I’ve been wondering about this for a while, but it came back into my mind when reading this thread, or more specifically, when seeing the pictures of Jessie the dog. I’m not sure if this is a GQ, but for now it seems like the most appropriate place to post.
Now, in Finland the issue that puzzles me doesn’t come up, since ear cropping has been illegal since the 1970’s and tail-docking since 1996 or so, but for other countries the laws are obviously different. Here’s the question: I can understand that the breed standard for certain breeds calls for a docked tail or cropped ears and that show dogs typically must conform to this standard in countries where cropping and docking is legal. However, what about dogs that are not going to participate in any shows whatsoever any time anywhere?
For example, this web page has pictures on different types of Doberman ear crops, including the “pet crop”, which is different from the “show crop”. If the dog is not going to be entered in any shows and will live its life solely as a companion, why are the ears still cropped? Or, as in the pictures of Jessie, why dock the tail of a mixed-breed animal that does not have any sort of breed standard to conform to? It seems to me like the more sensible thing to do would be to leave the animal as-is instead of going through any extra hassle.
Sometimes it’s done because of a fear of injuries. Some of these dogs end up with ears that split and bleed, or tails that get broken easily. Then, there are the people who just like the way it looks. It’s said that it can be harder for a dog to find a home if it doesn’t look the way people expect it to, so even a breeder who’s on the fence might take the entire litter down to have their tails docked, unless the future owner says not to.
I agree that it is done for looks. Afterall, a non working labrador and a non working doberman have the same chance of tail injury, but we don’t ear crop or tail dock the labrador
I have heard this word used for the procedure for more than 10 years, so they apparently have been using that term for quite a while now. What did they originally call the procedure?
Some tail-docking is for the convenience of the owner. For example:
A good friend of mine got a Great Dane with natural ears and tail. She was a happy, friendly dog, and her tail was a menace. She’d clear a coffee table with one swipe. That wasn’t so bad, but her tail knocked over a small child, and any adult nearby would feel like he’d been thumped with a fungo bat. She got docked.
My brother fosters rescued greyhounds awaiting adoption. Most greys don’t wag a lot, but he had one with a happy tail. The dog was always whipping his tail into furniture, and he trailed blood spots throughout the house. He had a bandaged tail most of the time. I don’t know what the outcome was, but if I had adopted that one, I would have had him docked.
For pure-bred dogs, tail docking is usually done right at birth or when the pups are very very young, as that is considered less cruel than docking the tails later. It is not possible to tell at that early stage which pups will be show-quality and which will not, so the entire litter is docked. A pure-bred docked puppy can be show-quality or pet-quality, but a non-docked puppy is only pet-quality and therefore potentially much less valuable.
I have two pure-bred non-show quality cocker spaniels. When I was in the market, it was literally impossible for me to find non-docked cocker puppies. They are all docked, right at birth. I wish the breed standards did not require docking because I personally consider it a pointless infliction of pain. I consider ear cropping to be completely reprehensible (though the difference is obviously only one of degree) and would never own or buy a cropped dog.
ETA: I should clarify that the first paragraph of show-quality (docked) dogs versus pet-quality (undocked) dogs obviously only applies to breeds where docking is the breed standard, like cockers and poodles. Many other breed standards prohibit docking, since a tail is required. It’s the arbitrariness of the breed standards on docking that bugs me.
A rescued pit bull of my acquaintance had had her ears docked in what was obviously a cruel and amateur way. The edges are all jagged and scarred, and the result is that the dog looks meaner than she would if her ears were floppy. Another “benefit” to the original owners would have been that floppy ears can be dangerous when fighting dogs in pits, because they are just extra flaps of skin to be bitten or otherwise torn off.
These are the only conceivable purposes I could imagine for docking this (or in fact, any unregistered) dog’s ears (altho I welcome having my ignorance fought on this matter).
My pet dog is a cocker border collie mix, whose papers say cockapoo. He had his tail docked (we got him at 2.) I’ve often wondered why, so maybe that explains it. Doesn’t seem to have hurt him any, except we have to look at him wag his butt in happiness.
IMHO the “risk of injuries” claim seems disingenuous. As noted above, undocked/uncropped dogs even from the same breed don’t seem to have a plague of injuries.
People will do quite a lot to themselves for looks, generally they don’t hesitate to do similarly to their dogs for looks.
We used to have a Weimaraner with an un-docked tail. That tail was as long as a man’s arm, about an inch or so in diameter, solid muscle and bone, and when he was happy that dog cleared coffee tables with a single wag. Also terrorized small children as his butt was just about head level for a toddler. Not to mention persons of the male persuasion whose crotchtal region was in the way of that tail. I can understand how, if he had been used as an actual hunting dog, that his tail could have been subject to more injury than that of a short-tailed pooch. Since he was fully-grown when we were given him, we were not about to make him go through the procedure. Our youngest daughter just learned to be alert when the dog came through the room!