Wednesday, February 26, 2014

The Nanny Brigade Goes Tail Chasing


Have you ever noticed that the same people who want to ban all tail docking are the very same people who want mandatory spay and neuter laws?

Why is one bit of 10-second work considered "mutilation," while the other (major surgery) is considered the height of responsible ownership?

Would these same people push for mandatory spay-neuter laws for humans while supporting a ban on all nipple-piercings, tattoos, circumcisions, tummy tucks and Botox injections for people?

And what do these people have to say about Mother Nature which makes naturally bob-tailed animals (including dogs and cats) but which makes no animals without reproductive organs?

If "natural" is good and "artificial" is bad, then perhaps they might want to rethink their position?

Or is this simply a case of nannyism
-- the precursor to jack-booted authoritarianism?

To be clear, I am no libertarian. Call me a communist if you want, but I think there is a place for police and fire departments, and I want the public health service to be fully funded. I am affirmatively in support of regulated commerce.

I readily concede there is a place for the state to intercede when individuals maintain misery by not properly taking care of their charges, whether those charges are human or animal.

And I am all in favor of spaying and neutering dogs. All of my own dogs except one have been "fixed," and I encourage others to do the same.

But I do not demand it
.

Surely, we still live in a free world where a difference of opinion is still allowed if it harms no one, man or animal alike?

And if we are going to start legislating dogs, why would anyone start at the tail?

In a world where dozens of breeds, such as the English Bulldog, the Pug, and the Boston Terrier cannot breathe due to overly flat faces, and hundreds of breeds have rising rates of defect and disease due to a legacy of inbreeding within a closed registry system, why would anyone elevate tail docking to the top of their concern pile?

Some will say that dogs cannot give permission for tail docking.

Right.

Does anyone seriously think dogs are giving permission for spays or neuters, poodle haircuts, or vaccines? Dogs do not sign permission slips when they get microchipped and tattooed for identification purposes. And no, on their last day on earth, they are not asked to sign a release before a veterinarian with a syringe full of sodium pentobarbital sends them on their way.

Dogs are not people. Does this really have to be said?

Now, to be clear, I have no problem if folks do not want to dock their own dogs. In fact, I applaud it. Let freedom ring.

Of course, not everyone agrees on that either. On the opposite side of the fence from those that would ban all tail docking are those who would mandate it.

Mandate it?

Yes. At an American Kennel Club show in Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania (USA), a judge disqualified a Weimeraner because it had an undocked tail.

Ridiculous.

But, of course, no more ridiculous than those who would wade in to ban the practice!

Those who oppose all tail docking claim the procedure, done at one or two days of age, causes great pain to the pup.

Nonsense.

Most of these people have never seen a tail get docked. And perhaps you have not either.

No matter.

The good news is that in this modern age anyone can see what all the fuss is about by simply going to Youtube and typing in "Tail Docking and Dew Claw Removal in 2 Day-Old Pups:Torture or Not?"

And while you are there, type in "Dr Greg spays a female dog" and "Dr. Greg neuters." All three procedures are performed by the same vet. Compare and contrast.

With a tail nip, the dog is ready for its mothers teat a minute or two after the start.

With a spay and neuter, it's heavy sedation, 12 hours at the vet, and a cone around the neck for 10 days!

Some claim a docked tail is a hindrance to canine movement and communication.

Really? It has never been a problem for Corgis, Australian Shepherds or other naturally docked breeds that seem to communicate well and run without a hitch.

So why are the tails of some breeds docked at all?

The answer is that some breeds have long thin tails that can be damaged when whipped about in brush or worked in rock. Dogs of these breeds may benefit medically if their tails are docked. How often an over-thin and fragile tail is a real medical problem depends on the breed, the dog, how it works, where it works, and if it is worked at all. In all cases however, a tail trim on day two is much simpler and less complicated than a tail dock at a later age.

Some will argue that if dog tails were not docked, breeders would breed dogs with stronger or shorter tails.

No doubt they are right. But have the proponents of this argument really thought this one through? You see, we are not talking about a theoretical world, but a real one.

In the real world, breeding for a thicker or shorter tail will mean a further narrowing of the gene pool within the Kennel Club's closed registry system. Breeds that have already been pushed to the edge by generations of inbreeding, may be pushed over the edge if tail selection results in a third or more of all dogs being removed from the gene pool. Yes, after 20 years you may have a tail you can live with, but at what price in terms of rising cancer, cataracts, liver failure and epilepsy within the breed?

Opponents of tail docking argue, that most tail docking is done for cosmetic and historical reasons.

True enough, but so what? We do a lot of things for cosmetic and historical reasons. Why can't tail tail docking be one of them?

People circumcise their children, and whole TV shows are devoted to tattoos. Every third teenager has a pierced tongue, nipple, eyebrow or navel. Women are getting breast implants or breast reductions, and men are getting hair transplants and scalp reductions.

Noses are bobbed, fat is sucked out, teeth are capped, Botox is injected, and ears are being pierced, ringed, barbelled, and pinned.

Have you ever been to a PeTA rally? If you look around, you will see a lot of metal hanging out of nostrils, off of eye brows, or rammed through tongues. Every other girl will be showing off her "tramp stamp" tattoo on the small of her back. God only knows what you might find ringed, belled and pierced if you were foolish enough to ever see one of these people standing before you naked. The mind shudders.

PeTA spokes-idiot Pamela Anderson, has had her own body repeatedly tucked, sucked, injected, lifted, dyed, bobbed, and implanted.

And these people are worried about a ten-second tail nip? What on earth for?

There are real problems in the world of dogs, and this is NOT one of them.

Not everything in the world needs to be legislated, and this is something that fits under the umbrella of "leave it alone and let freedom ring."

But, of course, people cannot do that.

And why not?

Simple: the fixation on dog tails has nothing to do with dogs.

This is part of a larger cultural war that pits liberals versus conservatives, rural vs. urban, vegan vs. meat eaters, and traditional Britain versus "Euro-England."

Whatever side you are on is fine with me; just don't tell me you are fighting about dogs!

16 comments:

s said...

I call shenanigans on this. Docking is fashion, pure and simple. "So the tail won't get broken" is about as convincing as the "so the blood won't run into the dog's eyes in a fight" explanation of the English Bulldog's face wrinkles. Is it horrifically painful? Probably not, but neither is ear piercing, and I'm not about to go putting studs in my dog's ears just because it would look neat. There's an argument about the advisability of a ban, but, when it comes right down to it, looks are all that's at stake.

And, for the record, I don't know anything about Corgi/Aussie genetics, but the Manx cat's tail is due to a spinal formation defect that kills homozygous kittens and is related to other health problems. In short, I'd be reluctant to write taillessness off as harmless just because the dogs don't seem socially hampered.

geonni banner said...

I've worked at several veterinary clinics, and I have seen a number of dogs - Great Danes, and un-docked Dobermans with horrible hematomas and weeping sores on their tails. They got these, not by charging through thick brush after quarry in the field, but by standing next to any of a number of hard surfaces like walls and bashing their tails against it (wagging) until the appendage was a bloody mess. They don't stop, even when the tail is swollen, infected and bloody.
This is a common problem, which is easily avoided by docking the dogs as newborns. I've seen it done dozens of times and at most you get one little peep out of the pup.
Amputating an un-repairable adult tail is another story... Complications - some resulting in death are not uncommon.

Unknown said...

Awesome piece!!

PBurns said...

S - I think Geonni just answered your question. So too can a reader of this blog who recently had their dog's tail amputated after it hammered itself into a painful blood splatter. Since you do not seem to know too much about working dogs, here's what it looks like >> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_PGvSoaafXiI/TGtM_M13-HI/AAAAAAAAIo0/XPp1hk-8ER4/s400/tail-injury.jpg
As for docked tails, there are a lot of animals that come naturally docked from Bobcats to yourself (yes, you are a primate/monkey with a naturally docked tail).

With dogs and cats, it's a mixed set of outcomes and there's more at work here than the C189G T-box gene. See >>
> http://jhered.oxfordjournals.org/content/100/2/236 for a little more information.

s said...

Nope. Still not buying it. And this is because, even among hunting dogs, the only ones you see with docked tails are the ones where the breed standard calls for it. Labs and German Shorthairs are both gun dogs and, at least where I’m from, do pretty much the same thing in the field. Labs keep their tails, shorthairs don’t. And what about the hounds? I can’t think of a single hound breed that gets docked. Is there scientific proof that the average shorthair has a weaker tail than the average coonhound? Is hunting pheasants somehow more likely to cause injury than tracking coon and bear? No. It’s that people expect a stump on a shorthair and a tail on a coonhound; there is absolutely no reason other than fashion to dock the one but not the other. Is it the worst thing we do to dogs for looks? Of course not, especially when you consider the inbreeding of pedigree dogs and our obsession with extreme brachycephalism. But that doesn’t change the fact that it’s more about form than function.

And, for the record, although I am apparently a resident of a major metropolitan area who attends PETA rallies while feeling vaguely guilty about dyeing my Chihuahua to match the handbag I carry it in, I grew up on a farm and have known my share of stock dogs, hunting dogs, and yard-guarding varmint killers. The only tail injury I have ever seen was on a suburban Lab who was an overenthusiastic wagger. Curiously, I have never heard a call for prophylactic docking of all pet Labs.

As to the tailless breeds, I will have to do some research; I am rather more skeptical of the continued viability of a trait that has been deliberately created within maybe 150 years versus one that evolved over millennia. This isn't so much baboon vs. chimp (or chump, for that matter) as baboon vs. random baboon without a tail. As far as I am aware, there are no wild canids without tails.

PBurns said...

A don't give a roaring shit whether you "buy it" or not. You clearly think all dog tails are the same and all use is the same, which means you are an ignorant and an idiot. Seriously stupid. Do you even know the difference between the tail of a Border Terrier and a Jack Russell Terrier? Do you even know how a terrier tail is used in the field? No, of course, not. You do not even know the difference between a Labrador RETRIEVER and a German Shorthaired POINTER. Maybe the capitalization here will offer a clue? Seriously, buy a book, spend some time in the field with actual dogs, and do not have any children. You grew up on a farm? Either that's a lie, or your mother and father are brother and sister. Or perhaps (and more likely) you are exactly the nanny type this article is all about. Your choice (whatever that is) should be everyone's choice. What a tiresome bore you must be with that perspective on life!

Before you go away for good, let's get back to your level of ignorance. Have you ever used the Google? Try that. It's almost a cure for stupid, and it reliably works for ignorance. If you use the Google you will find the article on tail damage in German Shorthaired pointers (yes there are real studies with numbers and such), you will know about the research done on docked and non-docked tail damage in dogs (yes, more actual research with numbers), and you will know that up to 16,000 dogs suffered tail injuries in the UK for a recent 12-month period, and that 5,000 or so had to undergo adult tail amputation. You will also know that no one has ever shown that docking is any more than a momentary discomfort to pups, which is a site less than what we can show for spay and neuters which is (apparently) a never-mind. But none of this will matter to you will it? You are clearly not about evidence or choice; you are about NO evidence, and no choice.

And because of that you entirely missed the point of this article which is to let people do what they want in this trivial arena where different people have different dogs, used in different ways, in different places. And yes, people have different preferences in looks too. So what? If you wear a blue dress or a rubber rain coat, does everyone have to do the same thing? If the bimbo down at Hooters gets her nipples pierced, does that mean the law should require you to do that too, or conversely because your nipples are not pierced, does that mean she cannot make that choice for herself? Shall we ban boob jobs, tummy tucks, and pierced ears? How about Caesarian sections, circumcisions, and episiotomies? You run down Nanny Road very quickly. Most Americans are going to think more than that. And they are going to use the Google.

PBurns said...

Geonni has just put up a very nice post on this topic here >> http://pedanticmystic.blogspot.com/2014/02/what-about-tail-docking.html

She mentions a point that had not occurred to me, which is that in the UK docked dogs are not allowed to be shown, which means that true working terriers and members of some gun dog breeds are almost never going to be see in the show ring again.

Oh sure, the "one and done" crowd will still show up, but most true working terriers are tail docked and for a reason, and the same is true for some gun dog breeds.

The gap between "Fancy" and field, already large, gets bigger....

The Midland Agrarian said...

S said, "And what about the hounds? I can’t think of a single hound breed that gets docked."

As a matter of fact, I have a bob tail brindle cur dog (hound) laying six feet from me right now. Many are natural bobtails, but many are also "cur-tailed" when young.

PBurns said...

Hounds tails are often docked a bit, depending on who is hunting and when, but you would actually have to USE THE GOOGLE or hang our with hounds men to know that. S is a typist.

For those interested in reading what folks are asking and learning from people who actually work their dogs, see >> http://biggamehoundsmen.com/forum/docked-shortened-tails-on-hounds-t10268.html

PipedreamFarm said...

I found this informative:

"Since docking was banned in Sweden in 1989, there has been a massive increase in tail injuries amongst previously
docked breeds. Within the 50 undocked Pointer litters registered in that year with the Swedish Kennel Club, 38% of
dogs suffered tail injury before they were 18 months old and two years later, by 1991, the number of individuals with
tail injuries had increased to 51% in the same group (Gunilla Strejffert, Report to the Swedish Breed Council for German
Shorthaired Pointers, 1992, Borlange, Sweden). Even more alarming is the finding that only 16% of injury cases had
improved, 40% showed no improvement and more than half of dogs with tail injuries had regressed during the
two year period!"

Source: SA Wingshooters Association
www.k9alliance.com/resources/Tail-Docking-FactSheet.pdf

PipedreamFarm said...

The argument against tail docking has been that the rate of tail injuries in all dogs reporting to vet clinics is very low; however, this rate is skewed by the percentage of house pets vs working dogs reporting to vet clinincs.

It is unlikely one law could be written and readily enforced for two sub-populations of dogs (working vs non-working).

PipedreamFarm said...

Let's see wait and see what is published in a study from Scotland.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26344573

JL said...

Just as an FYI, some Aussie breeders band tails as a docking mechanism, and some use lamb tail dockers. Apparently if one knows what one is doing these methods can be done at home, thus avoiding the exposure to bugs left behind by other vet client dogs. From what I've read (I own Aussies but haven't bred them) it's getting more difficult to find a vet who will dock and can do a good job getting the tail to the desired length (which varies between breeders as the standard allows for tails up to 4" in an adult dog).

Jack's the Game said...

Regardless of all the arguments for or against making tail docking a political issue, one thing that seems to be ignored is the fact that it is next to impossible for those of us who would prefer to have a companion whose tail has not been docked to find one because of this ridiculous and stupid "breed standard" that has been set by the equally ridiculous and stupid American Kennel Club requirements that have ruined the health and personalities of so many of our wonderful canines for no other reason than snobbery. Tail docking has taken away the ability for potential buyers to get to choose since the procedure occures at 2 days of age. I absolutely love, adore and charish my ruff coat Jack, but I miss her tail and sometimes I think maybe she does too.

PBurns said...

No problem finding a Jack Russell without a docked tail. One adopted from rescue last month sitting on the couch right now. Mountain, another of my Russell's appears to have an undocked tail as the breeder (at my request) took off just the very tip.

P3D said...

The Scottish report will NOT shed much light on this subject and especially with regard to working terriers. By approaching the Veterinary College Scientists the Government department assumed that they would get the best information on working dogs. This could not have been further from the truth. The lack of any field knowledge was evident from the draft report that was issued for peer review. Not only did they not grasp the anatomical differences between the tail types and set of working breeds used today. They approached the Kennel Club (UK) for a list of working terriers’, a case of the blind leading the blind.
The choice to have your dog’s tail docked or not, should at least be accompanied by a knowledge of the reasons why tails are docked in the first place. For the future welfare of your dog it is your responsibility to at least ask why. (Google will help)