|
|
Location: UK
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,096
|
29-11-2010, 04:29 PM
Originally Posted by Borderdawn 
Whats your point here? Are you saying naturally bobbed breeds cannot "communicate?" Seriously?
I'm saying they can't communicate to the same precise extent as they could otherwise. The conformation of many breeds compromises communication e.g. heavy ears that cannot easily redirect the angle and height of the pinnae, long soft coats that don't reveal piloerection, heavily wrinkled brows and overly loose or wrinkled skin that influences facial and eye expression, etc.
Because some dogs are naturally disadvantaged this way is not a good reason, imo, to artificially disadvantage others.
Dogs do not fall over with docked tails but it you watch a full-tailed sighthound going round a sharp turn watch how they use and rotate their tails to help counter balance, much like a hunting cheetah, - it doesn't mean they can't do it without, it just means they can't do it quite as well.
Id have thought that obvious, being much thicker coated with fur and feathering, its less likely to get damaged, same applies to many Springers, they have a 1/3 removed only.
Long haired Weims have fine, silky feathering, not thick fur, compared to the normal coats, that means the feathering is more vulnerable to catching, entangling and thus getting the tail torn in undergrowth, than a short smooth coat.
It isn't the smooth coated dogs than get bracken, burrs, grass seeds, twigs etc caught up in their coats, or who get caught up in thick undergrowth.
My point is docking is frequently done for fashion/aethetics or tradition rather than genuinely to prevent damage, or other breeds would also be docked.
So you just hijacked some more?
- sometimes it can't be helped, or maybe sometimes the temptation is just too strong 
|
|
|
Location: UK
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,096
|
29-11-2010, 04:45 PM
Originally Posted by Brierley
Sorry, but there are plenty of dogs with docked tails that do suffer after effects and pain from docking. There are also plenty of dogs that can't cope with the dock and further mutilate themselves by biting at the stump - seen it enough times
At a few days of age the nerves are not yet fully myelinated. That doesn't mean the puppy cannot feel pain, it means the message travels to the brain more slowly and so there may not be an instant pain response.
There is also a view that docking can further pre dispose some bitches to a greater likelihood of post spay incontinence than otherwise, particularly if spayed prior to the first season.
I would think maybe the charging/docking issue to to prevent the practise being promoted to the public.
As far as the public buying docked puppies, you would be astonished as how many pet owners genuinely do not realise their puppy was not born with a tail that short (particularly if it is a relatively long dock), as they are unaccustomed to seeing e.g undocked terriers - their puppy came with the tail length they were expecting, which they assumed to be the natural length.
|
|
|
|
Location: Lincolnshire
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 8,969
|
29-11-2010, 05:03 PM
Originally Posted by Jackbox
Your saying a 3 day old pup suffers after effects from a dock, and a dog suffers psychologically from not having a full tail.
How do you know that a dog that bites at his "stump" is doing so because he does not have a full tail.
What about the dog that "bite" and "mutilates" its full tail,
Is he doing so for a different reason! or are you humanising said dog to what you want to fit your theory.
How do you know that he doesn't?
. I've seen so many docked dogs do this that I believe docking to be a major contributionary cause. By comparison, I've only seen a couple of dogs (during many years of working with dogs) who mutilate a full tale and both have been due to medical reasons. In effect, I'm saying both are due to the same cause, medical. One disease or disfunction, the other pain/discomfort/irritation or remembered pain/discomfort/irritation.No humanising at all. Just experience gained while working with dogs
|
|
|
Location: UK
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,122
|
29-11-2010, 05:11 PM
Originally Posted by Brierley
How do you know that he doesn't?
. I've seen so many docked dogs do this that I believe docking to be a major contributionary cause. By comparison, I've only seen a couple of dogs (during many years of working with dogs) who mutilate a full tale and both have been due to medical reasons. In effect, I'm saying both are due to the same cause, medical. One disease or disfunction, the other pain/discomfort/irritation or remembered pain/discomfort/irritation.No humanising at all. Just experience gained while working with dogs
Experience, and interpretation, gained by being around docked and undocked dogs!
|
|
|
|
Location: UK
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,122
|
29-11-2010, 05:17 PM
Originally Posted by Tass
A vet I know used to have to do docking when he was employed and his employers demanded it. He was good at it, to the point that the breeders would specifically ask for him, however, once he started working for himself he refused to do any further docking, due to the distress of some of the puppies. By contrast he said dew claw removal, at that age, did not evidence pain.At a few days of age the nerves are not yet fully myelinated. That doesn't mean the puppy cannot feel pain, it means the message travels to the brain more slowly and so there may not be an instant pain response.
There is also a view that docking can further pre dispose some bitches to a greater likelihood of post spay incontinence than otherwise, particularly if spayed prior to the first season.
I would think maybe the charging/docking issue to to prevent the practise being promoted to the public.
As far as the public buying docked puppies, you would be astonished as how many pet owners genuinely do not realise their puppy was not born with a tail that short (particularly if it is a relatively long dock), as they are unaccustomed to seeing e.g undocked terriers - their puppy came with the tail length they were expecting, which they assumed to be the natural length.
I always thought it was accepted that the removal of dew claws is extremely painful for a 3day old puppy, evidence backed up by many a breeder friend and a good friend( vet) who docks, and removes dew claws... he always said that dew claw removal was far more traumatic to a puppy. than tail removal
|
|
|
|
Location: UK
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,096
|
29-11-2010, 06:12 PM
Originally Posted by Jackbox
I think you may have that the wrong way round
I always thought it was accepted that the removal of dew claws is extremely painful for a 3day old puppy, evidence backed up by many a breeder friend and a good friend( vet) who docks, and removes dew claws... he always said that dew claw removal was far more traumatic to a puppy. than tail removal
Maybe he meant rear dew claws though?
Those are often less developed that fronts, but front or back, either have much less bone that the tail at that age.
I shall have to clarify that with him, next time I see him. Although I can see why anyone supporting docking, vet or breeder, would put it that way, to justify the tails when the (according to them more painful) dew claws aren't banned.
|
|
|
Location: Co. Durham, UK
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 11,213
|
29-11-2010, 06:48 PM
Originally Posted by rune
In think it is because there is a strong possibility people will lie about it (gasp---never!) and carry on docking dogs that are just for showing.
rune
Originally Posted by rune
About the fact that the dogs work.
Maybe some do but if you allow them to show you will get people who just show people cutting tails off "because they like the way the dog looks without it"
rune
Originally Posted by lozzibear
I did read the link
thank you for telling me whether i had or not, i can figure that much out for myself My point is, the link refers to working dogs as being 'fit for function' with docked tails and therefore should be allowed to show... but how can a dog be 'fit for function' if the tails have to be docked to enable them to work... At least dogs in shows with full tails show how the dogs are meant to look...
Originally Posted by Tass
As have you with the equally off topic points you have contributed
- sometimes it can't be helped, or maybe sometimes the temptation is just too strong
|
|
|
Location: North Lanarkshire, Scotland
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 883
|
29-11-2010, 07:14 PM
Originally Posted by Tass
As far as the public buying docked puppies, you would be astonished as how many pet owners genuinely do not realise their puppy was not born with a tail that short (particularly if it is a relatively long dock), as they are unaccustomed to seeing e.g undocked terriers - their puppy came with the tail length they were expecting, which they assumed to be the natural length.
|
|
|
|
Location: uk
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 18,552
|
29-11-2010, 07:40 PM
Originally Posted by Tass
As have you with the equally off topic points you have contributed
- sometimes it can't be helped, or maybe sometimes the temptation is just too strong
|
|
|
|
Location: cornwall uk
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,132
|
29-11-2010, 08:01 PM
Originally Posted by Ripsnorterthe2nd
Why would anyone want to do that? Those that don't work their dogs are quite happy for them to keep their tails as people have become used to it now. To say that people would lie to dock a gundog that doesn't work is clutching at straws to say the least.
Some? Every docked HPR I've come across has been seen out working. As much as it pains you, it's impossible to deny that these dogs are docked for good reason and well within the law.
You're very welcome. Now then, lets hear your on topic opinion.....
Oh sometimes it can't be helped, conversations develop, but coming straight into a thread with an off topic reply when you've admitted you know it's off topic is very bad etiquette. There are plenty of threads on the ethics and morals of docking - go and haunt those and leave this one to those of us who are actually interested.
You justy as obviously can't understand that.
I have no reason to grasp at straws---I am happy with the law as it stands---I could be happier but I have learnt that you can't always have what you want in a democracy.
As I have said I happen to be one of the people who could well be affected adversly by the law---but I won't argue it, I'll support it.
rune
|
|