Why do people dock dogs’ tails?
Nowadays, people cut off dogs tails for four main reasons: to conform to the breed standard, sanitary reasons, to protect the dog from injuries, and for cosmetic purposes.
Breeders of purebred dogs often perform these surgical modifications to keep up with AKC standards. Tail docking is the AKC standard for more than 60 breeds, which translates to nearly a third of the breeds on the registry. Animal activists stress that the AKC breed standards promote this outdated practice since they wont make exceptions for undocked dogs to participate in shows.
Some pet parents prefer to dock long-haired dogs because it can prevent a build-up of fecal matter on the dogs hind end, making matting less likely and cleanup easier. Others choose to cut off working breeds tails because it can prevent briars and burrs from getting in the fur and injuring the animal.
Still, others cut off dogs tails for the same reason people perform ear-cropping: simply because they like the way it looks.
There are many questions and concerns about the ethical nature of tail docking in dogs. In fact, 40 countries have banned the practice of tail docking altogether. Docking is not illegal in all parts of the UK; however, handlers may no longer enter dogs in dog shows if they have undergone tail docking. Many animal activists praise this move as a step in the right direction to changing the outlook on breed standards and tail docking.
While tail docking is legal in America, the American Veterinary Medical Association is a staunch opponent of this practice due to the risks of complications. Likewise, the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons in the UK have spoken out against this practice, calling it “unjustified mutilation and unethical”.
Complications due to tail docking can involve infection, tumors, leaking of the cerebrospinal fluid, and even death. Whats more, tail docking can cause a young puppy tremendous pain. Some experts argue that neonatal puppies do not have a fully developed nervous system and cant feel the pain of tail docking, yet theres plenty of evidence to the contrary. Puppies often yelp and cry out when they have their tails docked, making some experts believe they are actually more sensitive to pain than older dogs who undergo this procedure.
A: Tailing docking is painful.25 The intensity or duration of the pain under ideal or typical circumstances is difficult to quantify. Painful procedures conducted in the neonatal period when the nervous system is vulnerable can result in negative long-term changes which affect how pain is processed and perceived later in life.26,27
A: It is natural for most dogs to have tails based upon their descent from a tailed species. However there is no strong evidence that naturally bobbed or surgically docked dogs are physically or psychologically disadvantaged. There is some early, but inconclusive, data that raises questions as to whether docking impairs communication with other dogs23 or may increase the risk of developing incontinence.24
A: Tail docking of dogs is believed to have arisen for three reasons at different points in history. In ancient times Romans believed that amputation of the tail tip and/or parts of the dog’s tongue could prevent a dog from contracting rabies.1.2 Because the tail was believed to help a dog in the chase, dogs were historically docked if they were owned by a poor person not permitted to hunt game.2 (Ironically, it is sometimes argued that docking increases a dog’s strength or speed.3) There is a continuing tradition of docking working dogs’ tails with the goal of preventing tail injury during activities such as hunting (see related question below). Early references, however, tended to suggest docking only in cases where the tail was overly long for the size of the animal and, therefore, might be prone to injury.4
1. Podberscek AL, Paul AS, Serpell J. Companion Animals and Us: Exploring the Relationships Between People and Pets. Cambridge University Press, 2000; 307. 2. Fleming. The wanton mutilation of animals. The Nineteenth Century, a Monthly Report, 1895;37:440. 3. Drury WD. British Dogs, Their Points, Selection, and Show Preparation. L.U. Gill: London. 1903. p. 165 4. Hallock C. The Sportsmans Gazetteer and General Guide. Forest and Stream: New York. 1877. p. 456. 5. Shields G. The American Book of the Dog. Rand, McNally: Chicago. 1891 6. almer, RM. All about Airedales: A Book of General Information Valuable to Dog Lovers and Owners, Breeders and Fanciers, Illustrated from Selected Photographs of Noted Dogs and Rare Scenes. The Airedale Terrier Reviewed. 3-A Publishing Co.: Seattle. 1916; 53. 7. Coren, S. How Dogs Think: Understanding the Canine Mind. Simon and Schuster, 2004; 106 8. Youatt W, Lewis EJ. The Dog. Leavitt and Allen, 1857 Available at: http://books.google.com/books?id=wxkPAAAAYAAJ Accessed December 15, 2008. 9. Bennett PC, Perini E. Tail docking in dogs: can attitude change be achieved? Aust Vet J 2003;81:277-82. 10. Sonntag, Q. Cosmetic tail docking. Vet News 2004;Feb:4-5. 11. Noonan GJ, Rand JS, Blackshaw JK, et al. Tail docking in dogs: a sample of attitudes of veterinarians and dog breeders in Queensland. Aust Vet J 1996;73:86-88. 12. Lytton, N. Toy Dogs and Their Ancestors: Including the History and Management of Toy Spaniels, Pekingese, Japanese and Pomeranians. Duckworth & Co: London. 1911; 91. 13. Moissac, JE. The fight against cosmetic surgery. Canadian Veterinary Journal 2009;50:11231124. 14. Australian Veterinary Association: Surgical alteration to the natural state of animals: http://www.ava.com.au/node/1085 accessed January 31, 2013 14. RCVS Guide to professional Conduct: http://www.rcvs.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/guide-to-professional-conduc… accessed January 31 2013. 16. Lee RB. A History and Description of the Modern Dogs of Great Britain and Ireland. H. Cox: London. 1897. p. 220-221. 17. Sasson-Brickson G. The bobtail trait in Australian shepherds – part I: a historical perspective and docking Regulations in various countries. Aussie Times 2005;March-April 18. Diesel G, Pfeiffer D, Crispin S, et al. Risk factors for tail injuries in dogs in Great Britain. Vet Rec 2010;166:812-817. 19. Strejffert G. Tail injuries of shorthaired German point dogs born in Sweden 1989, 1992 http://www.cdb.org/countries/sweden.htm Accessed June 28, 2010 20. Milne, E. The Truth about Cats and Dogs. Book Guild Publishing, 2007; 118. 21. Darke PG, Thrusfield MV, Aitken CG. Association between tail injuries and docking in dogs. Vet Rec 1985;116:409 22. Kennel Club: Breed Standard tail clauses – traditionally docked breeds: http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=1359 Accessed January 31st 2013 23. Leaver, SDA, Reimchen TE. Behavioural responses of Canis Familiaris to different tail lengths of a remotely-controlled life-size dog replica. Behaviour 2008;145:377-390. 24. Thrusfield P, Holt M. Association in bitches between breed, size, neutering and docking, and acquired urinary incontinence due to incompetence of the urethral sphincter mechanism. Vet Rec 1993;133:177-180. 25. Noonan G, Rand J, Blackshaw J, et al. Behavioural observations of puppies undergoing tail docking. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1996;4: 335-342. 26. LaPrarie JL, Murphy AZ. Long Term Impact of Neonatal Injury in Male and Female Rats: Sex Differences, Mechanisms and Clinical Implications. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology 2010;31:193-202. 27. Vega-Avelaira D, McKelvy R, Hathway G et al. The emergence of adolescent onset pain hypersensitivity following neonatal nerve injury. Molecular Pain 2012;8:30. Accessible online at: http://www.molecularpain.com/content/8/1/30 28. Haworth K, Putt W, Cattanach B et al. Canine homolog of the T-box transcription factor T; failure of the protein to bind to its DNA target leads to a short-tail phenotype. Mammalian Genome 2001;12:212-218.
A: The essential question is not “How harmful is the procedure?”, but rather “Is there sufficient justification for performing it?” Performing a surgical procedure for cosmetic purposes (i.e., for the sake of appearance) implies the procedure is not medically indicated. Because dogs have not been shown to derive self-esteem or pride in appearance from having their tails docked (common reasons for performing cosmetic procedures on people), there is no obvious benefit to our patients in performing this procedure. The only benefit that appears to be derived from cosmetic tail docking of dogs is the owner’s impression of a pleasing appearance. In the opinion of the AVMA, this is insufficient justification for performing a surgical procedure.
Remember: Alteration Is an Option
If youâre thinking about getting a puppy whose breed often gets docked or cropped, ask yourself: Are the risks and pain my dog may experience worth it? âWhen I bring surgery up with [potential pet owners], many donât even realize itâs a choice,â Roark says. If youâre getting your dog from a breeder, make sure they know before the dog is born if you donât want your puppy docked, Serpell says.
Or avoid the question altogether by getting an older dog.
What are the PROS and CONS of docking a dogs tail??
Tail docking is the term given to the surgical removal of puppies’ tails for cosmetic purposes. The procedure was usually performed at 2-5 days of age; the tail is cut off using a pair of scissors or caused to drop off by occluding the blood supply using a tight rubber band. There are over 70 breeds of dog that traditionally have had their tails cut off a few days after birth. The reason some breeds and not others are docked is simply because of the fashion set for that particular breed. Each breed has an arbitrary standard for where the tail should be cut off.
The RSPCA is opposed to the cosmetic tail docking of dogs because the procedure is unnecessary and compromises the welfare of dogs. In 2004, tail docking for non-therapeutic reasons was banned across Australia. Since then it has been illegal to dock dogs’ tails unless there is a veterinary medical reason for the operation. Only qualified veterinarians are permitted to carry out the surgery, whereas before the ban, tail docking could be carried out by anyone classified as an ‘experienced breeder.’ All previously docked breeds can now compete at dog shows with full tails, so there is absolutely no reason for any dog’s tail to be docked unless they were born prior to 2004 or have damaged their tail in some way.
Advocates of tail docking claim that it does not cause pain or discomfort, as the nervous system of puppies is not fully developed. This is not the case; the basic nervous system of a dog is fully developed at birth. Evidence indicates that puppies have similar sensitivity to pain as adult dogs. Docking a puppy’s tail involves cutting through muscles, tendons, up to seven pairs of highly sensitive nerves and severing bone and cartilage connections. Tail docking is usually carried out without any anaesthesia or analgesia (pain relief). Puppies give repeated intense shrieking vocalisations the moment the tail is cut off and during stitching of the wound, indicating that they experience substantial pain. Inflammation and damage to the tissues also cause ongoing pain while the wound heals. There is also the risk of infection or other complications associated with this unnecessary surgery.
Tail docking can also cause unnecessary and avoidable long term chronic pain and distress to the dog. For example, when a chronic neuroma forms at the amputation site. Neuromas are often very painful.
The dog’s tail serves a critically important role in canine social behaviour. The tail is a major communication tool between dogs. The tail’s position and movement can indicate friendliness, a desire to play, submission or a warning signal, among many other messages. Thus the tail also serves as a protective mechanism for dogs, part of the various strategies employed by dogs to communicate with one another; establish boundaries and to avert aggressive encounters.
The tail also communicates important messages to humans during human-dog interactions. The action of the tail can help humans to interpret a dog’s body language and to determine what sort of interaction is appropriate for a particular dog. Thus the tail plays an important role in public health and safety.
Removing the tail impairs a dog’s ability to communicate properly, leaving them highly vulnerable to being misunderstood by other dogs and humans and placing them at a distinct social disadvantage. Therefore tails must not be removed for any reason other than for therapeutic purposes.
The few remaining advocates of tail docking give a range of unconvincing explanations to defend their views. For instance, they say that some heavy coated breeds need to have their tails docked for hygiene reasons (even though many undocked breeds have thick coats and regular care is all that is necessary to maintain good hygiene). Another explanation is that docking prevents tail damage in hunting dogs. But most docked puppies are kept as family pets and are never used for hunting and research has shown that docking does not reduce tail injury in the general dog population. Furthermore, many breeds of hunting dogs do not have docked tails, and the length of the tail in docked breeds varies according to the breed standard. The excuses put forward to support tail docking are plainly unfounded. There is simply no excuse for reviving this painful tradition.