register for free
View our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Abbey
Dogsey Senior
Abbey is offline  
Location: Scotland
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 408
Female 
 
14-03-2011, 10:19 PM
I guess i maybe see things in a different way because of what I see and have seen over the past 18y. Once a tail has been damaged it is often very difficult to heal. I can think of dogs that have one amputation then end up having another when the original wound. I think of the many tails I have seen, the smell that comes from a wound that won't heal etc.

We personally had an undocked dog in the past who had a tail injury, he suffered so much as despite initial treatment we had to have 1/3 amputated...the wound took months to heal and he was so miserable and in pain, despite constant pain relief. His tail problems were with him throughout his (sadly) short life and given the option, I would have much preferred he had been docked at 3 days old.

Few subjects are quite as emotive as tail docking, all I can say is that through professional and personal experience, I would dock working HPRs.
Reply With Quote
Hali
Dogsey Veteran
Hali is offline  
Location: Scottish Borders
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 13,902
Female 
 
15-03-2011, 08:13 AM
Originally Posted by aerolor View Post
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.
I didn't know the answer - I don't know any working munsterlanders.

However, I've done a quick search and came across this petition from the Scottish KC which is quite interesting. It sets out th type of work each breed does and whether or not they are likely to suffer tail injury.

It also shows that in other countries where a docking ban was in place, tail injuries in working dogs increased significantly.

http://scottishparliament.cc/s3/comm...08-PE1196F.pdf

I do kind of agree with you that the coat seems ulikely to make the difference (as is suggested in the petition) but perhaps the real reason is that Munsterlanders are not so heavily worked in cover and haven't suffered the damage that springers/cockers do.

To me the the fact that not all gun dogs are docked shows some thought about why it is being done - i.e. it is not for the look of it, but for practical working reasons.
Reply With Quote
aerolor
Almost a Veteran
aerolor is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,114
Female 
 
15-03-2011, 10:46 AM
Thank you for your reply Hali. I agree that there must have originally been some thought put into the reasons why docking is necessary for some gundog breeds and not others, but I wonder if part of the rationale used is also founded in tradition, as I think it was for many of the non gundog breeds. I supose the debate will go on and on and opinions will be divided.
Reply With Quote
smokeybear
Dogsey Veteran
smokeybear is offline  
Location: Wiltshire UK
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 14,404
Female 
 
15-03-2011, 11:42 AM
Because Large Munsterlanders have HAIR on their tails, unlike GSP, GWP, HV HWHV, IS, Weimaraners, BI etc.

GLPs and Longhaired Weimaraners are also HPRs and like Large Munsterlanders have hair on their tails and like LMs are not docked!
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 16 of 16 « First < 6 13 14 15 16


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


© Copyright 2016, Dogsey   Contact Us - Dogsey - Top Contact us | Archive | Privacy | Terms of use | Top