Docking (dog)

History

Purpose

Historically, tail docking was thought to prevent rabies, strengthen the back, increase the animal's speed, and prevent injuries when ratting, fighting, and baiting.

Tail docking is done in modern times either for prophylactic, therapeutic, cosmetic purposes, and/or to prevent injury. For dogs that work in the field, such as some hunting dogs, herding dogs, or terrier dogs, tails can 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. Bones in the tail can also be broken by pulling or impact in the field, causing spinal injury to the tail. The American Veterinary Medical Association (the largest veterinary professional organization in the United States), disputes these justifications, saying "These justifications for docking working dogs' tails lack substantial scientific support. In the largest study to date on tail injuries in dogs the incidence was 0.23% and it was calculated that approximately 500 dogs need to be docked to prevent one tail injury."

Modern practice

Docking of puppies younger than 10 to 14 days old is routinely carried out by both breeders and veterinarians without anesthesia.

While the tails of some working dogs are docked to prevent injury or infection, the tails of larger dogs commonly used for guard work or protection work (not to be confused with patrol work where a handler can provide secondary aid) may be docked to prevent their tails from being grabbed in a fight. This is most common in the Rottweiler, Doberman Pinscher, Bandog, Cane Corso, Boerboel, etc.

Criticism

Robert Wansborough found 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. Leaver and Reimchen, in 2007, found that longer tails were more effective than shorter tails at "conveying different intraspecific cues, such as those provided by tail motion".

It has also been suggested that 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. Videos comparing docked and undocked dogs running and jumping show that dogs who are docked have to work harder to compensate for the loss of the tail. Canine pathologist and sports-medicine expert Prof. Chris Zink believes the extra stress imposed on the joints can have long-term health consequences.

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.

Docking has been condemned by the American Veterinary Medical Association, the American Animal Hospital Association, and the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association. These organizations have also called on breed organizations to remove docking from all breed standards.

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.

Legal status

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.

United Kingdom

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.

England and Wales

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 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 69 weeks of imprisonment, or both.

Prior to the ban, the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS), the regulatory body for veterinary surgeons in the United Kingdom, had stated in the 1990s that they considered 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 was still considered unacceptable by the RCVS, no further disciplinary action was taken against vets performing docking prior to the implementation of the ban.

Northern Ireland

In Northern Ireland, legislation known as Welfare of Animals Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 made tail docking illegal except for certain working dogs.

Scotland

In Scotland, docking of any breed is illegal. The Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006 contains provisions prohibiting the mutilation of domesticated animals. However, the Scottish government has carried out a consultation on this issue and declared that they intend to legislate to bring the law in Scotland in line with the law in England and Wales, meaning that there will be an exemption for certain breeds of working dogs. This is due to the increase in serious spinal trauma reported in field dogs with undocked tails.

Legal status of dog tail docking and ear cropping by country

]]

References

• EFRA – A.D.A. submission https://web.archive.org/web/20110126050347/http://www.anti-dockingalliance.co.uk/page_18.htm

References

1. (20 October 2015). "Ear Cropping – What You Need To Know About Ear Cropping". Puppy's Place.
2. [https://web.archive.org/web/20070626075746/http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/welfare/domestic/awbillconsulttaildocking.pdf A review of the scientific aspects and veterinary opinions relating to tail docking in dogs]
3. "Canine Tail Docking FAQ".
4. "DEFRA – CDB Submission". cdb.org.
5. "Canine Tail Docking FAQ".
6. Wansborough, Robert. (1 July 1996). "Cosmetic tail docking of dogs tails". Australian Veterinary Journal.
7. (1 January 2008). "Behavioural responses of Canis familiaris to different tail lengths of a remotely-controlled life-size dog replica". Behaviour.
8. (18 December 2014). "Jumping grids - Agility dogs. Docked and undocked Aussies".
9. "Cutting off dogs' tails leads to aggression: Study".
10. "Ear cropping and tail docking of dogs".
11. "Ear cropping and tail docking".
12. "CVMA | Documents | Cosmetic Alteration – Position Statement".
13. [http://www.akc.org/events/conformation/faqs.cfm faq] American Kennel Club
14. [http://www.akc.org/breeds/boxer/breed_standard.cfm Boxer Breed Standard] American Kennel Club
15. [http://www.akc.org/canine_legislation/position_statements.cfm#earcropping Ear Cropping, Tail Docking and Dewclaw Removal] {{Webarchive. link. (3 September 2011 American Kennel Club Canine Legislation Position Statements)
16. [http://www.avma.org/issues/policy/animal_welfare/tail_docking.asp AVMA.org] {{webarchive. link. (25 January 2010)
17. (12 November 1992). "RCVS guidelines on docking". Council of Docked Breeds.
18. Clover, Charles. (5 April 2007). "Neglectful dog owners could face prosecution". The Daily Telegraph.
19. (4 October 2016). "Scotland's ban on tail docking of dogs lifted".
20. (3 August 2010). "Tail docking illegal in Australia". [[RSPCA Australia]].
21. "Zakon o zaštiti i dobrobiti životinja".
22. (16 November 2015). "Ear cropping, tail docking not allowed under P.E.I. animal welfare act". [[The Guardian (Charlottetown).
23. "Newfoundland and Labrador Regulation 35/12".
24. (12 October 2018). "Bill 27 – Animal Protection Act – RA".
25. (25 March 2010). "N.S veterinarians ban tail docking". CBC News – Nova Scotia.
26. (3 October 2008). "No more nip and tuck for show dogs: N.B. vets".
27. (6 February 2016). "Quebec's order of veterinarians bans pet cosmetic surgery". CBC News – Montreal.
28. "Alberta veterinarians vote to ban declawing, ear cropping, tail docking surgeries".
29. "Archived copy".
30. "Archived copy".
31. (28 October 2015). "Cosmetic ear cropping banned by B.C. veterinarians". CBC News – British Columbia.
32. (10 February 2012). "Ear cropping of dogs banned in Manitoba". CBC News – Manitoba.
33. "New Bylaw Prohibits Veterinarians from Performing Ear Cropping Procedure | Manitoba Veterinary Medical Association".
34. "Archived copy".
35. [http://www.wsava.org/Taildock.htm WSAVA Tail Docking Position Statement] {{webarchive. link. (15 February 2008)
36. "Mutilations and tail docking of dogs". [[Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs]].
37. "Explanatory memorandum to the docking of working dogs' tails (England) regulation 2007".
38. "Eläinsuojelulaki 247/1996 – Ajantasainen lainsäädäntö – FINLEX ®". finlex.fi.
39. (18 May 2004). "Cosmetic tail docking of dogs tails".
40. "Rappel législatif sur la coupe d'oreilles". chiens-online.com.
41. (25 February 2025). "DECRETO NÚMERO 5-2017".
42. (25 February 2025). "Es dañino cortarles las orejas y la cola a los perros".
43. [https://www.guatevision.com/guatemala/conozca-las-sanciones-que-puede-recibir-si-decide-cortarle-la-cola-y-orejas-a-su-perro Conozca las sanciones que puede recibir si decide cortarle la cola y orejas a su perro] {{webarchive. link
44. "Új jogi szabályozás a felelős állattartásért - Nébih".
45. "2012 Állatvédelmi Törvény |".
46. "犬の断尾". koinuno-heya.com.
47. "Code of Welfare (Dogs) 2010". [[Biosecurity New Zealand]].
48. (15 October 2012). "O'NEILL ANNOUNCES BAN ON TAIL DOCKING OF DOGS".
49. [http://www.paragraf.rs/propisi/zakon_o_dobrobiti_zivotinja.html Serbian Animal Protection Act]
50. [http://zakonodaja.gov.si/rpsi/r08/predpis_ZAKO4018.html Slovene Animal Protection Act] {{webarchive. link. (9 February 2010 {{in lang). sl
51. "Hayvanları Koruma Kanunu". tbmm.gov.tr.
52. (9 June 2006). "New call to action for amended NY state crop/dock bill". [[American Kennel Club]].