Docking is the removal of portions of an animal's tail. While docking and bobbing are more commonly used to refer to removal of the tail, the term cropping is used in reference to the ears. Tail docking occurs in one of two ways. The first involves constricting the blood supply to the tail with a rubber ligature for a few days until the tail falls off. The second involves the severance of the tail with surgical scissors or a scalpel. The tail is amputated at the dock.
At least 17 dog breeds have naturally occurring bob tail lines. These appear similar to docked dogs but are a distinct naturally occurring genotype.
Historically, tail docking was thought to prevent rabies, strengthen the back, increase the animal's speed, and prevent injuries when ratting, fighting, and baiting. In early Georgian times[clarification needed] in the United Kingdom a tax was levied upon working dogs with tails so many types of dogs were docked to avoid this tax. The tax was repealed in 1796 but that did not stop the practice from persisting.
Tail docking is done in modern times either for prophylactic, therapeutic, or cosmetic purposes. For dogs that worked in the field, such as some hunting dogs and herding dogs, tails could collect burrs and foxtails, causing pain and infection and, due to the tail's wagging, may be subject to abrasion or other injury while moving through dense brush or thickets.
Docking to puppies fewer than 10 to 14 days old is routinely carried out by both breeders and veterinarians without anesthesia. Opponents of these procedures state that most tail dockings are done for aesthetic reasons rather than health concerns and are unnecessarily painful for the dog. They point out that even non-working show or pet dogs are routinely docked. As a result, tail defects that docking proponents claim makes docking necessary in the first place are perpetuated in the breeds.[clarification needed] They point to the many breeds of working dogs with long tails that are not traditionally docked, including English Pointers, Setters, Herding dogs, and Foxhounds.
Robert Wansborough argued in a 1996 paper that docking tails puts dogs at a disadvantage in several ways. First, dogs use their tails to communicate with other dogs (and with people); a dog without a tail might be significantly handicapped in conveying fear, caution, aggression, playfulness, and so on.
Certain breeds use their tails as rudders when swimming, and possibly for balance when running, so active dogs with docked tails might be at a disadvantage compared to their tailed peers. In 2007, Stephen Leaver, a graduate student at the University of Victoria, published a paper on tail docking which found that tail length was important in the transmission of social cues. The study found that dogs with shorter tails (docked tails) would be approached with caution, as if the approaching dog was unsure of the emotional state of the docked dog. The study goes on to suggest that dogs with docked tails may grow up to be more aggressive. The reasoning postulated by Tom Reimchen, UVic Biologist and supervisor of the study, was that dogs who grew up without being able to efficiently transmit social cues would grow up to be more anti-social and thus more aggressive.
Wansborough also investigated seven years of records from an urban veterinary practice to demonstrate that undocked tails result in less harm than docked tails.
Influence of kennel clubs
Critics point out that kennel clubs with breed standards that do not make allowance for uncropped or undocked dogs put pressure on owners and breeders to continue the practice. Although the American Kennel Club (AKC) says that it has no rules that require docking or that make undocked animals ineligible for the show ring, standards for many breeds put undocked animals at a disadvantage for the conformation show ring. The American breed standard for boxers, for example, recommends that an undocked tail be "severely penalized."
The AKC position is that ear cropping and tail docking are "acceptable practices integral to defining and preserving breed character and/or enhancing good health," even though the practice is currently opposed by the American Veterinary Medical Association.
Today, many countries ban cropping and docking because they consider the practices unnecessary, painful, cruel or mutilation. In Europe, the cropping of ears is prohibited in all countries that have ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals. Some countries that ratified the convention made exceptions for tail docking.
Show dogs are no longer docked in the United Kingdom. A dog docked before 28 March 2007 in Wales and 6 April 2007 in England may continue to be shown at all shows in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland throughout its life. A dog docked on, or after, the above dates, regardless of where it was docked, may not be shown at shows in England and Wales where the public is charged a fee for admission. Where a working dog has been docked in England and Wales under the respective regulations, however, it may be shown where the public is charged a fee, so long as it is shown “only to demonstrate its working ability”. It will thus be necessary to show working dogs in such a way as to demonstrate their working ability and not conformity to a standard. A dog legally docked in England, Wales, Northern Ireland, or abroad may be shown at any show in Scotland or Northern Ireland.
In England and Wales, ear cropping is illegal, and no dog with cropped ears can take part in any Kennel Club event (including agility and other non-conformation events). Tail docking is also illegal, except for a few working breeds; this exemption applies only when carried out by a registered veterinary surgeon.
The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS), the regulatory body for veterinary surgeons in the United Kingdom, has stated they consider tail docking to be "an unjustified mutilation and unethical unless done for therapeutic or acceptable prophylactic reasons". In 1995 a veterinary surgeon was brought before the RCVS disciplinary council for "disgraceful professional conduct" for carrying out cosmetic docking. The surgeon claimed that the docking was performed to prevent future injuries, and the case was dismissed for lack of evidence otherwise. Although cosmetic docking is still considered unacceptable by the RCVS, no further disciplinary action has been taken against vets performing docking.
The Animal Welfare Act 2006 makes the docking of dogs' tails a criminal offence, except for working dogs such as those used by the police force, the military, rescue services, pest control, and those used in connection with lawful animal shooting. Three options were presented to Parliament in March 2006 with Parliament opting for the second:
- An outright ban on docking dogs' tails (opposed by a majority of 278 to 267)
- A ban on docking dogs' tails with an exception for working dogs (supported by a majority of 476 to 63)
- Retention of the status quo.
Those convicted of unlawful docking are liable to a fine of up to £20,000, up to 51 weeks of imprisonment or both.
In Scotland docking of any breed is illegal. The Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 contains provisions prohibiting the mutilation of domesticated animals.
Legal status of dog tail docking and ear cropping by country
|Template:Country data Afghanistan||Unrestricted|
|Australia||Banned in all states and territories.||June 2004 (East)|
16 March 2007 (WA)
|Austria||Banned||1 January 2005|
|Belgium||Banned||1 January 2006|
|Template:Country data Bolivia||Unrestricted|
|Brazil||Banned for cosmetic purposes|
|Bosnia and Herzegovina||Restricted: Can only be done by a vet|
|Canada||Banned in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia by the New Brunswick Veterinary Medical Association (NBVMA) and the Nova Scotia Veterinary Medical Association (NSVMA); members of these provincial Veterinary Medical Associations are not allowed to perform the procedures on dogs by rule of their organizing body. However it is not Provincial law in Nova Scotia, nor Federal law in Canada. Banned in Newfoundland and Labrador in the Newfoundland and Labrador Regulation 35/12 on 2 May 2012.|
|Template:Country data Colombia||Banned|
|Template:Country data Costa Rica||Unrestricted|
|Czech Republic||Ear cropping banned, tail docking unrestricted|
|Denmark||Banned, with exceptions for five gun dog breeds||1 June 1996|
|Template:Country data Egypt||Unrestricted|
|England||Restricted: can only be done by vet on a number of working dog breeds.||2006|
|Finland||Banned||1 July 1996|
|France||Tail docking is unrestricted (France opted out of the rule regarding docking when it ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals) Any other surgery for aesthetic purposes (such as ear cropping) is banned since 2009|
|Germany||Banned, with exceptions for working gun dogs.||1 May 1998|
|India||Unrestricted, from Madras High Court ruling (WP № 1750/2012)|
|Iran||Unrestricted — tail docking and ear trimming are still taught in veterinary faculties in Iran|
|Template:Country data Republic of Ireland||Banned||7 March 2014|
|Israel||Banned for cosmetic purposes.||2000|
|Template:Country data Kuwait||Unrestricted|
|Template:Country data Morocco||Unrestricted: Morocco has no animal protection laws|
|Netherlands||Banned||1 September 2001|
|New Zealand||Cropping ears is banned, docking tails is restricted to those trained and acting under an approved quality assurance programme in puppies less than four days old.|
|Template:Country data Northern Ireland||Ear cropping illegal. Welfare of Animals Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 bans tail docking.|
|Portugal||Cropping ears is banned. Docking tails is allowed, as long as it's performed by a veterinarian.||2001|
|Template:Country data Scotland||Banned||2006|
|Slovakia||Banned||1 January 2003|
|South Africa||Unrestricted||June 2007|
|Spain||Banned in some autonomies|
|Template:Country data Sri Lanka||Unrestricted|
|Switzerland||Banned||1 July 1981 (ears)|
|Template:Country data Tunisia||Unrestricted|
|Turkey||Banned||24 June 2004|
|United States||Unrestricted. Some states, including New York, and Vermont have considered bills to make the practice illegal.|
|Template:Country data Virgin Islands, British||Banned||2005|
|Template:Country data Wales||Restricted: can only be done by vet on a number of working dog breeds||2006|
- "Ear Cropping - What You Need To Know About Ear Cropping". Puppy's Place.
- ^ a b c d e f A review of the scientific aspects and veterinary opinions relating to tail docking in dogs
- "DEFRA - CDB Submission". cdb.org.
- Wansborough, Robert (1 July 1996). "Cosmetic tail docking of dogs tails". Australian Veterinary
Journal. Archived from the original on 16 November 2007. Retrieved 31 December 2007. line feed character in
|publisher=at position 22 (help)
- faq American Kennel Club
- Boxer Breed Standard American Kennel Club
- Ear Cropping, Tail Docking and Dewclaw Removal American Kennel Club Canine Legislation Position Statements
- Clover, Charles (5 April 2007). "Neglectful dog owners could face prosecution". The Daily Telegraph. London. Retrieved 30 December 2007.
- "Tail docking illegal in Australia". RSPCA Australia. 3 August 2010. Archived from the original on 13 December 2007. Retrieved 18 January 2012.
- ^ a b c WSAVA Tail Docking Position Statement
- "Mutilations and tail docking of dogs". Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Archived from the original on 31 July 2009. Retrieved 25 March 2015.
The docking of dogs' tails has been banned in England since 6 April 2007. There are exemptions from the ban for certain types of working dog, or where docking is performed for medical treatment.
- Explanatory memorandum to the docking of working dogs' tails (England) regulation 2007
- "Eläinsuojelulaki 247/1996 - Ajantasainen lainsäädäntö - FINLEX ®". finlex.fi.
- "Cosmetic tail docking of dogs tails". 18 May 2004. Retrieved 23 February 2013.
- "Rappel législatif sur la coupe d'oreilles". chiens-online.com.
- "犬の断尾". koinuno-heya.com.
- "Code of Welfare (Dogs) 2010". Biosecurity New Zealand.
- Slovene Animal Protection Act Template:Sl icon
- "Hayvanları Koruma Kanunu". tbmm.gov.tr.
- "New call to action for amended NY state crop/dock bill". American Kennel Club. 9 June 2006. Retrieved 31 December 2007.
EFRA - A.D.A. submission http://anti-dockingalliance.co.uk/page_18.htm
- Leaver, S. and T. E. Reimchen. 2008. Behavioural responses of dogs to different tail lengths on a robotic dog replica: testing the effects of tail docking. Behaviour 145: 377-390.
- Artelle, K. A., L. K. Dumoulin and T. E. Reimchen. 2010. Behavioural responses of dogs to asymmetrical tail-wagging of a robotic dog replica. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition, 2010