# What is the penchant for lopping off dog parts??



## snoozy (May 10, 2002)

I'm windowshopping on craigslist for dogs, and for a number of breeds, people advertize tails being docked and dewclaws removed. If I were interested in Dobermans, they'd mention having hacked off their ears.

If dogs have dewclaws, aren't they meant to be there??
If a dog is born with a tail, isn't it supposed to have one??
If its ears are a certain way, aren't they designed to be that way??


----------



## farmmom (Jan 4, 2009)

Some of this was started to protect hunting dogs from animals grabbing them by ears and tails and from ripping off dewclaws running through tall grass. I do prefer dewclaws to be removed, especially the really loose ones, but like ears and tails. At the same time, I think they are beautiful if docked/cropped correctly. I have helped do many while working in vets' offices.


----------



## akane (Jul 19, 2011)

There are some breeds that the body parts have been bred to have problems. Dew claws catching in certain hunting breed lines is a major problem and a much bigger health issue later than removing them as puppies. While it would be more ideal to breed the problem out and make tighter dew claws for now it does have a purpose. Originally standing ears up and tail docking was to prevent health problems (ear infections, caught tails, etc... I've seen a stripped tail on a cart dog.) as well but it's nearly completely lost it's purpose. There is not enough population where these things are a risk and better care is available so I really do think those 2 should be banned like it is in some countries.


----------



## TedH71 (Jan 19, 2003)

Originally in England, bobtailed dogs were taxed at a lower rate than fully tailed ones so that's how it happened in the first place.


----------



## JasoninMN (Feb 24, 2006)

snoozy said:


> I'm windowshopping on craigslist for dogs, and for a number of breeds, people advertize tails being docked and dewclaws removed. If I were interested in Dobermans, they'd mention having hacked off their ears.
> 
> If dogs have dewclaws, aren't they meant to be there??
> If a dog is born with a tail, isn't it supposed to have one??
> If its ears are a certain way, aren't they designed to be that way??


Yup they are supposed to be there, but every notice how many dogs are neutered and spayed on craigslist too? Their uterus and testicles are meant to be there also. I guess that raises the question is it wrong to cosmetically alter a dog for appearance, but okay to remove other body parts for convenience of the owner so they can be careless and not worry about accidental litters?


----------



## wendle (Feb 22, 2006)

I've had performance dogs(working border collies) for 15 years and have yet to see issues with the tail, ears, or dewclaws. They don't have the loose back dewclaws, but my lgds do, and they don't seem to have trouble, except they need trimming more as they have no way to wear down. A friend of mine docks her cattle dog tails because they work with tails up and occasionally catch hot or barbed wire. Not sure if that is a breed trait, or just her dogs though. The tail docking and dew claw removal when done very young doesn't seem like a big deal. I don't do it myself though.


----------



## JPiantedosi (Apr 23, 2012)

I have mentioned before that I raise bird dogs. German Shorthairs, and English Pointers to be exact.

As far as the tails go, docking tails is an ongoing debate, but since a 40% length tail is in the US standard for GSP it is what most people do, and I assume breed standards prompt most tail docking. In Europe it is illegal. One practical purpose for docking tails is that in thick cover my pointers (full tail) will beat the end of their tails to a bloody pulp. It doesn't seepm to bother the dog any but it is a wound that doesn't heal well and can become infected if not properly cared for.

Dew claws in working/sporting dogs can become a real headach. the dew claw originally acted as a "thumb" and much like horses, as dogs evolved the dew claw moved up the arm and really serves no purpose. Though I have seen dogs rip/break a dew claw in thick cover or on underwater obstructions and it is a lengthy, expensive, and painful process to have them removed at that point.I have dogs with dew claws and dogs with out dew claws. If they aren't removed at 2-3 days old then they are better left intact.

Many people alter their dogs because that is what the buyer expects. They are after all trying to market a product.


Jim


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2002)

snoozy said:


> If dogs have dewclaws, aren't they meant to be there??
> If a dog is born with a tail, isn't it supposed to have one??
> If its ears are a certain way, aren't they designed to be that way??


Not always. Dogs have been bred for various traits since people started keeping dogs. Dewclaws can get torn or grow into the leg (admittedly that's neglect) so why keep it? The only ones I've seen were caught in bedding and furniture actually. In some breeds the tail has developed into a thin easily broken appendage that is better off than on. It just wasn't a priority to keep strong when striving for hunting ability (for example) . I can't think of any good reason to crop ears. Things do change though!


----------



## Ravenlost (Jul 20, 2004)

snoozy said:


> I'm windowshopping on craigslist for dogs, and for a number of breeds, people advertize tails being docked and dewclaws removed. If I were interested in Dobermans, they'd mention having hacked off their ears.
> 
> If dogs have dewclaws, aren't they meant to be there??
> If a dog is born with a tail, isn't it supposed to have one??
> If its ears are a certain way, aren't they designed to be that way??


Yes they are! However, I must admit that we once had the dewclaws removed from a dog. Our precious Brawn had double dewclaws on his back feet and, after tearing one almost off while outside playing, we decided to have them removed when he was neutered (totally different reasons for having THOSE parts removed). Vet was surprised...the dewclaws were not even attached to the foot as they should have been. Brawn didn't even act like the surgery caused any pain...he didn't seem to notice anything had happened to his feet. Of course, that might have been due to his noticing what had happened to another area of his body!

We were glad to have those removed as they posed a serious threat of injury to the dog. I would never take a dog in to have it's tail bobbed or ears clipped just for cosmetic reasons.


----------



## HOTW (Jul 3, 2007)

In some breeds the dews have become remnant parts thta no longer function and should be removed to prevent harm. In many breeds it has become the fashion to do so.In the UK docking and ear cropping are forbidden. I am very much considering not docking my Poodle puppy tails as I feel it not a neccesary thing but you have to deal first with people's ignorance of docking an deducate them.


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

I personally think dewclaws should be removed in most cases. I do have several dogs with them because they weren't done when they were young, but I think it is responsible to have them done if you have a litter.
As far as ears and tails. I say leave them alone unless there is a medical reason to have them altered.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

I have to admit, I love the look of a good ear crop (not a show crop) on Dobermans and Schnauzers... but unless I was showing, I don't think I'd have it done.

Tails I love. Dogs use them to communicate and they also make a great handle in a pinch. Try to find a Schnauzer or Dobe breeder that will leave the tails on their dogs in this country! But I do see the advantage to docking tails on certain breeds--I've seen dogs break the end of their tails and subsequently wag them into a mangled, bloody mess. It's a pretty awful injury and almost impossible to heal; it seems dogs don't have many nerve endings on the tip of the tail that tell them to take it easy. I'd rather see a tail docked at 3-5 days of age, than due to an injury at 18 months.


----------



## Jackie (Jun 20, 2008)

The vet I deal with is so sick of seeing dewclaws torn off that she now snips the floppy ones off for free when the dog is spayed or neutered. Some have a bone in there...you can feel it. And they are sturdy you don't cut off those ones, just the ones that are hanging on just by skin. When I was a kid my dog had one floppy one and one with the bone in. It was weird. I have a rescue puppy right now at a foster home. He just went in to the vet for a minor issue and the vet told them that he HAD to have them off. And this vet flat out refuses to crop ears, tails or declaw a cat. She would never do it to an animal for 'looks'. She really believes its necessary.


----------



## lexa (Mar 30, 2012)

As a groomer, I prefer dogs to have their dewclaws to be removed. They are usually not a problem for smooth coated dogs where they can be seen but for long coated dogs they are more of an issue. I have seen both smooth and long coated dogs with their dew claws grown into their pads. And even had to send couple dogs to the vet to have them trimmed and removed because of how deep they grown in. Dew claw genetics are very complex, wild canines have very small and tight fitting dew claws thant are attached to the leg by small joint with minimal pad and for them dew claws are not an issue. In most modern breeds dew claws are often loose with no joint and large pad and they are not usefull to the dog. By some reason, I have never seen a dog who had a small digit with attached dew claw with nail overgrown, loose ones all the time. Most owners of long coated dogs do not take proper care of them and dogs get matted, and hair gets matted around dew claws. When whose dogs get groomed dew claws are easily caught in the clippers and cut off. They are also easyly caught in debris, carpets, ets and ripped off. 
When it comes to tails and ears, I really do not see a need for it in modern world where most dogs spend their time on couches instead of hunting or fighting. Yes it looks pretty and dobermans that have their tails and ears don't look as mean, they look like black and tan ridgebacks with out the ridge. I love boxers that I see here in germany with their tails and ears. I would love to get one one day.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

lexa said:


> As a groomer, I prefer dogs to have their dewclaws to be removed. ... Most owners of long coated dogs do not take proper care of them and dogs get matted, and hair gets matted around dew claws.


Yep. I always suggest that owners of small fluffy dogs have the dewclaws removed when the dog is spayed/neutered. Just makes everything so much easier for everyone.



> I love boxers that I see here in germany with their tails and ears.


Me too--and I love to see a Rottweiler with a tail! Some time ago I read a Rott fancier's diatribe on why tails should remain docked, and it was the most ridiculous piece of disinformation I have ever read. She claimed that leaving the tails would change conformation and gait, and throw the dog off balance.  I wish people would just be honest and say "I like the way the breed looks with a docked tail" instead of making up phony reasons why tail docking should be done.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Wolf Flower said:


> Yep. I always suggest that owners of small fluffy dogs have the dewclaws removed when the dog is spayed/neutered. Just makes everything so much easier for everyone.
> 
> 
> 
> Me too--and I love to see a Rottweiler with a tail! Some time ago I read a Rott fancier's diatribe on why tails should remain docked, and it was the most ridiculous piece of disinformation I have ever read. She claimed that leaving the tails would change conformation and gait, and throw the dog off balance.  I wish people would just be honest and say "I like the way the breed looks with a docked tail" instead of making up phony reasons why tail docking should be done.


Yes, it would be much better if they just say that instead of making excuses.
Anyone who has been around true working dogs knows that they use the tail for balance. Docking the tail and ears is for cosmetic reasons only.


----------



## airotciv (Mar 6, 2005)

I will agree with removing the Dewclaws, they were used for fighting in the wild. They are not needed now. As for docking/cropping ears and tail, I see no reseon to do it. As a Great Dane owner, my Danes have floppy ears as they were ment to be. The history of doing this, is something that may have been good for the times. But most of our dogs are not working or shown, there a Pet. No need to dock/crop a tail or ears.


----------



## lexa (Mar 30, 2012)

Wolf Flower said:


> Yep. I always suggest that owners of small fluffy dogs have the dewclaws removed when the dog is spayed/neutered. Just makes everything so much easier for everyone.
> 
> 
> 
> Me too--and I love to see a Rottweiler with a tail! Some time ago I read a Rott fancier's diatribe on why tails should remain docked, and it was the most ridiculous piece of disinformation I have ever read. She claimed that leaving the tails would change conformation and gait, and throw the dog off balance.  I wish people would just be honest and say "I like the way the breed looks with a docked tail" instead of making up phony reasons why tail docking should be done.


I have had a similar discussion with poodle breeders and there is truth t their words. If tomorrow tail docking was banned in USA. Half or more of top show dog progeny would not be able to be shown because of their tail set. Most dogs shown in AKC are breed to retain flashy, exederated looks, in a lot of breeds dogs are overangulated. Tail set is directly related to dogs rear angulation and gate. 
In breeds where tails were not docked there were little selection for anything other than set of the tale. Dogs with desirable high tail set (also happed to have flashy angles) what have full tails often have gay tails (lay close to back) or even spirals. If left with long tails whose dogs would not look good at all. We have a neighbor here with Aerdale who has a tight curly tail hanging to one side like on shiba. It looks funny and at least visually it makes look like his gate is off. 
It would take many generations to set in correct tails into population, but it also would change dogs rear angulation to less severe to acommodate new shape. I think that is what th0se people are afraid. When they talk about balance they talk about relation of all parts and looking balanced, not actual ability of dogs to walk straight.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

lexa said:


> In breeds where tails were not docked there were little selection for anything other than set of the tale. Dogs with desirable high tail set (also happed to have flashy angles) what have full tails often have gay tails (lay close to back) or even spirals. If left with long tails whose dogs would not look good at all. We have a neighbor here with Aerdale who has a tight curly tail hanging to one side like on shiba. It looks funny and at least visually it makes look like his gate is off.
> It would take many generations to set in correct tails into population, but it also would change dogs rear angulation to less severe to acommodate new shape. I think that is what th0se people are afraid. When they talk about balance they talk about relation of all parts and looking balanced, not actual ability of dogs to walk straight.


That may be true. But docking tails only hides "incorrect" tail set. Were docking to be banned, I am sure many people would be upset because their dog's tail set is suddenly "faulty". I would hope that judges would grant some leniency for the first few generations, while breeders work on correct tails, because it obviously isn't going to happen overnight.


----------



## BarbadosSheep (Jun 27, 2011)

In their native countries, most working livestock guardian dogs have ears cropped almost completely off. It is for a good reason though. Ears are painful when ripped and are very slow to heal. These working dogs get into serious fights with predators, usually wolves. So ear crops prevent damaging painful injures. While we don't usually crop ears of these breeds in this country, some of these breeds do still get total ear crops when they are a day old. It's done for the same reason...to prevent injury but also it's just customary for those breeds so it's done. I personally don't like the way a total ear crop looks but I understand the reasoning behind it.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

I would imagine ear damage done by a predator would be much like ear damage done by another dog.
At one time some people thought if you cropped the ears of a dog it was a fighting dog.
It is really just the opposite.
Ear damage is not that painful. That should be easy to understand as they cut them off. One thing people should remember. Would you rather have a predator or another dog grab your dog by the ear or some other important part? Myself, I would much rather have them grab my dog by the ear.


----------



## TedH71 (Jan 19, 2003)

Poodles can have nice tails. Mother used to have one that did. I suspect they're out there but most people don't want to take the hassle that it takes to have a good tail.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

A lot of the poodles have really bad tail docks. Even the vets around here dock them at the 1st or 2nd bone like a Rott. It's impossible for a groomer to do a proper poodle tail on them. When I helped a friend dock show poodle tails, I believe it was only the last 1/3 that is supposed to be taken off. I have seen some undocked poodle tails groomed so that you can barely tell it wasn't docked once they grow into a full show coat.


----------



## HOTW (Jul 3, 2007)

My male's breeder measureed th etail in 3 different ways before she would mark the tail where she wanted the vet to cut itand she insisted on standing beside the vet as he did th etails! I have had people tell me my guys tail is too lonf but with a long tial you can allow the "top" of the tail poof to b ejust aboce the tip of th etail and get a greta pompom everytime. My bt=itches tail is a little shorter but acceptable. Both carry thei tails at a nice angle, she has a little more curvature towards the front but nothing liek I have seen on show dogs in the ring!


----------



## Oregon Julie (Nov 9, 2006)

I have been watching this thread with interest. I stopped docking my Parson Russell Terriers about 6 years ago. I was sending dogs to Finland and it is illegal to dock there. While a person can import a docked dog, they cannot compete with them and since that was an important part of getting a dog from elsewhere I decided to make it easy on everyone and just stop taking tails off. I stopped removing dew claws a couple of years later, unless they are rear dewclaws which are often as not floppy in my breed.

A couple of things have come up in this thread that I want to address, one is the business of measuring how much to remove on a tail. I have used a 50 pence coin from England for years to measure, they are slightly larger then a quarter. I place it against the pups butt, under the tail, and measure out from there. In some cases this is 1/4 of the tail that comes off, in other cases 1/2 comes off and everything in between. You can dock a litter of 6 pups this way and lay the tails out in a row at the end and what has been removed can vary in a huge way. So when I see people saying "you take X amount off" I shudder. This is one of the ways you get tails too short and too long. Each pup has a different length therefore you need to measure what is left ON the dog, not what you take off.

The other thing is quality of tails. Someone said something about "if they banned docking now it would take a couple of generations for breeders to breed a good tail" and this is very true. In my breed some of the docked dogs have less then stellar tails and it makes sense that these would be really ugly as natural tails. However what has blown me away is that I have bred two docked dogs with very straight tails to each other and gotten entire litters of pups with lovely conformation and tails that want to at the very least be very curved or worse wheel tails that want to lay to one side of the dogs back like a Basenji.

I am fairly certain that in the end the radical AR people will have their way and docking and ear cropping will be banned in this country so I am glad I have made the move towards breeding a good Parson who also has a good natural tail. BTW my first experience with natural tails was with a dog that we imported from Finland about 11 years ago. He was the first obviously natural tailed dog in the breed to earn an AKC championship and it was really tough going to get there. He is a nice dog, but boy did the judges have a problem with the tail and made that very clear. He was put to the back of the class a number of times behind some REALLY bad dogs and that was frustrating to say the least, but I got him finished and was proud to have done so. 

A photo of our Finnish boy Capu: Am Ch Tupla-Taplan Captain Cook


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

I vote for dew claws off too- I had one girl that had to have her leg bandaged at least once or twice a year because she tore the dewclaw. Bloody, painful messes for her. She was a smaller medium terrier.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

I just had a purebred Golden Retriever with a docked tail walk out of my shop 5 mins ago. I must say, that is a first. The owner said it had a bad cyst on the tail and the vet couldn't repair it properly due to lack of skin for wound closure.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Oregon Julie said:


> I am fairly certain that in the end the radical AR people will have their way and docking and ear cropping will be banned in this country so I am glad I have made the move towards breeding a good Parson who also has a good natural tail.


You are wise to do so, and I wish more breeders would start breeding for good natural tails NOW, before they are forced to. It's really in their own best interest; when docking is banned, they will be miles ahead of the competition!



> He is a nice dog, but boy did the judges have a problem with the tail and made that very clear. He was put to the back of the class a number of times behind some REALLY bad dogs and that was frustrating to say the least, but I got him finished and was proud to have done so.
> 
> A photo of our Finnish boy Capu: Am Ch Tupla-Taplan Captain Cook


He is a lovely dog with a lovely tail! Did it curl at all, or did he hold it straight as positioned by the handler?


----------



## Oregon Julie (Nov 9, 2006)

Wolf Flower said:


> He is a lovely dog with a lovely tail! Did it curl at all, or did he hold it straight as positioned by the handler?


Thanks, I agree he is a lovely boy and a real sweetheart to boot!

It was carried nicely when he was slightly uncertain in the show ring, like when being handled by a friend and not me-his doggie mommy who he LOVES oh so very much. When I handled him he was trot along with the tip of the tail dang near touching his back. I normally owner handle all my own dogs, but in this case it was best to hand him off to a friend most of the time. My friend was handling him at that show and he has back to back 4 pt majors, one under a terrier specialist judge so we were very pleased. 

The ironic thing about showing him was that the judge who gave him his last needed points to finish his championship told me that I should get his tail docked if I wanted to keep showing him and doing any winning. I informed her that I had promised the breeder that I would not dock him after the fact (which actually I had not, but came to the decision to leave him natural on my own) and that this win had finished him so no need to dock. But I was appalled that she would suggest that I dock a 2 year old dog for the sake of a ribbon and some points.


----------



## lexa (Mar 30, 2012)

Oregon Julie said:


> I am fairly certain that in the end the radical AR people will have their way and docking and ear cropping will be banned in this country
> [/url]


I wish so too. And I wish that it is what they will stop at it too. 
You boy is so lovely! And boy does he have a tail!
What blows my mind is the fact that fact that dogs tail been docked can place the dog with poor conformation over the one with perfect one and full tail. I know that docked tails are part of breed standard, but I think that it should be the last thing to be judged on since it is cosmetic surgical alteration of the dog, which AKC in theory prohibits. I think the tide will slowly change as more and more younger people will enter show scene and as need to bring new blood from overseas will increase. They had to change things in cocker standard about tails, because there are some awsome dogs overseas that were not showable here because of their full tails. Now it is just a fault, so if a dog is superb, it still has a chance to place. 

And on account of poodle tails, I have no idea what is wrong with vets. my vet shows chessies. Her dog often goes into group ans best in show classes, so she must have seen what poodle tails look like, never the less friend of mine had a standard poodle ***** that needed a c-section and she gave her consent to have pups docked and dew claws removed. She came back to pick up a litter of pups with rotti docks! I would prefer full or longish tail over bunny puff any time even on pet dogs.


----------



## lexa (Mar 30, 2012)

Oregon Julie said:


> I am fairly certain that in the end the radical AR people will have their way and docking and ear cropping will be banned in this country
> [/url]


I wish so too. And I wish that it is what they will stop at it too. 
You boy is so lovely! And boy does he have a tail!
What blows my mind is the fact that fact that dogs tail been docked can place the dog with poor conformation over the one with perfect one and full tail. I know that docked tails are part of breed standard, but I think that it should be the last thing to be judged on since it is cosmetic surgical alteration of the dog, which AKC in theory prohibits. I think the tide will slowly change as more and more younger people will enter show scene and as need to bring new blood from overseas will increase. They had to change things in cocker standard about tails, because there are some awsome dogs overseas that were not showable here because of their full tails. Now it is just a fault, so if a dog is superb, it still has a chance to place. 

And on account of poodle tails, I have no idea what is wrong with vets. my vet shows chessies. Her dog often goes into group ans best in show classes, so she must have seen what poodle tails look like, never the less friend of mine had a standard poodle ***** that needed a c-section and she gave her consent to have pups docked and dew claws removed. She came back to pick up a litter of pups with rotti docks! I would prefer full or longish tail over bunny puff any time even on pet dogs.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

lexa said:


> And on account of poodle tails, I have no idea what is wrong with vets. my vet shows chessies. Her dog often goes into group ans best in show classes, so she must have seen what poodle tails look like, never the less friend of mine had a standard poodle ***** that needed a c-section and she gave her consent to have pups docked and dew claws removed. She came back to pick up a litter of pups with rotti docks! I would prefer full or longish tail over bunny puff any time even on pet dogs.


It drives me crazy that vets dock poodles so short--sometimes it's a mere nubbin that I can't even get hold of--same with cockers! Why oh why can't they look at the breed standard, or even a picture of a properly docked tail, I will never be able to fathom.

I guess I have to lay part of the blame on BYB's, who really don't know or care how the tails are supposed to look.


----------



## lexa (Mar 30, 2012)

Well, friend of mine is a BYB but she cares obout her dogs and how they look even though she breeds t make money. The vet who docked her pups tails is show going vet who should know better.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

originally tails were docked for prophylactic health reasons. even today some dogs get life threatening infections from "happy tail." among the preventative reasons was to reduce the opportunity for other animals but especially people from geting a hand hold. in fact german sheperd dogs used for herding domestic hogs had their tails docked as recently as the 1950s. keeping in mind how dirty hogs & some other animals can be & the lack of modern medicines AND the fact that a tail allows almost instant access to the central nervous system for an infection, prophylactic removal made sense.
cropped ears have a marginally lower incidence of ear infection (1 percentage point at most), but again before modern medicine the difference mattered for some people. additionally for guardian type dogs it gave them a fierce appearance that increased their deterent effect.
i think it should be up to the owner to decide. taking the time outlaw it & enforce just means we as a society have too much time & no desire to tackle more serious issues.


----------



## akane (Jul 19, 2011)

If the shows judged both equally then people could decide for themselves. The only way to get the shows even and therefore get breeders to stop having to do it in order to sell their puppies since they don't know who's going to show is to ban it. The show crowd is what's really holding everything up since it's required in order to do well and then it gets passed to the pet crowd from there as just being normal.


----------



## snoozy (May 10, 2002)

Isn't the tail the extension of the spine? So why would it be an improvement to a being's balance to have their spine cropped??

As for breeders "being able" to breed good tails, why do they imagine that what they do to an animal's body after it is born would have an effect on its DNA?


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

snoozy said:


> Isn't the tail the extension of the spine? So why would it be an improvement to a being's balance to have their spine cropped??


ears are cropped. tails are docked.
yes tails are part of the spine & if a dog gets an infection because of happy tail or a bite, the infection has near instant access to the rest of the spine & the brain. so dogs in jobs or of a nature to sustain repeated injury were docked to protect them from the risk. 
docking the tail only hurts balance if done after the dog is an adult & then the effect is temporary. sighthounds need them because of the extreme speeds they reach, but for other types of dogs the presence or absence of a tail is generally irrelevant to basic life functions.
some of the best cowdogs in the world are blackmouth curs, they are born w/ tails ranging from a nubbin to full length. there isn't a hairs difference in performance & they don't have any problems communicating their intentions w/ people or other dogs.
the whole argument is a lot of nonsense on both sides.


----------



## snoozy (May 10, 2002)

Well, but they are born that way, not maimed that way.


----------



## Oregon Julie (Nov 9, 2006)

snoozy said:


> As for breeders "being able" to breed good tails, why do they imagine that what they do to an animal's body after it is born would have an effect on its DNA?


I don't think any breeder thinks that what they do to an animals body has an effect on it's DNA, but it can sure cover up a lot. You can show a dog with a docked tail that has a bit of a curve to it (in a breed where it is intended per the breed standard to be straight) but if that tail is natural there is no hiding the wheel tail or saber tail that the dog has. So breeding when I say I am working on breeding a better tail it is breeding a better natural tail, one that fits the standard for my breed. 

Pops2 I agree that it should be up to the owner to decide. I have nothing against docking dogs. I still do it for friends when asked. I just decided to stop doing my own because of the difficulty in picking a pup to go abroad at 3-5 days of age when I docked and then crossing my fingers that it was the right dog to send. I truly think that the radical AR will win and we will not have the legal right to dock or crop. If I had a breed that was traditionally cropped I would be doing my best to breed for "good ears" ahead of that ban.


----------



## GrannyCarol (Mar 23, 2005)

I'm wondering what the penchant is for telling everyone what they can do with their dog. Properly done, docking a dog's tail, or removing dew claws rarely causes more than a moment's "ouch" on the three day old puppy. 

I'm not as familiar with cropping ears, never had a dog that would be a candidate for it, but it really is up to the owner whether or not to do so. 

Everyone seems to want me to remove my dog's uterus and ovaries or testicles... That ought to be my business as well.


----------



## amylou62 (Jul 14, 2008)

GrannyCarol said:


> I'm wondering what the penchant is for telling everyone what they can do with their dog. Properly done, docking a dog's tail, or removing dew claws rarely causes more than a moment's "ouch" on the three day old puppy.
> 
> I'm not as familiar with cropping ears, never had a dog that would be a candidate for it, but it really is up to the owner whether or not to do so.
> 
> Everyone seems to want me to remove my dog's uterus and ovaries or testicles... That ought to be my business as well.


I agree. 

If I wanted my Doberman to look like a coonhound that's what I would have gotten. Don't tell me what I can and can't do with my dogs. MYOB


----------



## JasoninMN (Feb 24, 2006)

GrannyCarol said:


> Everyone seems to want me to remove my dog's uterus and ovaries or testicles... That ought to be my business as well.


Its funny how a practice that has no long term health effects is so readily criticized. Yet everyday operations that do affect a dogs health in the long run isn't questioned. Its is a proven fact that is some breeds spaying/neutering is a sentence to cancer and other problems later on. As I said earlier, the convenience of spaying and neutering makes it widely accepted as okay and that out weighs the health risks in the long run I guess. The anti dock and crop crowd should be anti spay and neuter as well if the dogs health and well being is really their argument.


----------



## ForMyACDs (May 13, 2002)

We had three dogs come in to the clinic this week with torn dewclaws. One was a floppy hind dew claw, but the other two had tight front dews that were torn and for one of those dogs this is the second time it has happened. I would much rather remove dews at 3 days old in a nearly painless procedure (the bones are soft and not fully attached at that point) than remove them later in life when it's a major surgery to amputate what is essentially an attached toe. 

I choose to be involved with a breed that doesn't require docking or ear shaping......that's just a choice I've made.


----------



## lasergrl (Nov 24, 2007)

I see way way way more dogs tearing non dewclaw nails then dewclaws. Its a simple matter of keeping their nails trimmed really.
I see no point in removing dewclaws on puppies, but thats every breeders choice. I do love a cropped doberman though, and without those ears true they just look like a skinny **** hound.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

snoozy said:


> Well, but they are born that way, not maimed that way.


it doesn't change the fact that for MOST dogs & the lives they live the tails is an utterly unnecessary appendage for function or communication. the removal of it in no way damages their health, performance or quality of life (in some cases it actually improves QOL). further vetrinary science has determined the procedure causes little to no immediate pain & absolutely no long term pain. 
OTH maiming, by definition is an injury that permanently affects function & quality of life, which docking, cropping & dewclaw removal DO NOT. ALL the PETAphile arguments against the procedures are anthropomorphic emotional appeals w/ no basis in medical or scientific fact.

here's my philosophy.
you (general not a particular person) do what you think is BEST for YOUR animals & i'll do what i think is best for MINE. if i ask your opinion give me your frank opinion. if i don't ask STFU & MYOB.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

GrannyCarol said:


> Everyone seems to want me to remove my dog's uterus and ovaries or testicles... That ought to be my business as well.


Uterus and testicles can affect society at large--that is, by producing unwanted litters. I don't give a frog's fat patootie whether people spay/neuter or not--IF they can keep unwanted/accidental breedings from occurring. 

Animal Control and city/county shelters, who bear the brunt of the unwanted pet population, don't come free. Who pays to fund these services? That's right. You, me, and the rest of the taxpayers. 

Don't want to bring a discussion about spay and neuter into this, really, just wanted to point out that some things can potentially be other people's business.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

Wolf Flower said:


> Uterus and testicles can affect society at large--that is, by producing unwanted litters. I don't give a frog's fat patootie whether people spay/neuter or not--IF they can keep unwanted/accidental breedings from occurring.
> 
> Animal Control and city/county shelters, who bear the brunt of the unwanted pet population, don't come free. Who pays to fund these services? That's right. You, me, and the rest of the taxpayers.
> 
> Don't want to bring a discussion about spay and neuter into this, really, just wanted to point out that some things can potentially be other people's business.


if there are so many accidents everywhere, then why are shelters & rescues in some parts of the country importing rescues from the southern USA? general pet over population is a myth perpetuated by the AR community. what over population there is is very localized. the only thing that does still seem to be true is the general irresponsibility of pet owners, but i consider that a side affect of the general irresponsibilty of society.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Pops2 said:


> general pet over population is a myth perpetuated by the AR community. what over population there is is very localized.


I suppose there may be localized areas where there is NOT an overpopulation problem, but everywhere that humans are concentrated, there is also a concentration of unwanted pets. It's not a myth--I've worked with shelters and rescues, and believe me, the number of animals that wind up in shelters is appalling.



> the only thing that does still seem to be true is the general irresponsibility of pet owners, but i consider that a side affect of the general irresponsibilty of society.


Exactly my point.


----------



## secuono (Sep 28, 2011)

Flopped ears get infections far more readily and the head shaking can cause blood blisters on the tips. I have a Dober with a docked tail, cropped ears and dewclaws removed. He's a very active dog and hostile when it comes to strangers. Far smarter for him to of been altered at birth than to be stressing him, drugging him and removing them once an issue develops. 
Dober tails are very long and thin, a broken tail is not something that can be fixed easily and best to just remove it before issues start. Sure some other breeds also have long tails, so this isn't something I approve of. I had no word in it when my dog's tail was docked. I did agree to ear cropping solely to help keep any infections at bay. 
Spay and neutering should be done on all pet dogs/cats. I see no use in show animals. Working animals have a cause and reason, rest is just fluff to keep people company or to make people money. 
Dew claws are remnants of the past, they are worthless to dogs these days. Some dogs don't get poorly developed claws and don't need to be removed. But some grow too large and stick away from the leg, these should be removed. The nail has little to nothing to do with it being torn out. That issue is a human ignorance/laziness thing. It's easy and safe to just remove the dewclaw, especially for certain breeds or working dogs. 
We have a Bulldog, flopped ears, constant non-stop issues since we got her a few months ago. She always has dirty ears, we clean them every 3 days. She's already had 2 ear infections as well. Our 3rd dog has natural upright ears, no issues at all. Her dewclaws are small and tight to her legs and actually help her with the odd things she does. If they were larger and loose, they would of been ripped long ago.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

dogs being in shelters does not automatically mean generalized overpopulation for that area. for example some shelters adopt over 95% of their dogs & only PTS for health & aggression. yet there are dogs in those shelters. it just means the right person hasn't come in yet. i've worked w/ several local humane societies & the numbers were no where near as appalling as the reasons.
most places that claim to have general over population really only have a problem w/ over population of a couple of breeds (bulls, labs & goldens). 
when a location is PTS a majority of their healthy dogs of all breeds despite good publicity, then they probably have an over population. but that is the exception not the norm.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Back when I was young there wasn't any animal shelters around.
There also wasn't that many stray animals.
There sure wasn't many spayed or neutered animals.

Now we have animal shelters in every city. They are always over crowded and needing money. It seems like animal shelters and pounds encourage stray animals.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

pancho said:


> Back when I was young there wasn't any animal shelters around.
> There also wasn't that many stray animals.
> There sure wasn't many spayed or neutered animals.


I imagine that back in those days, unwanted litters of puppies were drowned and unwanted adult dogs were shot.

Nowadays us bleeding-heart liberals can't bear to see pets drowned or shot, so we have animal control, shelters, and rescues.

I wish more people would take responsibility.


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2002)

Saw what looked like a PB white standard poodle with an undocked tail. It was curled so tightly back on its self at the end it looked painful. Tried to snap a picture but they were too fast for me fumbling with my phone in the rain. I have seen many Springers with undocked tails and while some are pretty good looking most had evidence of past or current breakage. I'm sure that sort of thing can be improved on with breeding but there will be some suffering generations getting there. I've seen lots of 3 day old pups after docking and dewclaws off and they settle back into nursing virtually instantly. I'm not sure its such a terrible thing either. Cropping ears doesn't improve a dogs looks to me, I prefer the light weight Rottie ears on a Dobe. JMO


----------



## SilverFlame819 (Aug 24, 2010)

I think Dobies with natural ears are sooooo cute. I hate watching them with long flippy whips smacking them in the head when they run! 

Some breeds just look so bizarre to me when they are left natural, but I think that's simply because I'm used to seeing it a certain way.

There was a Dobie not too long ago on a dog trail by my house that I did a total double-take at. It had natural ears AND tail. I barely recognized it as a Dobie! It had such a soft look. It looked like B&T Coonhound bred with something athletic and whippy... Like a whippet! It didn't install that "eek, attack dog" feeling of a cropped dog running straight at you, and it just looked... friendly and kind of playful. I asked the owner if it was a Doberman (still a bit unsure of what my brain was telling me), and he said - "Yep!" I was delighted! Apparently he gets that reaction a lot... People here in the US are NOT used to seeing a natural Dobie. He had an English accent. I don't know if he requested the puppy be left natural, or if he brought it with him from England, but it was definitely a sight to see!

What always makes me sad are the Pit Bull chopped off ears. If you aren't using that poor thing for dog fighting, don't chop its ears down to the skull!  Pits have adorable ears, there is NO reason for chopping them off! (And well, if you ARE using the dog for fighting and that's why you've chopped them off, then what I have to say just isn't allowable on this forum). 

I also have lived out in cattle country, where every single Heeler has its tail docked. The first time I ever saw a show Heeler (which, in itself, was funny to me... Breeding those high-energy, biting, barking things to prance around and look pretty on astroturf??) with a long tail, I just was a bit baffled. I thought it looked bizarre and unattractive and just WRONG... But now, here in the city, I see them all the time, and it looks normal and fine to me.

I think it's all in perception, and what we're used to.

Both of my Border Collies have natural bob tails. I get either horror from strangers ("WHY would you chop off a Border Collie's tail?!"), or disbelief, ("Are you SURE they're not Aussies??")... I like that they look different. It's the perfect opportunity to drive home that Border Collies are not SUPPOSED TO BE bred for looks, but for BRAINS and ABILITY... But on the other hand, it will be nice in the future to have some long-tailed BC's, so I can stop having the same conversation over and over with strangers...


----------



## lexa (Mar 30, 2012)

Pops2 said:


> if there are so many accidents everywhere, then why are shelters & rescues in some parts of the country importing rescues from the southern USA? general pet over population is a myth perpetuated by the AR community. what over population there is is very localized. the only thing that does still seem to be true is the general irresponsibility of pet owners, but i consider that a side affect of the general irresponsibilty of society.


Because states that import rescues from southern states have better programs that keep down ammount of unwanted pets. In NYC, for example, you will rarely see stray dogs. If there is one running around it gets reported and caught almost immediately. In Greater Columbia Area, SC people living in trailer parks keep packs of dogs that roam around. Richland and Lexington counties put down 19,000 dogs and cats a year! That is overpopulation!


----------



## lexa (Mar 30, 2012)

In Europe there are lines of boxers with natural bob tails, that can be shown, actually. 
It was started as an experiment by a breeder who breed boxers and corgies together and selected whose with bobbed tails. Within 5 generations he had show quality boxers with full pedegrees. So there are option but they require work in that direction.
GENETICS


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

SilverFlame819 said:


> What always makes me sad are the Pit Bull chopped off ears. If you aren't using that poor thing for dog fighting, don't chop its ears down to the skull!  Pits have adorable ears, there is NO reason for chopping them off! (And well, if you ARE using the dog for fighting and that's why you've chopped them off, then what I have to say just isn't allowable on this forum).


Take a good look at the Ch. fighting dogs. You will notice something. Just about every single one of them have natural ears and tails. There is no reason to cut the ears or tail on a fighting dog and several reasons not to.
The majority of pit bulls with cropped ears are show dogs or owned by people who know little about pit bulls.
You won't see any people who have actual fighting dogs cropping the ears.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

SilverFlame819 said:


> What always makes me sad are the Pit Bull chopped off ears. If you aren't using that poor thing for dog fighting, don't chop its ears down to the skull!  Pits have adorable ears, there is NO reason for chopping them off!


Agreed. That is one breed where the ears look better natural, IMO. Around here we get these creeps who lop off the entire ear flush to the skull, with a pair of scissors as far as I can tell. I groom one of these dogs--I didn't ask the owner if he did that to the dog or if he got her that way, because I didn't want to know (she also had sagging teats, of course, having borne litters--I didn't ask him about that either). :flame: But when a dog has absolutely no ear flap, it makes them hard to read, so easy to misinterpret. This Pittie girl is a bit shy and was growling when she first came in. Let me tell you, when a Pittie is staring at you growling and you can't tell what the ears are doing, it's a little unnerving. As it turned out, she was fine, but it took *me* a while to shake the vibe.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Wolf Flower said:


> Agreed. That is one breed where the ears look better natural, IMO. Around here we get these creeps who lop off the entire ear flush to the skull, with a pair of scissors as far as I can tell. I groom one of these dogs--I didn't ask the owner if he did that to the dog or if he got her that way, because I didn't want to know (she also had sagging teats, of course, having borne litters--I didn't ask him about that either). :flame: But when a dog has absolutely no ear flap, it makes them hard to read, so easy to misinterpret. This Pittie girl is a bit shy and was growling when she first came in. Let me tell you, when a Pittie is staring at you growling and you can't tell what the ears are doing, it's a little unnerving. As it turned out, she was fine, but it took *me* a while to shake the vibe.


Do not depend on the ears of a pit bull for any sign of their intentions.
Pit bulls are a little different than other breeds. Many will wag their tails and look happy because they know what they are going to do if given the chance.


----------



## ForMyACDs (May 13, 2002)

SilverFlame819 said:


> I also have lived out in cattle country, where every single Heeler has its tail docked. The first time I ever saw a show Heeler (which, in itself, was funny to me... Breeding those high-energy, biting, barking things to prance around and look pretty on astroturf??) with a long tail, I just was a bit baffled. I thought it looked bizarre and unattractive and just WRONG... But now, here in the city, I see them all the time, and it looks normal and fine to me.


Ah, but there is no such thing as a "show heeler". You mean show Australian Cattle Dogs? Not really the same thing......Heelers are usually of unknown parentage and many are mixed out with something else. They're basically the mutts of the ACD world. Many of them are weedy and of poor conformation with narrow, snipey heads that could never withstand the kick of a cow. Many of the dogs you see in the ACD show ring also work livestock......it's one of the few breeds that will show AND work.

ACDs aren't bad if properly socialized. They are however, a breed that needs to be raised by someone experienced with a hard-headed breed. Smarts + hardheadedness = a tough dog to raise, but one that is a JOY when raised right.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

pancho said:


> Do not depend on the ears of a pit bull for any sign of their intentions.
> Pit bulls are a little different than other breeds. Many will wag their tails and look happy because they know what they are going to do if given the chance.


Oh, I know that. I just worry when they're staring, growling, and slinking around with their tail between their legs. Usually ears can tell me when they're starting to relax.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

ForMyACDs said:


> Ah, but there is no such thing as a "show heeler". You mean show Australian Cattle Dogs? Not really the same thing......Heelers are usually of unknown parentage and many are mixed out with something else. They're basically the mutts of the ACD world.


Isn't the "Queensland Heeler" an actual breed, as well? Or is it more of a landrace type?


----------



## SilverFlame819 (Aug 24, 2010)

pancho said:


> Do not depend on the ears of a pit bull for any sign of their intentions.
> Pit bulls are a little different than other breeds. Many will wag their tails and look happy because they know what they are going to do if given the chance.


This just comes across as a really negative PB stereotype.



ForMyACDs said:


> Ah, but there is no such thing as a "show heeler". You mean show Australian Cattle Dogs? Not really the same thing......Heelers are usually of unknown parentage and many are mixed out with something else. They're basically the mutts of the ACD world. Many of them are weedy and of poor conformation with narrow, snipey heads that could never withstand the kick of a cow. Many of the dogs you see in the ACD show ring also work livestock......it's one of the few breeds that will show AND work.


All the Heelers in the area I used to live in were ACD's. Because they're bred for heeling cattle, most of the farmers just call them Heelers... But they aren't mutts. Yes, some of the people have Border/Heeler crosses, but for the most part, all the "Heelers" were purebred ACD's. Look just like a fancy, high-dollar AKC ACD... Minus the tail. Never seen one with a narrow head unless they were mixed with Border, and then they were advertized as "cow dogs", not Heelers.



Wolf Flower said:


> Isn't the "Queensland Heeler" an actual breed, as well? Or is it more of a landrace type?


No, the Queensland is an actual breed now, but it is not recognized by the AKC. Looks pretty much like a smooth-coat Aussie to me, although I think technically it's closer related to the ACD.


----------



## SilverFlame819 (Aug 24, 2010)

Weird... I'm looking up pictures now, and almost everyone who has Queenslands listed is actually advertising their ACD's, and using the Queensland tag to attract the search engines. None of these dogs look like the Queenslands I'm used to seeing. These are all just ACD's. And now... I'm confused. *lol*


----------



## TedH71 (Jan 19, 2003)

The main reason I think heelers are coming with docked tails is because someone in the past thought that they were the same as the Australian shepherd which comes with a docked or natural bobtail and docked the pups' tails. Shows how misinformed they were.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

SilverFlame819 said:


> This just comes across as a really negative PB stereotype.
> 
> .


I raised pit bulls longer than many people on this forum have lived.
I tell it like it really is. People who do not know the breed often misunderstand.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

SilverFlame819 said:


> This just comes across as a really negative PB stereotype.


Maybe, but it's true. In fact a lot of dogs will look really excited and happy right before they attack something. It's drive. The same way the dog looks at you when you're about to throw a ball, the same way a Labrador goes after a duck, the same way a police dog looks at a fleeing suspect. Tail wagging, ears up, straining forward, ready to chase and grab. It's natural.


----------



## DamnearaFarm (Sep 27, 2007)

Never heard of heeler used to describe a mutt. Around here a heeler *is* an ACD.


----------



## Old Mission (Dec 26, 2009)

I show and breed Great Danes and I will always crop ears. I have been present for cropping and its not as big of a deal as you might imagine. Soon as they wake up they are eating and playing without pain meds like nothing even happened and its no big deal. 
I am not for any AR's or politicians taking away my rights or freedoms no matter what they may be, thats what makes America America.... Freedom.


----------



## ForMyACDs (May 13, 2002)

Heeler is used generally as a term for mutt ACDs (as in not well-bred or unregistered). It is a GENERAL term, not a breed term.

Using the word "heeler" is as grating to an ACD owner as "nanny" and "billy" are to goat breeders and it generally goes along with someone who docks tails (a BIG no-no in ACDs and an obvious red flag that the person doesn't know or understand the breed). 

In other words......if you are the type of person who wants your dogs or your breeding to be respected you don't use the term "heeler".


----------



## DamnearaFarm (Sep 27, 2007)

ForMyACDs said:


> Heeler is used generally as a term for mutt ACDs (as in not well-bred or unregistered). It is a GENERAL term, not a breed term.
> 
> Using the word "heeler" is as grating to an ACD owner as "nanny" and "billy" are to goat breeders and it generally goes along with someone who docks tails (a BIG no-no in ACDs and an obvious red flag that the person doesn't know or understand the breed).
> 
> *In other words......if you are the type of person who wants your dogs or your breeding to be respected you don't use the term "heeler*".


Uh huh.


----------



## ErinP (Aug 23, 2007)

No, it's a regional thing. Or perhaps an occupation thing. 

In my corner of the world you would never hear someone refer to their blue or red heeler as an Australian Cattle Dog either, no matter how many litters they've produced out of their respected working dogs. 
They're heelers...

PS: I don't know anyone who breeds actual working dogs to the AKC standard necessarily, anyway. But I do know people who dock tails of not only heelers but *border collies* as well! 
I have the best border you've ever seen. Intuitive, gentle and willing to tear the nose out of a bull on the fight. But she has NO TAIL. 
Her breeder docks some of his litters because a lot of his customers live in areas with a lot of burrs and those long, lovely tails DO fill up with burrs pretty fast... I know heeler breeders who basically have the same philosophy. "Its just in the way"  I wish my poor Trish had a tail, but for the quality of dog she is, I can adjust


----------



## KnowOneSpecial (Sep 12, 2010)

I have a Corgi with a tail. (Got him from someone here on HT!) He LOVES to chase his tail. All I have to say is, "Max, where's your tail?!" and he's off to the races! He also lays on the floor on his back and tries to catch his tail by swishing it up towards his mouth. Funniest thing you'd ever seen! 

Our Corgi's tail provides hours of entertainment. For that reason alone I'll never dock a dogs tail!


----------



## snoozy (May 10, 2002)

Wow! I never expected so many people would get so riled about someone having an opinion about unnecessary chopping off of animal tails and ears, etc. Even waving the American flag about their "right" to do whatever they like to their animals. 

I guess I'm not looking at it from the point of view of breeders who must have their animal look a certain way to win prizes or warrant certification. 

I do think that a tail is VERY much a part of how dogs communicate. Like humans and their eyebrows. Absolutely necessary? No, but very important in non-verbal face reading.


----------



## Maura (Jun 6, 2004)

I am a reflexologist and I rub the ears of the foster dogs when they come in, or when they seem out of sorts. Of course, you don't need to be certified as a reflexologist to do this. Lopping off a dog's ears robs the dog of many important pressure points, including the area for calming and bringing an animal out of shock.


----------



## GrannyCarol (Mar 23, 2005)

snoozy - I'm not riled about your opinion, but your attitude, as expressed in the title of the post, is that anyone that docks or crops is wrong and you are right. Frankly, that made me angry and probably I shouldn't have expressed that as I did, but I am really tired of AR types (not assuming that you are one of them) that have been working for years to take my rights away and to give people the opinion that anyone that doesn't agree with them is not just wrong, but evil. I'm not speaking of just docking or cropping or spaying my pets, but that I consider them MY PETS, not little people in fur coats and to change the whole mindset of this country against responsible, loving pet ownership to being "pet parents" that must worship animals. 

This trend that you "adopt" a pet as you might a child is meant to erode our rights with our pets in general and make pets more like a ward of the State, thus bringing more and more big government into our lives. This is why I get angry and bring freedom into the discussion. 

I've owned, trained, loved, shown, bred, professionally groomed dogs for 40 years now. I've seen the changes in how pets are viewed by the public, I've seen what the AR groups have brought to the table and how our rights have been eroded by this, not just as pet owners but as individuals in this country. I hate that. To me it doesn't even matter if I personally think its a good idea to dock or crop, but the principle of individual freedom that this country was founded on, given to good men by God, that is important. 

BTW, even in those breeds where docking and cropping is customary, you can show a dog with natural ears and tails and a good one will win. It's harder, but not forbidden.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

SilverFlame819 said:


> I also have lived out in cattle country, where every single Heeler has its tail docked. The first time I ever saw a show Heeler (which, in itself, was funny to me... Breeding those high-energy, biting, barking things to prance around and look pretty on astroturf??) with a long tail, I just was a bit baffled. I thought it looked bizarre and unattractive and just WRONG... But now, here in the city, I see them all the time, and it looks normal and fine to me.


not all of those are queenslands, some are smithfields or stumpies which are natural bobs. i mean this in a general sense not necessarily your specific area.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

ForMyACDs said:


> Heeler is used generally as a term for mutt ACDs (as in not well-bred or unregistered). It is a GENERAL term, not a breed term.
> 
> Using the word "heeler" is as grating to an ACD owner as "nanny" and "billy" are to goat breeders and it generally goes along with someone who docks tails (a BIG no-no in ACDs and an obvious red flag that the person doesn't know or understand the breed).
> 
> In other words......if you are the type of person who wants your dogs or your breeding to be respected you don't use the term "heeler".


actually according to my ozzie friends, the heelers used exclusively for working domestic hogs were docked same as german sheperds & have been for MANY decades.
also while a lot of ranch dogs are mixed, a lot more are unregistered purebreds. heeler doesn't mean the dogs aren't pure. properly it means a dog that works the back of the herd moving it. the other job is the header. this dog works the front of the herd & directs it as the cowboy directs him. i'm also going to call BS on showbred dogs working anywhere like ranchbred dogs, first & foremost because EVERY heeler i've seen in shows (on tv granted) was fat & lacking leg. fat dogs just don't have the bottom to work like a fit one. & bench legged dogs wear down faster too. i find show fancy to be the only people that really believe show dogs can consistantly work as well as working bred dogs. i don't know when the queensland heeler became the ACD & i really care, but i'm pretty sure only people in the show fancy are the ones that get offended at the term heeler.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

SilverFlame819 said:


> This just comes across as a really negative PB stereotype.


no it's actually how they are. a propper pit bulldog doesn't do threat displays, posturing & the other body language that preceeds a fight between say two labs, or what have you. in fact going in to a match their body language is very similar to the excited wiggle butt lab when you come home from work. because of this if one decides to bite there probably won't be any cues to warn that it's about to happen.


----------



## SilverFlame819 (Aug 24, 2010)

Wasn't trying to get anyone riled up.  

I obviously did not know the poster's history, or I would have read the intent in the statement.


----------



## ErinP (Aug 23, 2007)

Pops2 said:


> actually according to my ozzie friends, the heelers used exclusively for working domestic hogs were docked same as german sheperds & have been for MANY decades.
> also while a lot of ranch dogs are mixed, a lot more are unregistered purebreds. heeler doesn't mean the dogs aren't pure. properly it means a dog that works the back of the herd moving it. the other job is the header. this dog works the front of the herd & directs it as the cowboy directs him. i'm also going to call BS on showbred dogs working anywhere like ranchbred dogs, first & foremost because EVERY heeler i've seen in shows (on tv granted) was fat & lacking leg. fat dogs just don't have the bottom to work like a fit one. & bench legged dogs wear down faster too. i find show fancy to be the only people that really believe show dogs can consistantly work as well as working bred dogs. i don't know when the queensland heeler became the ACD & i really care, but i'm pretty sure only people in the show fancy are the ones that get offended at the term heeler.


I agree, though my preference is border collies, rather than heelers. But I have the same thoughts WRT show vs. working dogs. (In fact I vividly remember when border collies lost the fight and were "accepted" into the AKC in the mid 90s. It was a day of mourning in the working dog community and the original quality of the breed has slid downhill in the years since.  )


----------



## Pugnacious (May 17, 2012)

As an owner of hounds used to run mt lions and bears, there is a good reason for removing both dew claws and tails. The dew claws can get torn off, especially in crusty snow. The tails can also freeze and break off in cold weather. I've never had it happen but I know it has. I prefer long tailed dogs so all of mine but 2 have their tails intact.

Ear cropping is done on fighting dogs for sure. For obvious reasons.


----------



## CesumPec (May 20, 2011)

How is it that this thread has gone on this long about chopping off dog parts and no one has compared it to America's bizarre obsession with circumcision?

There, I did it.


----------



## Pugnacious (May 17, 2012)

CesumPec said:


> How is it that this thread has gone on this long about chopping off dog parts and no one has compared it to America's bizarre obsession with circumcision?
> 
> There, I did it.



Obsession and tradition are completely different. Especially when tradition started as something benefitial..........


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Pugnacious said:


> As an owner of hounds used to run mt lions and bears, there is a good reason for removing both dew claws and tails. The dew claws can get torn off, especially in crusty snow. The tails can also freeze and break off in cold weather. I've never had it happen but I know it has. I prefer long tailed dogs so all of mine but 2 have their tails intact.
> 
> Ear cropping is done on fighting dogs for sure. For obvious reasons.


That is usually what people with no knowledge or experience in dog fighting think.
There haven't been many Ch. fighting dogs with cropped ears. Cropped ears are a sign of either a show dog or a person who does not know the breed he has. They are left on for a very good reason.
If a dog grabs hold of a fighting dog's ear they have picked the wrong part. It doesn't hurt the dog, it keeps the other dog from getting a hold a good hold.
Just ask yourself. If my dog was in a fight would I rather have the other dog grab him by the ear or the throat?


----------



## airotciv (Mar 6, 2005)

Old Mission said:


> I show and breed Great Danes and I will always crop ears. I have been present for cropping and its not as big of a deal as you might imagine. Soon as they wake up they are eating and playing without pain meds like nothing even happened and its no big deal.
> I am not for any AR's or politicians taking away my rights or freedoms no matter what they may be, thats what makes America America.... Freedom.



Just to say, I don't want to take your rights away. But my Dad raised Boxers and the cropping of ears is not as easy as you say. They were not out playing, they had thier ears in bandanges. Can't believe any Vet would tell you to let the dog go out and play. Now as for my Great Danes, I can understand you show, I Don't need to have my Danes ears cropped. Thats my Choice.


----------



## lonelyfarmgirl (Feb 6, 2005)

I've read this thread with interest at the variety of opinions. It cracks me up to see so many people against cropping and docking. Its not like this animals are chained to the wall and their body parts are hacked off in bloody terror.

Tiny puppies are docked and it hurts for a second. No worse than circumcision on a human boy, or piercing the ear of a human girl. For ear cropping, the animal is put under, standard surgical practices are used, and given pain meds if needed upon recovery. 

When my dober had his ears done, the worst part was the itching of the stitches. No worse than the stitches in the belly of a spayed *****, or the stitches set in a dog that has an injury of some sort. It was over in a week, and I promise he doesn't remember. A dog altered for appearance is treated with the utmost in medical care.

On the flip side, when I castrate piglets, DH picks them up by the back feet, I slice and yank and chuck the offending member over my shoulder. For calves and goats, we run their head into a gate, slice, yank, toss, no pain meds, no anesthesia, no nothing, and in 30 seconds, they are back with momma like nothing ever happened. 

And you know what? The vet does it the EXACT same way.
Maybe people should let people pretty up their dogs as they see fit.


----------



## amylou62 (Jul 14, 2008)

:goodjob::goodjob::goodjob::goodjob::goodjob:


lonelyfarmgirl said:


> I've read this thread with interest at the variety of opinions. It cracks me up to see so many people against cropping and docking. Its not like this animals are chained to the wall and their body parts are hacked off in bloody terror.
> 
> Tiny puppies are docked and it hurts for a second. No worse than circumcision on a human boy, or piercing the ear of a human girl. For ear cropping, the animal is put under, standard surgical practices are used, and given pain meds if needed upon recovery.
> 
> ...



Yep


----------



## amylou62 (Jul 14, 2008)

lonelyfarmgirl said:


> I've read this thread with interest at the variety of opinions. It cracks me up to see so many people against cropping and docking. Its not like this animals are chained to the wall and their body parts are hacked off in bloody terror.
> 
> Tiny puppies are docked and it hurts for a second. No worse than circumcision on a human boy, or piercing the ear of a human girl. For ear cropping, the animal is put under, standard surgical practices are used, and given pain meds if needed upon recovery.
> 
> ...



Yep. :goodjob::goodjob:


----------



## SilverFlame819 (Aug 24, 2010)

On a scale of 1 to 10, my feelings about docking rank around a 6. My feelings about cropping rank around an 8. 

Circumcision ranks at around a 17. You just don't want to open up that can.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

CesumPec said:


> How is it that this thread has gone on this long about chopping off dog parts and no one has compared it to America's bizarre obsession with circumcision?
> 
> There, I did it.


People get more neurotic and overly emotional about dogs than they do over children in this country.

I know so many people who were very hands-off parents with their children. Now their kids are grown and gone and they have dogs. They dress the dogs up in baby clothes, won't leave the dog alone for more than 2 hours, take it everywhere and annoy everyone with constant dog photos, and stories about their dog over dinner. 

I'm sure most of them whacked off their son's foreskin without a seconds thought, but they think a verbal correction to Fifi for pewping on the floor is dog abuse.


----------



## JasoninMN (Feb 24, 2006)

airotciv said:


> Just to say, I don't want to take your rights away. But my Dad raised Boxers and the cropping of ears is not as easy as you say. They were not out playing, they had thier ears in bandanges. Can't believe any Vet would tell you to let the dog go out and play. Now as for my Great Danes, I can understand you show, I Don't need to have my Danes ears cropped. Thats my Choice.


That is interesting my family raised boxers as well and when their ears were cropped it hardly affected them. In fact the pups would still chew on each others ears and ear settings after coming out of surgery. None seemed to care about it at all. Saying they don't play is pretty silly.


----------



## Pugnacious (May 17, 2012)

SilverFlame819 said:


> On a scale of 1 to 10, my feelings about docking rank around a 6. My feelings about cropping rank around an 8.
> 
> Circumcision ranks at around a 17. You just don't want to open up that can.




Why? Because the opinion of a faceless poster on a homesteading website should be valued more than the opinion of ones own pediatritian on the subject? :umno:


----------



## oregon woodsmok (Dec 19, 2010)

I prefer not to crop or dock, so I don't have breeds that are cropped or docked.

Other than that, it is best left to the fanciers of each breed, who understand and love the breed to make that decision for their breed.

If you don't raise or own that particular breed of dog, it is none of your business and most likely nobody cares whether you understand it or approve. No meddling busybody is going to have any effect on what I feed my dogs or how they are cared for. If I happened to want a cropped breed, I would not care if some control freak humaniac liked cropping or not.


----------



## CesumPec (May 20, 2011)

Pugnacious said:


> Why? Because the opinion of a faceless poster on a homesteading website should be valued more than the opinion of ones own pediatritian on the subject? :umno:


to not totally hijack the thread, i have transferred my comments to general chat - circumcision.

But in relation to this thread, I don't know how you can be against tail docking and pro circumcision.


----------



## snoozy (May 10, 2002)

You circumcise your dogs?! 

:lookout: 

I'm kidding. Lighten up, wouldja!


----------



## GrannyCarol (Mar 23, 2005)

I find I am quite able to be for or against all sorts of things and not be too tangled up with logic in the process.


----------



## JasoninMN (Feb 24, 2006)

CesumPec said:


> But in relation to this thread, I don't know how you can be against tail docking and pro circumcision.


Seriously? That is hands down the most ridiculous thing I have ever read on the net.


----------



## SilverFlame819 (Aug 24, 2010)

Pugnacious said:


> Why? Because the opinion of a faceless poster on a homesteading website should be valued more than the opinion of ones own pediatritian on the subject? :umno:


Um... no? Because I have a big mouth and I can ramble on for days.  NOBODY wants to start that ball rolling! *lol*



JasoninMN said:


> Seriously? That is hands down the most ridiculous thing I have ever read on the net.


*lol* You need to get out on the net more... There are WAY more ridiculous things on here than that!


----------



## JasoninMN (Feb 24, 2006)

SilverFlame819 said:


> *lol* You need to get out on the net more... There are WAY more ridiculous things on here than that!


I stick to the pretty "tame" sites. I guess I don't see the connection between a dogs ears and tail to human genitalia. I wonder how they feel about castration/banding of livestock? Docking lambs tails? And other common livestock procedures. I still don't see the circumcision link since we are talking animals not humans.


----------



## Old Mission (Dec 26, 2009)

freshly Cropped ears should not be "put up in bandages" maybe thats why they hurt. They are supposed to be kept open to air out and heal, bandages will just stick to the sutures/wound and breed infection and moisture. 
The ears are posted up on a cup or foam form so they stay upright and no tape or bandages covering them at all. (they are held on by some skin bond) By a few hours time the edges are no longer wet and totally dried up and in the process of healing, but the cup stays on till the edges are 100% healed. My dogs freak out more about getting nail trims then the pups act after they wake up from a crop. They ARE eating and playing right away


----------



## CesumPec (May 20, 2011)

JasoninMN said:


> I stick to the pretty "tame" sites. I guess I don't see the connection between a dogs ears and tail to human genitalia. I wonder how they feel about castration/banding of livestock? Docking lambs tails? And other common livestock procedures. I still don't see the circumcision link since we are talking animals not humans.


here's the connection

If you are against docking and cropping (and I&#8217;m excepting medical necessities) it will mostly likely be because of some combination of these reasons

1. you don't want to cause pain when it isn't necessary
2. you believe in keeping things as nature intended
3. you want the little fella (yeah, still talking about dogs :heh: ) to have full use and enjoyment of that which would be cut

If you can't see the similarity in the logic of the arguments, I sorry, but I don't know how to lay it out any more simply. 

Pro circ arguments usually come down to medical, religion, or so junior will look like daddy. Probably not true in the time of Moses, but today there is no general medical necessity and most of the men in the world get by just fine with their foreskin intact. I try not to argue religion, bible, torah, or koran because people pretty much believe what ever interpretation they choose. But I doubt when God stands in judgment of good men, he lets the scale tip towards hell because of foreskin As to looking like Dad, my father passed away when I was a teen and I don't ever recall comparing penises. Perhaps you did but hey, I'm trying not to be judgmental.

I've never raised sheep so i don't have an informed opinion on docking sheep tails but I do wonder why we have sheep that need tails docked. There are plenty of wild sheep that don't get their tails docked. 

Castration - there is a need to do that for meat quality, breeding control, and sometimes handler safety , so I have no problem with that.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

CesumPec said:


> I've never raised sheep so i don't have an informed opinion on docking sheep tails but I do wonder why we have sheep that need tails docked. There are plenty of wild sheep that don't get their tails docked.


because wild sheep don't have wool & like pretty much all wild animals they have minimal hair around the anus.



CesumPec said:


> Castration - there is a need to do that for meat quality, breeding control, and sometimes handler safety , so I have no problem with that.


nonsense, nonsense & nonsense
button bucks & spikes are exceptional eating & they're intact. likewise a mature buck is great eating IF you know how to cook it.
the only true necessity of breeding control is to crontrol the intact animals access to each other, castration is a crutch for the lazy & irresponsible.
early & active handling will do more to gentle an animal than castration. wild barrs are just as dangerous as a wild boar.


----------



## GrannyCarol (Mar 23, 2005)

As far as I know most men get along fine circumcised as well. Most dogs get along fine either cropped, docked or neutered. Most dogs are dealt with a lot more kindly in regards to those things than most livestock. 

This is one time, Pops2, that I'm not going to agree with you. Regarding livestock, mature intact males probably aren't going to get along with each other nearly as well as mature castrated males and are not going to grow as fast or hold weight as well. They are generally easier and safer to handle castrated too, all other aspects being the same. I doubt most ranchers have the time to tame down every bull they want to butcher so that they can handle it safely, nor will they want to have to have special facilities to keep them separate (yes, I know they won't all need to be kept separate, I see the fields of beef breeding bulls kept in our area). Ranchers don't have to be lazy or irresponsible to want to maximize their profit and time on a meat steer. 

I've had a lot of intact dogs over my decades of showing and breeding various breeds. I've had quite a few of them neutered too. The same dog has often been calmer and less likely to mark after neutering, even when I've had it done as an adult. I had a couple done later in life, due to health issues, and, yes, they behaved differently and were easier to live with. No, I don't consider myself lazy or irresponsible regarding intact male dogs. I'm not a huge fan of "fix every dog", but there are benefits to having them intact and some to having them spayed or neutered. 

I guess I'll go back to my life of occasionally "lopping off dog parts" for my own convenience and personal taste. I've probably aired my own opinions plenty on this subject. :\


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

It is my belief that if I own the animal I can crop, dock, neuter, or paint it pink and it isn't the business of amyone else.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

that's okay Granny, i don't really believe it myself. just showing a "reasonable" argument can be made against any action no matter how sound the reason for it.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

pancho said:


> It is my belief that if I own the animal I can crop, dock, neuter, or paint it pink and it isn't the business of amyone else.


where's the like button?


----------



## snoozy (May 10, 2002)

pancho said:


> It is my belief that if I own the animal I can crop, dock, neuter, or paint it pink and it isn't the business of amyone else.


But it isn't about you. It's about the animal.


----------



## GrannyCarol (Mar 23, 2005)

snoozy said:


> But it isn't about you. It's about the animal.


snoozy, my pets don't have rights, I do. Therefor I am not violating their rights. Nor is something abusive just because you don't like it. If someone is actually abusing or neglecting their animal (and there are all too many cases of such things), then use your energy to do something about that, believe me there are lots of cases of real animal abuse and neglect out there, or.....

Why don't you get your righteousness up over real problems, such as child abuse, rape, murder, the illegal collusion between the government and big business that runs this country today in a manner that is both evil and shameful?


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

I just removed dew claws on a litter of puppies a few days ago. Took 5 mins, and they were happily nursing away as soon as they were done.


----------

