Souff

I miss seeing well bred Maltese of good temperament. Would be interesting to see how many Maltese pups were put on to the Limited Register in 1987 and in the following years. The practice did not stop unregistered breeders using Maltese to produce crossbred SWFs in their thousands but I suppose it kept the competition down in the show ring. Souff edited for s & g I really don't think the showring has much to do with Malt numbers. Even when they were at an all time high with registrations there were very few shown. Keeping a Malt is a full show coat is not for the faint hearted and as a result they have never been a popular show dog, they were always much more popular as a pet so they could be scissored or clipped off to a more managable coat. For some reason the show dogs need a coat that drags on the ground so they lead rather restricted lives with their coats rolled up in "crackers" to protect it between shows. No one keeps a dog in show coat when it retires from the ring, they are trimmed back to at least clear of the ground so they can run and play like normal dogs. I take your point. Same goes for the Silkies and Yorkies and other little ones with long coats. A lot of work goes into it. If it isnt to keep others out of the show ring, then putting all pups on the Limited Register has been done with the idea of stopping other registered breeders from breeding with them. And the end result of that train of thought is that the dogs still got bred from and the pedigrees are now lost. No matter what the motivation, putting whole litters of pups on the Limited Register has been disastrous for some breeds. One can only wonder when the practice will be outlawed or regulated, for the sake of the future of those breeds. Another huge drain on Australian gene pools has been through the very obliging and very protected Hawaiian vacuum cleaner ..... Souff

I think the popularity of breeds come and go though and always will. What is more telling, and is incredibly sad, is that the overall figures for purebred dogs is in a dramatic freefall. In many breeds the freefall just continues, but it is not without warning but across society .... vets, universities, breeders, animal welfare orgs and canine registries .... have pretty much failed to heed the warnings. All know the consequences of depleted gene pools (or they should know) but what steps have been taken to reverse the dangerous trends? None so blind ...... or apathetic. Souff

I miss seeing well bred Maltese of good temperament. Would be interesting to see how many Maltese pups were put on to the Limited Register in 1987 and in the following years. The practice did not stop unregistered breeders using Maltese to produce crossbred SWFs in their thousands but I suppose it kept the competition down in the show ring. Souff edited for s & g

Ah yes, those lovely Bat ears! :D Souff loves Bostons but all the ones I know are terrible snorers. PF, "preferably docked" implies CHOICE. As I said in an earlier post the dog world is HUGELY varied and we must look to the dogs needs and apply what choice we have in the best interest of the dogs. We had choice ripped away from us, for political reasons, and yet the rest of the thinking world did not follow suit. That speaks volumes for me. Souff is going to go and get some sleep. I will have to think more about those Lab plans tomorrow. I might need to look back over those old Black Maltese Terrier posts - it is inspiration like that the dog world needs. Laboratory produced perfect dogs. Yessirree! The hijackers can now have the thread. G'nite :p Souff

And you own or breed a docked breed?

In that case, which breeders of previously docked dogs are now selecting for strong, well furnished tails with good carriage? That should solve the problem of tail damage in the future. Of course! That is the answer! Why didn't we think of that before? We will set up a laboratory, get all the genes represented in the correct quantities, and knock out the recessives. No worries - instant fix! Oh damn, I just had second thoughts .... what I really need is a few centuries to reverse those problem tails. But then again there will be some rogue breeder out there who wont do that and they will just come along and contaminate the laboratory-produced dogs with perfect tails. Bloody backyard breeders again, should be legislated out of existence. Breeders can spend all their lives dedicated to selecting the right genes GayleK. And just 1 inappropriate mating can undo that good work. Souff

[quote name='GayleK' date='18th Apr 2011 - 06:27 PM' post='5263353' And another question for those of you who work in veterinary clinics, how often would you have undocked dogs presenting with tail injuries? Cases out of 100 or 1000 maybe? Good animal welfare is not something that should ever be based on volume. Quality of life is far more important aspect.

I believe their good balance was coming from their hindquarters, rather than from the tail. It is good to look at this video and the video of the corgi. Good balance features in both videos.

She is a Finnish Lapphund Snap - Minxy ! Ah, thank you. I don't run into Finnish Lapphunds every day so please excuse Souff for not doing homework.

Aussielover, it all gets back to the many differences in dogs, and the many differences in what the different breeds can, and cannot, do. What is fine for your breed with a tail is not necessarily the case in another breeds. What people are saying here is that the dogs were not handicapped in their communication simply because they were docked. That claim is an outright lie and can be disproven by thousands of happy docked dogs who were, and still are, able to communicate beautifully. It is a pity that people can only think of docking through their own breed and not take into account the vast differences that we have in the dog world overall. We don't treat all humans the same. We look to their differences and treat according to their needs. Souff

And just to contrast is a docked corgi doing extremely well at flyball and in my opinion, her turn on the box is a lot better than a lot of the dogs in that video. Well that darned corgi will just have to run under handicap in future I am afraid - it has a clear advantage!

Is that an Aussie Shepherd or a Border Collie in the photo?

Nice. From the way that some of them are pushing off from the box, I would venture to suggest that the better ones on the turn are the dogs who have the better turn of stifle and well angulated hindquarters and these will give them the edge in the flexibility stakes over a dog who just doesnt have the same strength in the hindquarters. The tail follows what happens in those two areas. Souff

Does "body stance" include dancing around on your hind legs, even though you don't have a tail, when you are just sooo pleased to see somebody? :p The best dancer here is 14 years old and yes, she was docked as a puppy. She could give lessons in communication .... and balance!

Exactly.

Awwww, you stop picking on the Chis now ... its a very big world outside that handbag!

These type of comparisons were all part of the hysteria and lies that were used in the propaganda to get tail docking banned in Australia. For those who are really interested the TAIL is NOT a LIMB, it is an extension of the spine and was never intended to be weight bearing like a limb. As for the BALANCE argument, this is another red herring used to whip up hysteria by those who don't like docking. It is not just a tail that aids in balance. A dog can be long tailed or short tailed and be clumsy, or it can be well balanced and agile. The build and weight of the dog has a lot to do with their ability to be agile and well balanced. I suspect also that what goes on in that part of a dog behind the eyes has a lot to do with how well animals can balance. If you have ever seen a dog with NO TAIL (born that way) concentrating on making its way carefully across a log over a flooded creek you will know what I mean. They don't have big claws like pandas or wombats to help them stay on a log, but can still get safely across. A goofier dog with tail wagging wildly might not do so well on the same log. Whoops, splash! There is a lot more to a dog than a tail. Souff

1. No. 2. I have had giant schnauzer. 3. No, but how on earth is this relevant?! 4. No, but i have owned dogs who have broke their legs while stepping to something sharp. That has been painful for a dog and needed many weeks care. Maybe we should cut one leg as well while docking tails. This would diminish the risk that one leg will get hurt. Leg is not VITAL (sorry about my previous mistake, it's this language barrier) part for dog either. Just very crucial for balance just like tail. It is quite impossible to discuss about topic with someone, who is so fanatic of something. I haven't said that I think docking tails is cruel. I have just said that attitudes in my country has changed after 15 years. If Australian countryside is so dangerous for dogs tails, why kelpies and dingos have tails? And I have understood that most people live in cities nowadays? We have lots of hunting dogs in Finland. I have heard of a few GSP's has had tail damages while running in a thick forrest during hunting. I could approve docking for that breed. Do you hunt with dogs? Thank you for your reply Elina. Just for the record I am not a fanatic. I am a concerned person who understands many of the facets of the docking debate. I have owned both docked and undocked dogs, and I have had a lot to do with dogs of different breeds who have suffered damaged tails. Some owners dogs were so badly affected by months of trauma that the dogs were later euthanased. A once happy dog can lose all joy of life after tail injury. Some become totally obsessed with the remaining tail after amputation. It is very sad to see. Some are euthanased as they never recover from the trauma. My concern is that the right thing is done for dog breeds that are AT RISK of tail damage. Tail damage can be prevented by taking pro-active steps, in much the same way that disease can be prevented by taking proactive steps. I am not concerned for all breeds, just those who are at risk. No, I do not hunt with dogs but I am very close to people who hunt. Records of tail damage to GSPs were being kept, such was the concern. The dogs used in the harsher Australian conditions mostly have very strong tails and do not suffer tail damage like Pointers. In answer to your question about Kelpies and Dingos, they are NOT at risk of tail damage because of the construction of their tail; like the hunting dogs in Australia, they have a thick strong tail and the space between the vertebrae is small. The tail is set high and carried high. The construction of a tail, and the tail set and carriage, are some of the things that are important to know about tails. Some TYPES of tails are at risk of tail damage. Some TYPES of tails are not at risk of tail damage. In answer to your statement about most people living in cities nowadays in Australia, please remember it is dogs we are talking about - not people. Dogs in the cities live a protected life, but in Australia, there are many, many dogs who do not live in cities. Australia is a huge country - it is about the same size as 48 mainland states of the USA. It is around 50 per cent larger than all of Europe (excluding Russia). We have a very big country and we have a LOT of dogs living in country areas. Life in Australia for dogs is very different to life in Finland for dogs. Souff

My answers to your questions are very irrelevant about the matter that I just wanted to tell that maybe long tails doesn't feel so bad anymore after 15 years. Maybe that bring a little comfort to someone. It has been 11 years for some parts of Australia and not a lot has changed. My questions are very relevent to the subject and I would like to read your answers. Showdog is correct. 60 replies is a very small number of replies. There are a lot of people in Europe and the United Kingdom who are angry at how these laws were foisted on them and their dogs. Souff

John, I agree with you 100%. We SHOULD learn to care more for our wildlife. But there is a problem. The wild piggies don't want to live with our wildlife, they want to kill them and eat them. A hungry sow with 14 little piglets to feed will eat almost anything, including you if you were to stumble into her path. After she, or the boar, had ripped you open. Yes, I agree, we need to care more for our wildlife, but NOT for FERAL PIGs that were introduced here from other countries and do not belong in the Australian eco system and do a hell of a lot of damage to the environment. Souff

I just told what replys I got from a country where has longer history of banning docking. Sorry, no needs to attack to me. We just have already now new generation of dog owners who are shaken that docking has been approved before. It sounds so absurd nowdays for many people. Sorry, I didn't realise this was such a sensitive topic that I wasn't allowed to anwer this at all... Elina, I am not attacking. This is a very sensitive topic and many people (who know their dog breeds far better than politicians) are still angry at what happened here in Australia. You have not answered my questions. Souff

Elina, I have some questions for you: 1. Have you ever lived in the Australian countryside with dogs that like to go into holes in the ground? 2. Do you own or breed a docked breed? (one of the conditions for commenting in this thread) 3. Have you ever owned a Welsh Corgi (Pembroke) 4. Have you ever owned a dog that has broken its tail as an adult, and you had to get the breaks to heal, without success, and then after months of unsuccessful treatment, you had to get the tail amputated on the adult dog? If so, can you tell me what the temperament of the dog was like during the months of treatment, and what the dog's temperament was like after the amputation? The lifestyle of dogs in Finland and other European countries is markedly different to dogs in Australia, and is due to the differences in climate and lifestyle. Australian dogs spend a far greater amount of time OUTDOORS and many of them are very busy dogs that have no regard to the damage that they can do to tails. Dogs in Europe spend a far greater time safely indoors in homes, and/or safely in barns, than their Australian counterparts. Tail damage is cruel. Amputation of a broken tail is cruel. Tail damage is preventable. We can prevent cruelty and if we know our dogs are at risk, then there is a case that says we have an obligation to prevent cruelty. Souff

And that is absolutely the right attitude. It should be all about what is best for the individual dog, and it should always have been restricted to people who are qualified imho. Souff loves Schipperkes and I don't think their long tails are at any risk of harm today. Getting a high set full tail tangled up in running ropes on a barge could have been a different story though. Souff

Good luck tomorrow!

Correct. Similar proposed laws were thrown out in NZ and so the NZ breeders have the choice to dock, or to sell puppies undocked. And in other governments in other parts of the world, the same thing has happened. Proposed laws have been put forward about banning docking ..... and rejected. People in other countries would not agree to having choice taken away from them. It is all about choice, and owners COULD choose to have a puppy with a long tail, prior to the ban. All they had to do was to order a puppy with a tail. Not hard. If one breeder refused their request, then another breeder could be approached. Australian breeders and owners should have a legal choice returned to them, but as a restricted procedure with only qualified people being able to dock/band. Souff