizzy - interesting to hear of direct personal experience with tail damage. I was very like you you used to be too - anti docking totally until I learned more about the issues with working dogs.

Yes, spaying is a different issue, but I raise it as a comparison as to what some people find acceptable in the best interest of their dogs (or even their own convenience).

Its easy to say 'docking is cruel' when you haven't witnessed the consequences of not doing it.

I have no idea whether it is possible to breed dogs with damage-proof tails - realistically I can't see how that would be achieved. How do you work out which dogs are going to have the strongest tails or do you just work them all and let the weaker tailed ones suffer? And is a 'tougher' tail alone enough to prevent injury, even if you could breed for it? I suspect not.

You see to me it seems strange that someone can have a dog neutered for mainly aestetic reasons and then claim that docking a tail (to prevent possible/probable considerable distress) is barbaric?

Never cut a tail off in me life!!

At the end of my post 76 I asked if anyone knew why a Large Munsterlander - who is an HPR - is not docked, when other HPRs are docked.
They work in heavy cover like springers, other HPRs etc. and they are not just a retriever (as Labradork pointed out FCRs are supposed to be).
There seems to be a lack of consistency to this docking or not docking rationale. I am not persuaded that it has something to do with coat type either, nor size of dog, so any suggestions as to why Munsterlanders are not docked would be interesting to know.