It would be interesting to see by how much the entry figures have gone down since the ban.

Only then would you get the true picture.

You'd need the Crufts numbers for pups last year and 4 years ago.

I really don't think the majority show and work and if the ones that do lobbied for a working test as part of the showing then it would cover all bases.

rune

Cant really do that properly though at present Lynn, the entries are down in all breeds since the recession, nothing to do with docking.

Was everything that was done then the right thing to do?

Ideas change and things move on. In those days there was dog fighting and bull baiting as well.

I have old pictures of spaniels with tails--- will hunt some out this afternoon ---its cold and I have free time!

rune

So the breeding has failed. If a long tail is not acceptable, then why has the tail length not been bred for? Human failure that the dog pays the price for.

The answer is the same for your second question. Instead of mutilation, we should be breeding responsibly taking into account both purpose and HEALTH (which is, of course, a whole other debate)

No, the breeding has always been the same, and dogs have been docked to prevent injury all along.

I know some people who work their dogs and don't dock because they never work their dogs in the type of cover that is most likely to cause injury, nor do they compete, so are never going to travel elsewhere with different cover. Absolutely brilliant as far as I'm concerned, the right decision for the dogs. Unfortunately though, it means that if they breed, their pups are unlikely to be taken on by someone who does regularly work their dogs through thick cover, simply because so many have seen dogs injur their tails doing so.

So with your answer to the second question, do we just stop breeding sheep with tails? We just let those breeds prone to fly strike die out? and with cows, we just breed them without horns? And what about chickens, how on earth do we only hatch the female eggs thereby allowing only viable chicks to be born, instead of killing all the male day old chicks to satisfy our need for egg layers??

Apols to the op for the slight digression, but I think it's helpful to have an overall view, instead of focussing on a sole operation which has been done for as long as many breeds have been around.

In the vast majority of cases, neutering is to suit our needs, not the dogs'. It's deemed more acceptable because of our irresponsibility in being unable to cope with the natural instincts of dogs in our care. However, on saying that, the very real, preventable (by neutering) health risks of the more and more prevalent mammary cancers, pyometra in bitches cannot be ignored and cannot be bred out of the dog so it really is a whole different debate.

If it is acceptable to breed dogs by design (either for the job they do or the looks they carry) then tail length should be considered - no? If it is acceptable to change the look of a species, then surely it is responsible to do so in a way that articifial health intervention is kept to a bare minimum rather than to get a rough idea of what's needed then intervening surgically to do the rest

Sorry, just had to post and I'm chuckling, but perhaps we ought to breed dogs without bo**ocks then??

I agree with that, and as you say life moves on, and we are becoming more accustomed to seeing traditionally docked breed in the ring with full tails,

My own breed for instance, there seems to be no shortage of puppies coming through, although across the board, entries are down due to recession.

I am very much pro docking, for all traditional;y docked breeds, always will be, that does not mean, I cant except the future.

I have no problem with your (not personal) opinion on docking, we all have an opinion... but regarding this thread topic, I cant see the logic to it.

Fit for function... a working /show dog epitomise that phrase.

Yet said dogs are beign penalized for the show ring ( at some shows) for a very stupid reason.

For fear of upsetting some members of the public due to seeing docked tails.

That's the crux of this argument, you can make a full champion up, yet cant show him at Crufts, yet another docked dog, could win Crufts!

Arguably one that is not as "fit for function" as the legally docked dog.

Isn't that the point? We can't so we get out the knife. The health benefits of castrating dogs is minimal. Behaviourally, there are more advatages for modern dog ownership which, coupled with the overpopulation issue, is why it is so popular.

Bitches are another issue (in my opinion) as health implications of leaving them intact provide a stronger argument for neutering

However, this strays a long way from the tail-docking issue which does nothing, either behaviourally or health-wise, for the greater good of the dog unless the owner CHOOSES to put the dog in a position that puts it's limb at risk

Your point is in the fact the animals have been bred that way.......I cannot see the similarity.

If dogs had been bred with shorter tails to do the same the argument would stand.