We lived in town and, unfortunately, I have had the experience of having to have an adult dog's tail amputated due to injury. It is perhaps not as uncommon as one may think

I know officially the KC DO NOT discriminate against the non-docked breeds that are usually docked, but from my experience I think unofficially they do I hope i'm wrong but that has been my experience so far.........................

Anyone else?

Shadowboxer-A friend of mine couple of years ago had to have his Springer Spaniels tail amputated due to being quite badly damaged because he kept running through hedges etc while out walking.'Charlies' tail though was quite wide and long haired which kinda made it worse for getting tangled up.

Aww bless ya!
Just out of interest why do you think their case wouldn't stand in a case of law?
Glad you agree on the working dogs thing, I did originally consider getting a ESS with a tail but TBH I'd have to go to Sweden, Finland or the like to get the temprement, look and working ability that I'm looking for with a tail. I do believe that docking working dogs is beneficial in the long run, but despite this what sticks in my throat is the fact that I think it is the norm to not dock Springers in the countries mentioned. Now why is this? It may well be the "damage" theory is incorrect but TBH I wouldn't want to take the risk and end up having to put my dog through an unncessary operation.

Personally I don't have a problem with other non working breeds not being docked. We have a Rottie here that has a full tail and he looks wonderful. If I was to but a docked breed purely as a pet I would look long and hard for one with a tail. As someone said to dock a pup that is bred purely for pet purpose is bizarre.

As for why some working breeds are dock and others not, I think someone else said, it depends on the tail action and the covering of the tail in the breed. For example Woody (Lab) has a very thick tail and is covered in dense hair which stops it getting damaged. A Springers is covered in very thin "Wispy" hair and the tail action is almost whip like which leads to it being more prone to damage.

As you might imagine, there was no little concern among the people who show docked breeds when the legislation came into force. However, it would seem that most judges are dealing quite fairly with the young dogs who have been showing since the law came into operation. In many cases no-one is quite sure just how the tails of the traditionally docked should actually look! So I think that the judges tend to regard the overall conformation of the dog and make their decision as though the tail did not exist. Provided of course that the 'set' is correct.

Here are pictures of a mini with and without a tail...I know which I prefer,
The short pert tail suits the character of the dog..

I like either to be honset Mini and if I was to own one would go for the undocked dog personally.

I just don't like the thought of docking a dog purely because it is thought to "look" better, sorry.

I have to say I prefer the docked dog. The undocked dog's tail looks too thin.

Awww loveley dogs Mini I'm afraid I prefer tail as God intended nothing at all wrong with it but i'm biased

Both dogs I must add are gorgeous

Mainly because if they are not working dogs it is not in the best interests of the dog. Though this is only my personal opinion