Spaniel puppy with docked tail?

[Stitchintimesaves9]

Advice please! We (DH, DS (16), DD (14)) have been wanting a family dog for a while, done lots of research and one the breeds we thought would be best for us is a Cocker Spaniel. We've just found out about a litter of Cockers very close to where we live. The breeder owns a boarding kennels/dog grooming business and is used and very highly rated by friends of mine. My friends also know the Mum, and say she has a lovely temperament etc

Visited the pups a few days ago, all fine. They're currently 2 weeks old. Mum was lovely, pups being raised in a family home - definitely not a puppy farm. But the pups' tails had been docked! They are from a working strain, so maybe this is routine? Just wondered what peoples' thoughts were?

"I'm interested in how people develop or change their opinions on issues like this."

I used to have no strong opinion about docking, in fact I remember defending it somewhat years ago when someone I thought was a bit 'townie' ( ) said it was cruel, I accused them of not understanding working dogs, country ways etc.

It changed when I began work in a veterinary practice (admin, not a clinical role) and saw it being done. I now consider it barbaric and wholly unnecessary.

changed when I began work in a veterinary practice (admin, not a clinical role) and saw it being done. I now consider it barbaric and wholly unnecessary

Hear hear, because it is. I am a country bumpkin who opposes fox hunting though.

It is still very common to see dogs with docked tails from breeds which were never working dogs or have not been for many many years.
It became established purely as fashion, as is cropping ears in U.S. and elsewhere. There's absolutely nothing to stop a breeder from chopping the tails off puppies which will all be pets. I've never heard of anyone ever being prosecuted for it.

lumela
Who is showing bad manners? You sound ever so sensitive.

So these dogs with the terrible tail injuries... are they working breeds?

The justification for docking because working dogs go through the sort of undergrowth where they are at higher risk of picking up tail injuries. My experience doesn't correlate with this, and a responsible handler shouldn't be sending their dogs into dangerous situations, tail or no tail.

If you are saying these dogs are getting injured just going about their day to day lives, it totally undermines the justification for docking working dogs. If all dogs are at risk of tail injuries when not working, they spaniels shouldn't be singled out for docking on the basis at being at higher risk.

spare:
You imply that I'm lying because, inconveniently for your argument, my experience doesn't tally with yours, and then accuse me of being 'ever so sensitive' when I don't like it.
Charming.

So these dogs with the terrible tail injuries...
I'm amazed that you find sarcasm a fitting response to serious injuries in dogs.
are they working breeds?
Yup. Traditionally docked working breeds, with vulnerable tails. If pet dogs of these breeds suffer such injuries, workers are far more likely to.

I agree with LumelaMme lots of working spaniels damage their tail if they do the job they have been bred for centuries to do, both our springers were docked to different levels and we have never had a problem with their little tails, but they both work, there is a reason working dogs are docked and lots of really caring breeders and owners to it to prevent accidents later when the dog rips and catches their tail in undergrowth which is extremely common and harder on an older dog, this is not the same as docking for larger guard breeds and does serve a purpose. Vets do carry the procedure now though they are often not as good at it as more experienced working dog people. These people live for their dogs so try not to judge before the whole picture is clear, controversial though🙄 Don't see as many complaints about docked lambs....

Lumela
I have said you are lying
I said I'm taking all the anecdotes with a pinch of salt
If you take that to mean your anecdotes, it says a lot more about you than me

But just to clarify, you think all working beeed dogs should get their tails docked to protect them from potential tail injuries they may pick up from their daily life? Not just working dogs?
Because their tails are so delicate and injury-prone that they just can't be trusted to keep them?
Wow.

I must say I also find the stance of chopping a limb off to stop there being any chance of said limb getting hurt, utterly bizarre.

Why chop off tails because, some may injure theirs at some point? So harm all to prevent some needing to under go the same amputation, you are inflicting on all of them.

I'm actually wondering if really all that needs to happen, to prevent most injuries, is clip the tails? Someone above suggested it as how they kept their dogs tail safe. In which case it would very much be like the docking of shire (and other working) horses. We used to dock them to keep them from getting injured / caught up in equipment. Now even when horses are doing traditional farming work or logging, etc, they don't need to be docked they just have their tails plaited and bandaged up out of the way whilst working.

I'm also wondering if it's easy for us to justify chopping off an important part of an animal, due to us not requiring tails. I don't think people appreciate how essential a limb, a tail, is to other species.

Oh, come on spare:
'I said I'm taking all the anecdotes with a pinch of salt...If you take that to mean your anecdotes, it says a lot more about you than me'
How else am I meant to interpret that?
Your whole tone implies that you don't believe a word I'm saying.

But just to clarify, you think all working beeed dogs should get their tails docked to protect them from potential tail injuries they may pick up from their daily life? Not just working dogs?
I've not said that anywhere. I have just pointed out that pet dogs from formerly docked working breeds (from working lines) also suffer traumatic tail injuries.

Now we can add misrepresentation to your approach to what I'm saying.

BLUE
Why chop off tails because, some may injure theirs at some point? So harm all to prevent some needing to under go the same amputation, you are inflicting on all of them.
It's not 'some may', BLUE, it's 'many will'. Tail injuries in working dogs from traditionally docked breeds are very common, and can take months to heal.

It is "some may" though. I certainly wouldn't call the figures quoted for spaniels earlier "many will".

But tbh even if it was most (which certainly doesn't seem to match up with earlier quoted statistics) later needed tails docking, why subject all to it, at an important developmental stage, just to prevent less than all needing it later.

Is there any research into whether, as a previous poster suggested, keeping tails clipped, rather than full spaniel fur, would help reduce injuries?

Also why are spaniels such as Springers and Cockers (even just pet ones as you've suggested) at so much more risk than Cavaliers? Cavaliers have that same spaniel tail.

Lumela
You aren't making a single grain of sense.
You back up the case for docking working dogs with stories of pets getting tail injuries

That's a bit like making the case to ban tackling in rugby by saying kids also fall of trampolines and hurt themselves.

Is it necessary to dock the tails of working dogs to protect them from tail injuries while they are working? Not in my experience and not the experience of my vet friends.

Is it necessary to dock the tails of working breeds kept as pets in case they hurt themselves? Absolutely not and someone would have to be certifiable to argue for this.
Are stories of pets injuring tails in any way relevant to the debate for docking working dogs? Absolutely not.

Perhaps the issue is that by docking for so long, breeders have been unwittingly breeding tail 'faults' for years?
If tails are suddenly so delicate and injury prone, the responsible thing would be to concentrate of breeding good tail confirmation and strength back into working breeds, rather than amputating them

In the meantime, anyone who gives a single shiny fuck about animal welfare should carry on boycotting breeders who needlessly dock their litters just for the sake of an outdated tradition and fashion

I would be highly concerned about having a working bred cocker spaniel as a pet for a first time dog, tail or no tail. If you go down this route, be aware that walking will not be enough. You must get that dog working for and with you, because its instincts will tell it to work. That could be hunting for a tennis ball or a dummy just as easily as a bird, but if you don't provide a job it will find its own and that can cause real trouble. There are gundog trainers out there who use modern, reward-based methods and you will need to find one.

They're lovely dogs, but a big commitment!

Is it necessary to dock the tails of working dogs to protect them from tail injuries while they are working? Not in my experience and not the experience of my vet friends.
Try this link But I expect you'll take those 'anecdotes' with 'a pinch of salt' too.

That's a bit like making the case to ban tackling in rugby by saying kids also fall of trampolines and hurt themselves.
That's a completely false analogy. What I'm saying is along the lines of, if adults can fall and hurt themselves when hacking gently in the woods, they are at greater risk of injury when three-day eventing.

Are stories of pets injuring tails in any way relevant to the debate for docking working dogs? Absolutely not.
Don't you see that if pet docks of those breeds can injure their tails, it's even more likely that working dogs will?

BLUE
But tbh even if it was most (which certainly doesn't seem to match up with earlier quoted statistics) later needed tails docking, why subject all to it, at an important developmental stage, just to prevent less than all needing it later.
Please read the study linked to earlier in this post.

Also why are spaniels such as Springers and Cockers (even just pet ones as you've suggested) at so much more risk than Cavaliers? Cavaliers have that same spaniel tail.
a) because some springers and cockers work and b) they are much more active dogs than Cavs.

*pet dogs

I can just about see an argument for docking of certain working dogs because having an injury which takes them out of action affects their work. I suspect they also injure other parts of their body but it's harder to chop off say a leg. I don't like it but then I am not a vet nor someone who works dogs so hard to argue for non docking other than having a personal opinion.

I can see no justification for docking pet working breeds. Yes mine bounds through undergrowth and gets things tangled up in his ears/tail etc but he has had more injuries to his legs than his tail so i think it should be harder to dock tails of puppies that are clearly not going to be worked although I know that is hard to police because it has to be done when the puppy is a few days old when it might not be clear who they will be sold to.

Yes, but you don't know which will be working dogs. Mine is a show type rescue (with a full tail) but he's ace on a day's beating. He's got the drive for it, and he led me into it because I was that person who needed a gundog trainer to help with my 'self-employed' mad spaniel.

The op might not mean to work their dog, but who knows where life with a spaniel might take them?

Spudlet but that then goes back to the question of do you chop off all their tails 'just in case'.

Well, that depends on the breeder doesn't it? I wouldn't rule out an undocked puppy if I was looking to buy a working dog, but I'd want to know from the breeder why they'd made that choice, because IME most people who know their working spaniels dock, and I want to buy from someone who knows what they're doing. Fair enough if they have changed their mind, but I'd want to know why.

It's also worth pointing out that a spaniel with a high work drive will work the hedgerows just as enthusiastically on a walk, so their tails are still at risk of injury... my lad has a show type coat which brings its own issues but it does give his tail a bit of padding with a careful haircut, and he doesn't wag anywhere near as hard as the working types I've known. I've observed that their coats are often thinner / finer, so they aren't as well protected too. Only my anecdata though.

I guess what I think is that anyone who breeds working breed dogs should be considering every one a potential worker, and making their choices of parents, homes and docking etc based on that assumption. So you might not insist that everyone who buys one shoots, but you should be making sure they know about the drives their dog will have and how to direct them, for example. Does that make sense?

It's also worth posting out that the Scottish ban on tail docking was repealed as it pertains to working dogs. I happen to know the guy who was in charge of that policy area at the time and I know it was not a decision taken lightly or made on a whim - he was a very experienced guy in that policy area (animal welfare) who thought it was for the best. Make of that what you will.

lum you've missed my point you said about pet cockers and springers often getting these tail injuries. So responding by saying some are working dogs, doesn't really answer my question. On your second point - whilst Cavs are calmer in the house they also have an abundance of energy out and about and run through bushes and undergrowth. Mine often looks like he's been dragged through a hedge backwards. So if springers and Cockers kept as pets are at high risk, as you seemed to be saying earlier, but Cavs are not - is it just down to bad breeding of working spaniels? In which case the answer would be to stop docking and start improving the breeding.

BLUE
lum you've missed my point you said about pet cockers and springers often getting these tail injuries. So responding by saying some are working dogs, doesn't really answer my question.
Sorry, it wasn't clear. There's no data about the risk of tail injuries in pet dogs from working lines of traditionally docked breeds. IME they do damage their tails quite a lot, sometimes seriously enough to require amputation, but there are no stats on it (not that I know of, anyway).

So if springers and Cockers kept as pets are at high risk, as you seemed to be saying earlier, but Cavs are not - is it just down to bad breeding of working spaniels?
It's do with the type of tail, how fast and hard it wags, and how much crashing through the undergrowth a dog does. I don't anything about Cav tails, but certainly field-bred springer spaniels and the HPR breeds have long whippy tails, with not much fur and not much fat (the absolute opposite of a labrador's tail, which is proportionately shorter, fatter, and with much more fur). And they wag these tails like crazy. It would be great to breed dogs like this with more resilient tails, but I would think it would be a long and complicated job (I'm not a dog breeder).

It's great that you have an active Cav. Most of the ones I see are quiet little things who are rarely off the lead.

spud
I happen to know the guy who was in charge of that policy area at the time and I know it was not a decision taken lightly or made on a whim - he was a very experienced guy in that policy area (animal welfare) who thought it was for the best
That's really interesting.

My working cocker isn't worked. I did start gundog training which was great for him mentally but I unknowingly gave him too much freedom as a pup which made it difficult. However, he still hunts through bracken etc and scrapes his little body to pieces (He doesn't notice!) so imagine that we're still best off with a docked tail as a split tail sounds like a nightmare!

It's great that you have an active Cav. Most of the ones I see are quiet little things who are rarely off the lead.

The only Cavs I know who aren't as energetic as other spaniels are either really old or morbidly obese

Sorry posted too soon...

Cavs do seem to be one of those breeds where people see seriously overweight as the way a cav should look. Which is sad.
By nature Cavs should be really energetic when out and about, just like any other spaniel. But at home, their love of sitting in your lap overrides the energy (unless you show any sign that you might start playing, in which case they are straight back into excited spaniel mode). It's what I loved about the breed - calm when you want to chill at home, yet energetic and enthusiastic when you want to play/go on walks.

Our springer had his docked as they were purely a working line. I would much rather he had a tail but I guess they didn't know that a non farm family were going to take him.
His little stump still wagged ferociously and in terms of tucking his tail in between his legs - he would just bow his head instead.