Hypothetical question about showing an imported dog
|
|
| Since the breed standard clearly states that the tails must be docked close to the body, I would assume that you would not be able to show the dog in the US or Canada. This has been a stumbling block for myself as well....I have been seeking importing another dog for awhile now...but I would want to show the dog and with the tail it just could not happen.
As far as registering goes, I know for example, when I imported Chicus from Brazil, the AKC recognizes Brazils studbooks, so AKC registering him was a cinch.However Canada does not. Therefore to CKC register him I had to show him (which I planned on doing anyways) and as long as he was not excused for not being a purebred I could CKC register him. Since then the CKC has changed the rules. You must now either pay over $100 for an examining commitee to examine the dog to make sure he is purebred OR complete a Championship on the dog and then he can be registered. I am pretty sure there is a list on the AKC site as to which countries studbooks they recognize. |
| Here is the link listing countries studbooks that the AKC recognizes.
http://www.akc.org/rules/special_registry_services.cfm |
| So you could pretty much expect to get excused with a tail then, right? |
| I would think so. |
| I found this information in terms of where it is illegal to dock or crop but I don't know how old it is. Does anyone have a current source or know of others outside of this list?
Laws about ear cropping and tail docking CANADA • Newfoundland & Labrador Ear cropping is illegal under the Animal Protection Act of 1978. OTHER COUNTRIES • Ear cropping is illegal in Australia, New Zealand and many European countries. Tail docking is illegal in Norway, Sweden, Cyprus, Greece, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Finland, Germany and parts of Australia. |
| I know in England as well as Scotland there is a docking ban. However, I have been in touch with a breeder in Hungary who could dock a pup for me. |
| The Great Britain part just went right past me for some reason. I knew but it didn't occur to me that they weren't on that list! |
| I guess the same goes in the reverse, no? Could a dog docked as a puppy in the U.S. be shown in one of the "outlawed" countries?
BTW, I wasn't aware that docking/cropping was illegal in Newfoundlad/Labrador...Another reason that I like those newfies....  |
| I know in Finland they cannot show a docked dog. I had to keep a tail on one of my pups that went to Finland to be shown.
Now I sent Kaede to Scotland, she of course is docked, and because she was docked before the ban took affect, she is able to be shown there. As a matter of fact she is entered in Crufts this year! |
| Don't forget that at the Centennial, the tailed dog was not only shown but placed in it's class. |
Maxmm wrote: Don't forget that at the Centennial, the tailed dog was not only shown but placed in it's class.
I wasn't at the Centennial. Where did the tailed dog come from? |
The stork. Wanna see them again?  |
| It was European but I can't remember exactly where. I'll have to look it up. |
Maxmm wrote: It was European but I can't remember exactly where. I'll have to look it up.
So, you're saying that you can show a tailed dog here then? Obviously he didn't get excused if he placed. |
| It's a big throw down about showing tailed dogs, right now. The standard says that tails are docked but I have not heard of a tailed dog being excused yet.
Anybody else? |
Maxmm wrote: It's a big throw down about showing tailed dogs, right now. The standard says that tails are docked but I have not heard of a tailed dog being excused yet.
Anybody else? It would probably matter where they came from, though, right? Like a tailed dog born in Michigan wouldn't be allowed but a tailed dog from Sweden would since it is illegal to have them there? |
| I'm very interested to know the answer to this. I just assumed you would be excused since the standard states the tail must be docked.
Just an update. A breeder friend of mine contacted the AKC and asked if she could show an OES with a tail and they told her there is no reason why she could not. Hmmmmmm..........I am wondering if it would be up to the individual judge. |
ButtersStotch wrote: So, you're saying that you can show a tailed dog here then? Obviously he didn't get excused if he placed.
Placing is one thing, but if it was awarded points and someone felt slighted, I'm sure they would have a good argument to get the points taken away. The standard clearly dictates docked tails. I do think it would be a nice gesture if OESCA would work something out with the AKC to allow the countries with the dock ban to show without any hassles. It would be nice if the dock banned countries would do the same, as pretty soon there will be no US docked or cropped dogs allowed to be shown at Crufts, the biggest dog show in the world. The Eukanuba show that is airing on TV tonight on Animal Planet, allowed top dogs from other countries, that had tails and uncropped ears show at their event. There was a big stink about it as the purists are against it. IMO, a good dog is a good dog, tails, floppy ears, etc. |
| The dogs can be shown. Having an undocked tail is not a DQ in the OES breed standard so it would not be appropriate for a judge to excuse or DQ on the basis of having a tail.
Some other docked and/or cropped breeds have AKC standards that require the dogs to be disqualified if they are not docked or cropped. There has been some discussion in OESCA to follow suit and change the standard to make having a tail a DQ....seems like the wrong way to go given the already limited gene pool and resultant health problems we've got. |
Guest wrote: The dogs can be shown. Having an undocked tail is not a DQ in the OES breed standard so it would not be appropriate for a judge to excuse or DQ on the basis of having a tail.
Some other docked and/or cropped breeds have AKC standards that require the dogs to be disqualified if they are not docked or cropped. There has been some discussion in OESCA to follow suit and change the standard to make having a tail a DQ....seems like the wrong way to go given the already limited gene pool and resultant health problems we've got. There are no DQ's in the OES standard. Short of biting a judge, there is nothing in the written standard that says if this happens, the dog is out. So according to the current standard, the tail should be docked. I think the question is, do we rewrite the standard to include a clause for "if a dog is not docked" or do we rewrite it to include the DQ? My question is, if there's a class with a tailed dog, a dog with a bad bite and a dog with a poor coat and that was all you had to choose from what's the worse fault? Even a tail technically being considered "a fault" isn't addressed in the standard. Oh and one more variable in the mix. If we start to just glance over tails what's worse, a full tail or a bad crop? Who's got their magic 8 ball to give us the right answer? Blech! |
| That's easy. A bad crop is way worse than a tail, lol. Bad crops weird me out. Big time.
In my opinion, I don't see anything wrong with a tail on a dog being shown if it's a good dog all around. The tail isn't a fault, just something we don't do here. I think any dog you're going to see in a showring with a tail is only going to have a tail because of the fact that it's from a place that doesn't allow docking. Not only would no decent breeder in the U.S. ever not dock a tail (unless they planned to import the dog), I would think any dog in North America with a tail left on probably wouldn't exactly be a show dog anyway. That being said, I don't ever really want a tail at all. Like I said before, this is all hypothetical.  |
| We have been out of the country so i am just now checking in on this.
Yes, as dislikable in the USA as it is, a OES with a tail may be shown. At this point it is NOT a dq to have a tail. It is up to the judges discretion to put up a tailed oes or not. There are those of us that are presently working very HARD to make a tail a disqualification! Frankly WE DONT WANT THEM ON OUR DOGS HERE IN THE USA! There are still countries in Europe where showing an OES without a tail is legal. There are countries in Europe where docking is still legal. What is so distasteful to most all of OES owners that show here in the USA is that we are NOT allowed to take an undocked dog to be shown in may of the other countries, yet they still feel free to come over here to show... I was (and perhaps will be the last) the last AMERICAN person to take an OES from the USA to CRUFTS that was allowed to be shown! Delilah. AND had the opportunity to place with a Highly Commendable in the Open Bitch Class there out of over 30+ dogs in her class alone. There are a couple of others there now, but they live in the UK....... not owned and living in the USA. That was quite the highlight to show on the green carpet at CRUFTS.......... not everyone can say that they have done that, much less come home with a placement! |
barney1 wrote: Maxmm wrote: It's a big throw down about showing tailed dogs, right now. The standard says that tails are docked but I have not heard of a tailed dog being excused yet. Anybody else? It would probably matter where they came from, though, right? Like a tailed dog born in Michigan wouldn't be allowed but a tailed dog from Sweden would since it is illegal to have them there? nope, a tail is a tail is a tail! Doesn't matter in this country where it is from. |
ButtersStotch wrote: That being said, I don't ever really want a tail at all. Like I said before, this is all hypothetical.
Bummer, I was beginning to think you may be getting a little puppy from........ Australia, maybe. |
Guest wrote: There are no DQ's in the OES standard. Short of biting a judge, there is nothing in the written standard that says if this happens, the dog is out. So according to the current standard, the tail should be docked.
I think the question is, do we rewrite the standard to include a clause for "if a dog is not docked" or do we rewrite it to include the DQ? But there are other parts of the standard that dogs don't reach and that doesn't mean they are not shown - honestly no dog hits all parts of the standard. Of course this is the only part that is a human action so it is a little different. However, why would showing a dog with a tail be any different than showing a dog without pigment arounf the eye? (for example) Hey if we start allowing tails maybe there would be less focus on the unnatural current grooming standard!  |
Las Vegas Sheepie Lover wrote: ButtersStotch wrote: That being said, I don't ever really want a tail at all. Like I said before, this is all hypothetical. Bummer, I was beginning to think you may be getting a little puppy from........ Australia, maybe. Okay but just thinking outside the box - can an 8 week old puppy be surgically docked? |
kerry wrote: Las Vegas Sheepie Lover wrote: ButtersStotch wrote: That being said, I don't ever really want a tail at all. Like I said before, this is all hypothetical. Bummer, I was beginning to think you may be getting a little puppy from........ Australia, maybe. Okay but just thinking outside the box - can an 8 week old puppy be surgically docked? Kerry, In this case "thinking outside of the box" is seriously bad. At 8 weeks it is no longer docking but an amputation that involves the spinal cord. HUGE HUGE issue and done only in extreme emergency cases because of possible spinal cord damage that could be anything from phantom limb syndrome to paralysis and in the worst case scenario death due to uncontrollable shock. There are certainly cases where older dogs have their tails amputated after injuries (ask an Irish Wolfhound breeder about this - they seem particularly suseptible to severe tail injuries) but it is done only after all other treatment venues have been exhausted. Docking is done at 3 days because of the poor development of the spinal cord and nervous system as a whole. Their eyes don't even open for about 2 weeks because they and the optic nerve haven't fully developed at birth. Remember dogs are predator animals and are born minimally developed, especially regardng the nervous system. It is this fact of their development that allows for docking infants with nil, or at least minimal, affect on the nervous system. If dogs were fully developed at birth like prey animals such as gnus, zebras or even humans, we couldn't do this so non-chalantly. Thanks and Cheers Carl |
| As Ali has pointed out this is not a hypothetical discussion. Tailed dogs have come to American shows, and perhaps Canadian shows by now, and have even placed. In my opinion this is absolutely hypocritical and the "thin end of the wedge" for AR activists to work against our breed traditions and standards.
Most European countries where docking is banned DO NOT allow the showing of docked dogs no matter the country of their birth and docking. Okay fair enough if that is their law, good, bad or otherwise as it may be. However to then expect that they can come to North America and impose their choices upon us is at best arrogant, self-promoting and just generally disgustingly rude as far as I am concerned. Bobtails people, Bobtails. It is not just a "cute" nickname for our breed it is one of the defining features and characteristics of the breed. One which I think deserves our every effort to defend and maintain. To voluntarily allow tailed dogs into "our" rings puts us on the slippery slope to a ban on docking here. I'm not saying that tailed dogs are necessarily inferior to docked dogs, not at all. Indeed the tailed dog that placed at the OESCA Centennial was apparently a gorgeous conformation dog otherwise and would make a great contribution to many a breeding line. And we should certainly seek out such dogs to improve an already small gene pool but no they should not be allowed into rings where docking is still permitted and is part of the breed standard. This is an issue for many breeds, not just the Bobtail - most of the terrier group, boxers, dobermans, Rottys etc. Thanks and Cheers Carl |
Las Vegas Sheepie Lover wrote: ButtersStotch wrote: That being said, I don't ever really want a tail at all. Like I said before, this is all hypothetical. Bummer, I was beginning to think you may be getting a little puppy from........ Australia, maybe. Lol. You aren't the first person to ask me if that was the reason I wanted to know! No, it has nothing to do with Brie's puppies, though if one showed up at my door, I wouldn't kick it to the curb.
I was just curious and wanted everyone's input. This is interesting and informative so I'm glad everyone's piping up. |
Carl Lindon wrote: In this case "thinking outside of the box" is seriously bad. At 8 weeks it is no longer docking but an amputation that involves the spinal cord. HUGE HUGE issue and done only in extreme emergency cases because of possible spinal cord damage that could be anything from phantom limb syndrome to paralysis and in the worst case scenario death due to uncontrollable shock. There are certainly cases where older dogs have their tails amputated after injuries (ask an Irish Wolfhound breeder about this - they seem particularly suseptible to severe tail injuries) but it is done only after all other treatment venues have been exhausted. Docking is done at 3 days because of the poor development of the spinal cord and nervous system as a whole. Their eyes don't even open for about 2 weeks because they and the optic nerve haven't fully developed at birth. Remember dogs are predator animals and are born minimally developed, especially regardng the nervous system. It is this fact of their development that allows for docking infants with nil, or at least minimal, affect on the nervous system. If dogs were fully developed at birth like prey animals such as gnus, zebras or even humans, we couldn't do this so non-chalantly. Thanks and Cheers Thank you - I appreciate the honest, thoughtful answer to an open - gee I have no idea what this entails question. I wouldn't try this on most other lists or forums. Its good to see people can really learn here. Carl |
ButtersStotch wrote: Las Vegas Sheepie Lover wrote: ButtersStotch wrote: That being said, I don't ever really want a tail at all. Like I said before, this is all hypothetical. Bummer, I was beginning to think you may be getting a little puppy from........ Australia, maybe. Lol. You aren't the first person to ask me if that was the reason I wanted to know! No, it has nothing to do with Brie's puppies, though if one showed up at my door, I wouldn't kick it to the curb. I was just curious and wanted everyone's input. This is interesting and informative so I'm glad everyone's piping up. What a shame! I wanted to pm you the same question. Wish someone here was getting one of her pups. Glad someone asked. |
barney1 wrote: Maxmm wrote: It's a big throw down about showing tailed dogs, right now. The standard says that tails are docked but I have not heard of a tailed dog being excused yet. Anybody else? It would probably matter where they came from, though, right? Like a tailed dog born in Michigan wouldn't be allowed but a tailed dog from Sweden would since it is illegal to have them there? It is illegal to docked the OES both in Norway, Sweden and Denmark, but you can show a docked oes in Sweden as ofen you wantet if he is born before 1 of january 2008! If he is born after you can show them just at one show |
| Just one show? How weird. Do you mean just one show altogether or only one certain show will accept a docked dog? |
ButtersStotch wrote: Just one show? How weird. Do you mean just one show altogether or only one certain show will accept a docked dog?
If the dog is born after 01/01/2008 its just one show, if he is born before you can show as mutch as you wanted |
| Docking is also illefgal in Switzerland. I am not sure about Germany??
But as Carl said, it is not RIGHT but totally disgustingly rude that they feel they can bring tailed dogs to the USA and Canada to be shown, yet we cannot show there. The 2 tailed dogs came over I believe, may be wrong, from Croatia to be shown at the Centennial/National. The next year the EuroOES show was held in Sweeden and our dogs were NOT allowed to be shown there due to the docking laws........ As of now, dogs born after April of this year are not allowed to be docked in the UK and/or show......... if they are docked in anyother country. This is just plain WRONG. Turn about is fair play........... |
| Makes sense...if we can't show a docked dog there...then they can't show a tailed dog here! |
Ali wrote: There are those of us that are presently working very HARD to make a tail a disqualification! Frankly WE DONT WANT THEM ON OUR DOGS HERE IN THE USA! I agree that you can see the gait better when the OES is docked, but having said that give me a good reason why in this day and age they have to be docked, the majority of OES's are pets and no longer work and as far as show dogs are concerned I have a Multi Champion WITH A TAIL so really there are none. Even the mother land Great Britain has introduced a docking ban and that is good so, as I expressed in a former thread instead of concentrating on the docking ban we should be paying more attention to the illnesses that are creaping into our wonderful breed or have I missed out on something that you have no problems regarding this in the states. Ali wrote: There are still countries in Europe where showing an OES without a tail is legal. There are countries in Europe where docking is still legal. What is so distasteful to most all of OES owners that show here in the USA is that we are NOT allowed to take an undocked dog to be shown in may of the other countries, yet they still feel free to come over here to show...
Hey Ali what are you afraid off the competition or that the people start seeing how nice these dogs are with their tail, there is nothing nicer as an OES who is happy and they can show this by wagging what rightfully belongs to them, my bitch is always happy and many judges have remarked upon this at shows, I was thinking of bringing her over to the states next year just for the fun of it.  |
| I'm not AFRAID of a dog with a tail. Personally I will withhold what I think about them here (as I wont hurt anyones feelings )and were not what were originally there for our dogs when the breed was "born". I could care less if they are pets........ You dont need a tail to tell that a dog is happy.
You certainly dont have an AMERICAN or CANADIAN or MEXICAN or LATIN AMERICAN Champion on a tail........ and if we have our say here, which aparantly we DO in this country against our Governments saying we have to dock........ there WONT be any tails! There are still countries in Europe where showing an OES without a tail is legal. There are countries in Europe where docking is still legal. What is so distasteful to most all of OES owners that show here in the USA is that we are NOT allowed to take an undocked dog to be shown in may of the other countries, yet they still feel free to come over here to show... The belief of the current powers in our club are this: NO TAILS, they were able to keep dogs with tails OUT of our Eukanuba Meet the Breeds booth in L.A. at the show........ and that was WITH AKC;s knowing all about the situation going on............. MANY KUDOS to those involved. As I said this issue IS in the process of the wheels to make it a disqualification for dogs here. In fact, after talking at the shows this weekend, it aparantlly isn't JUST the OES that are going to take this step....... other breeds are tired of having this thrown down our throats too. Be our guest, come to the shows. Just dont' bring your tailed dogs....... if it's your country's requirement fine, but don't shove YOUR REQUIREMENTS DOWN OUR THROATS........... WE cannot come show in your country so to a number of people the thought of a tailed dog coming here and showing is extremely distasteful to say the least. I no longer will show in a country that disallows docking......(and i am first on the list to try to keep them out of here in our rings) I may go to shows there, but I will never SHOW there again. And how sad this is because some of the best times i ever had were at shows in Europe showing. I will be going to visit with old friends.......... Quote: Hey Ali what are you afraid off the competition or that the people start seeing how nice these dogs are with their tail, there is nothing nicer as an OES who is happy and they can show this by wagging what rightfully belongs to them, my bitch is always happy and many judges have remarked upon this at shows, I was thinking of bringing her over to the states next year just for the fun of it. |
| Is the above poster done shouting yet? If the situation was reversed wouldn't YOU show your docked dog in Europe? I can't blame the foreign breeders for finding a loophole, I blame the AKC and the breed clubs. Until rational thought takes over and the emotion is removed there won't be a solution, ranting and shouting only confuse and divide everyone. The AKC needs to step up, if they will, and the national breed club needs to be clear and concise with what they want. In the meantime is it really fair to blame people for doing what they're allowed to do: show with tails in this country and then rant and rave about it? Seems very unprofessional to me, especially if you're an American breeder. Not a good image at all. |
Ali wrote: I'm not AFRAID of a dog with a tail. Personally I will withhold what I think about them here (as I wont hurt anyones feelings )and were not what were originally there for our dogs when the breed was "born". I could care less if they are pets........ You dont need a tail to tell that a dog is happy, how stupid a statement. If you read into the history of the breed you will find there are a few assumptions as to how the docking started, you are right you do not need the tail to see the dog is happy, but not everyone has experience with our breed and can read their expressions like we can, so this is not such a stupid statement like you remark. You do not have to withhold your thoughts about the tails then I certainly will not be insulted, but I will defend my opinions regarding this subject. I do not understand the statement "you could not care less if they are pets" correct me if I am wrong but most breeders sell the majority of their puppies as pets and not as show or working dogs and the most of these people would probably not mind if the OES had a tail. Ali wrote: You certainly dont have an AMERICAN or CANADIAN or MEXICAN or LATIN AMERICAN Champion on a tail........ and if we have our say here, which aparantly we DO in this country against our Governments saying we have to dock........ there WONT be any tails! No I do not have a Champion title from the countries you mention but I do have a Spanish and Gibraltar Champion and they still are allowed to dock in these two countries, plus I have an International Champion title earned in France, Spain, Gibraltar and Germany, Germany being the only country with a docking ban. Ali wrote: There are still countries in Europe where showing an OES without a tail is legal. There are countries in Europe where docking is still legal. What is so distasteful to most all of OES owners that show here in the USA is that we are NOT allowed to take an undocked dog to be shown in may of the other countries, yet they still feel free to come over here to show... Yes you can show docked dogs in some countries in Europe Sweden being one of them and believe it or not I like seeing them, but this doesn't change the fact the world is changing and you will have to go along with this or be left behind in your own small show world and having to live with good dogs coming from other countries with tails and WINNING. This was un-thinkable 20 years ago but the wind has changed and the ban is progressing through Europe and it will continue if you want it or not. Ali wrote: The belief of the current powers in our club are this: NO TAILS, they were able to keep dogs with tails OUT of our Eukanuba Meet the Breeds booth in L.A. at the show........ and that was WITH AKC;s knowing all about the situation going on............. MANY KUDOS to those involved. As I said this issue IS in the process of the wheels to make it a disqualification for dogs here. In fact, after talking at the shows this weekend, it aparantlly isn't JUST the OES that are going to take this step....... other breeds are tired of having this thrown down our throats too. ... As an Eukanuba breeder I say shame on them for this and I am glad they see things differetnly in Europe, there is absolutely no reason to disqualify a dog for having a tail as this is not a deviation from the standard but an addition to the perfection of our breed. No one is throwing anything down your throats and we are certainly not inflicting the docking ban on you, but you also have to obey our laws and they now forbid docking and partly the showing of these dogs. Ali wrote: Be our guest, come to the shows. Just dont' bring your tailed dogs....... if it's your country's requirement fine, but don't shove YOUR REQUIREMENTS DOWN OUR THROATS........... WE cannot come show in your country so to a number of people the thought of a tailed dog coming here and showing is extremely distasteful to say the least.... I am thinking about taking up an invitation to show in your country next year and guess what I will bring dogs with tails and I will show them with pride then they are no less worthy of thr breed name OLD ENGLISH SHEEPDOG than a docked dog, and conterary to your opinion it is not distasteful in any way at all. Face up to the fact these dogs will come sooner or later and bye the way you have still not quoted any reason for docking our breed other that it was always that way. Ali wrote: I no longer will show in a country that disallows docking......(and i am first on the list to try to keep them out of here in our rings) I may go to shows there, but I will never SHOW there again. And how sad this is because some of the best times i ever had were at shows in Europe showing. I will be going to visit with old friends..........
Ali you are more than welcome to show in Europe you will be welcomed with open arms as we are very friendly people who enjoy our shows, and yes this was thrusted upon us, but over ten years later we are still showing our dogs and we have grown to love our OES's with their tails. The discussion between us shows the different opinions held regarding this subject and I think it is very importent for our breed to discuss these as well as other subjects regarding this lovely breed of dog. |
| if you want undocked dogs in europe be my guest but leave them there and don't ram them down our throats here in OUR country which is exactly what you say you intend to do here.
In Sweeden only a dog with a docked tail as of 2008 may be shown at ONE SHOW ONLY....... You may like looking at tails.... I don't, and most all American breeders that I know of and have been in discussions with at our shows/nationals and others don't want them either. We will fight to keep them docked and only docked dogs to be shown at our shows. As has been said by many people (some board members) if we cant show in their country with a docked dog, then they should not have the right to bring their tailed dogs here and show. PERIOD. You may be able to bring them, but not show them if we fight this issue which we are doing. I have NO DESIRE to show with docked dogs. I know my dogs are good as my proven records and titles show......so don't think that is an issue. As i said i will come and visit, but i have no desire what so ever to go over a tailed dog even. You have no choice as your "GOVERNMENT" won't allow YOU the choice to dock........ we do have the choice here and most reputible breeders around CHOOSE to dock. I'm not 'shouting' but making a statment and enhancing MY beliefs! You may not like this fact, but that is it........and we are working on making it a DISQUALIFICATION. WE don't let oour governments tell us what to sit back and allow. We are strongly having to fight now for breed specific rights to own certain breeds, and breeders rights period in alot of our country. And we ARE fighting and winning....... |
| In a country that is famous for it progression and liberal opinions I do not understand this way of thought, however you will live in your belief until the ban comes I admit it may take a little longer but I am convinced it will come. There is absolutly no reason for docking an OES not even a show dog then in the ring they also present themselves well and they look lovely with their tails, get used to the fact in America the tail is here to stay and not even you can stop the progression which is taking place at the moment. I think you should be a little more sportive then if you are not afraid of our dogs then why the big panic regarding our dogs. |
| I've been reading this thread with interest. Does being an American, Mexican, or Latin American champion make your dog better than a champion from Germany or elsewhere? Is it more prestigious? I am curious as well to know why there is so much vehemence regarding this, what is the actual reason for docking? Is it medical, or vanity, or as Stewart pointed out just because that's the way it's always been? After rereading the posts I still can't find the answer if there is one. This has been interesting and I hope it doesn't dissolve into personal attacks and name calling. I hope the breeders here will chime in with their opinions, for or against, and why they feel that way. |
dairymaid wrote: Ali wrote: instead of concentrating on the docking ban we should be paying more attention to the illnesses that are creaping into our wonderful breed [/color] Thank you, Dairymaid. I am not a show person and therefore cannot begin to understand all the ins and outs and formalities and standards and all that. But I am an Old English Sheepdog owner and lover, and what matters most to me, and what should matter most to everyone else, is that our dogs are happy and healthy. Of course breed standard matters, and maybe because I am not a show person I do not properly understand the importance of docking, but I fail to understand how this one issue can divide an otherwise extremely smart and passionate group of OES owners, especially when many people involved have dogs with tails because of the law, not just by choice. That said, my next sheepie will have a tail because I personally see no reason why I should dock my pet. He was born this way and a part of me really thinks that's how he should be since it is no longer causing any health concerns for him, nor am I being taxed differently because of it (both are the major suspected reasons for docking the tails in the first place). Let's remind ourselves: These dogs have TAILS, not the PLAGUE. Please, let us just respect each other and the dogs that we hold so closely to our hearts, whether they are sitting beside us in the ring or on the couch. |
Mel & Tucker wrote: dairymaid wrote: Ali wrote: instead of concentrating on the docking ban we should be paying more attention to the illnesses that are creaping into our wonderful breed [/color] what should matter most to everyone else, is that our dogs are happy and healthy. I agree Melanie. Health should be the main concern, CA registery, hypothyroidism, etc are all important to maintain our breed and to me a tail seems considerably less of a concern. I still haven't heard a valid explanation of why tails are docked, and I'm not for or against docking at this point, only curious to know WHY people are so adamant on the subject. |
| If I have given the impression I was calling anyone names or I have insulted anyone this was not my intention and I apoligize for this mistake. I have only had OES's for a little over 15 years and my first three were docked. It was always a treat going to shows and watching the OES with their bear like gait, seeing them brushed up and ready for the ring made your heart beat faster, especially when visitors made compliments as they walked past. As they started talking about a docking ban in Germany we also went up in arms here, many breeders said they would stop breeding, it was said no one would want an OES with a tail, never the less the ban came and 10 years later we still show our dogs, our heart still bears faster when the dogs are ready for the ring and the same breeders are still breeding. Conclusion: Due to the docking ban the OES can now be admired in its complete perfection and ultimate beauty. To the question regarding the champion title, a dog who has earned a champion title is in most cases a very good example of the breed and deserves this title, it does not matter if the dog is an American, Canadian or German Champion, they are all champion titles which deserve to be carried with pride. I cannot give a good reason for docking a sheepie and I was against the ban like a lot of people in Germany and other parts of Europe, in between times I will openly admit I was wrong because we now have a dog who show their happiness by using this hereditary limb to its best advantage, furthermore the tail is also used by the dog for balance when turning. I have heard from many people that since the docking ban the OES has become a better agility dog, they will never be so fast as a border collie but they have better stability because of the tail. One therory is that because of tax reasons a dog without a tail was not classed as a dog, another the tail was docked to prevent accidents whilst herding, and there gives many more, today very few OES's are still used for herding, the most of them are know pets and there is absolutely no reason to dock a pet, this is still being done through our vanity. I do not know any judges who make repulsive comments regarding the tail and there are enough American Judges come to Europe to Judge our dogs. I am still waiting for a plausable ground to continue with the docking of our wonderful breed, for show reasons in not anaccepable enough ground, in this day and age this mutilation is no longer necessary.  |
| We do a lot of things for vanity's sake.
We brush our dogs, and parade them in show rings. I didn't realize that OES in the wild brushed themselves naturally nor have I ever seen them parade themselves around and subject themselves to judging. I have also never seen a dog go into his crate and lock it shut behind himself willingly, yet showdogs spend a whole lot of time locked up in crates. Humans have earrings and other body piercings, as well as most males here in this country get cropped themselves. It doesn't seem to affect our balance but stability is another thing. |
| Dairymaid -- I really appreciate you sharing your story about how your feelings changed about tail docking. I hope that -- if it ever becomes a requirement in the US -- that breeders here would have the same experience and would not give up on the breed for that reason. As a pet owner, I would not lose interest in having OES just because they have a tail. While I love the bobtail look, I can see that their tails are beautiful.
As for showing, I can understand that a country that does not permit docking would not allow docked OES to be shown because they are making a stand against docking. This is not the same as forcing us to adhere to their rules in the US -- it just requires that breeders adhere to their rules to participate in showing in that country. The same could be true in the US -- that we would require all OES to be docked to be shown. But I am glad if that is not the case. Although it is not our breed standard, there is no plausible argument that keeping the tail is cruel in some way and so prohibiting dogs with tails would just close off the OES to the forces of international competition. Instead, the US is a place that OES can compete with dogs from all over the world. Surely that makes for a richer competition. |
| Stewart, there is no reason to apologize, you have presented your opinions admirably. My fear is that sometimes these discussions get very heated and that's when the problems start.
My feeling is that a champion is a champion, regardless of what country it was shown in, tail or not. I realize the point system varies from country to country but the title is still earned in any case and as you said a title to be carried with pride. |
| Let me state one last thing on this thread, this is my personal opinion regarding the docking of the OES, yes Ron you are right in what you say but grooming a sheepies something different from docking but I respect your opinion regarding this, however let me say I think the docking ban is correct and I agree fully with this ban, however I disagree with the ban on showing docked dogs, in my opinion if you live in a country where docking is still allowed then these people should have the right to show their dogs in our countries, furthermore I think dogs born in a country where docking is still legal but owned by someone from a country where it is banned then these dogs should be banned from the show ring. We should live by the motto: "Happiness is an Old English Sheepdog, ultimate happiness is a multitude of them"" |
| I really wish people would stop trashing each other over their differences of opinion. The dogs have been tail-less for years. It is a new thing for them to have tails. We all fell in love with the "bobtail". Our governments seem to control more and more aspects of our lives. We all love OES's or we wouldn't be here. I don't like to see you all tearing each other apart of something that no one has immediate control of.
I wish the moderators would end or lock this thread already. It is full of negatives and that is not the reason I registered with this org. Please stop!!! |
| For what's worth, I think OES tails look cool -- several examples of happy sheepies wagging tails on YouTube:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=X44hWU1bwjw Even as puppies, I love how the very tip of their tails is white! And their tails don't curl, they stick out like those of beagles. I wish my pup had a tail, but I don't enjoy him any less because he doesn't have one. If I ever get another sheepie companion for Peppo, I'm going to try my best to get a tailed OES. How does one find out about breeders that produce tailed OES in the U.S.? I suppose I'm against an actual legislation banning tail docking, but the U.S. breed standard in the U.S. should be changed to allow both tailed and docked dogs. It is plain silly to consider tailed dogs sub-standard, or "defective". Believing in the freedom of choice for dog owners, there is no reason why we shouldn't have more beautiful tailed OES specimens around in the U.S. |
| To me, a docking ban in the US would just be one more freedom we'd have taken away from us by the government. It's still the same dog, with or without a tail, although without the tail I can fit twice as many OES in my house.
Just because other countries have banned docking doesn't mean we have to follow suit. And those of you from countries that have banned docking, don't wish the same on us because you've had another freedom taken from you. At the 2005 National Specialty, were tailed dogs were allowed from other countries because a large number of visitors from overseas were invited to the Centennial Celebration? Because it was such a new law? It's too bad there's no flexibility in the rule now as it alienates potentially great dogs. |
| I hate to weigh in on such a sensitive subject. However, sometimes I feel it’s worth making a comment/offering another input.
I respect the fact that some see this as a governmental restriction on their ‘freedoms’, but let us not forget that we have, in the past enjoyed ‘freedoms’ which were eventually found to be degrading, dehumanizing or just plain erroneous. Having worked in vet practices on both sides of the Atlantic, I was amazed to see the continuation of routine docking in the US. I don't agree with the allowance of a potentially painful purely cosmetic procedure. In defense of my stance, I offer the following excerpt from a British Veterinary Association Brief (2006): For the avoidance of any doubt, any instance of tail docking which is found to have been undertaken for reasons which were not truly therapeutic or prophylactic will necessarily constitute an unacceptable mutilation of the dog, which, if carried out by a veterinary surgeon who knew or ought to have known of the lack of true justification, would almost certainly be considered to be conduct disgraceful in a professional respect. The full brief can be Googled for, or is available at http://www.bva.co.uk/policy/issues/pol_brief_docking.pdf While I too enjoy the look of the Sheepies, I don’t know if I have the right to inflict a body modification on an animal for cosmetic reasons. We as a global breed group should be interested first in our dogs’ welfare, and second on anything/everything else. If this means not docking, then so be it. I will say I don’t engage in showing myself, but I do attended them infrequently, and I really appreciate the effort that goes into showing, and applaud those that do, worldwide, for the continuation of such a wonderful breed. jonathan |
Bosley's mom wrote: I guess the same goes in the reverse, no? Could a dog docked as a puppy in the U.S. be shown in one of the "outlawed" countries?
BTW, I wasn't aware that docking/cropping was illegal in Newfoundlad/Labrador...Another reason that I like those newfies.... In the UK A docked dog can be shown in the Uk as long as it is older than the docking ban. Once a dog is younger it can no longer be shown, and the owner/breeder (f they were from the UK) can be fined/imprisoned for docking the dog. I think they can still be shown if they are bred outside of the Uk or countries where the docking ban is in force. |
| I love my oes without tails, I would miss that adorable fuzzy butt wiggle if they had to have the tails left on.
I used to be fairly argumentative about tails, adamant about making sure we didn't have the ban on docking forced on us, however, I do think eventually we will just have to deal with it. I think there are few civilized nations left that haven't banned docking, so the US and Canada (especially Canada) will not be far behind. I have concerns about leaving tails on such a heavily coated breed, cleanliness, injuries, balance of the dogs for a few generations at least since we certainly haven't been breeding to include a tail on the dog (I wonder what this will do to the overall conformation of our dogs since we will have to focus on getting the tails "right") I have heard of plenty of "first gen" pups who have tails left on who are fine though, and it's a matter of the humans learning to care for it, keep all that hair clean under the butt etc... Ron's point about the coat caught my attention.... about oes in the wild brushing themselves.... oes are a fully man made breed... working oes 200 years ago simply did not have the coat our dogs have today. We have bred for that, for the show ring. I LOVE the look of an oes in full, majestic and magnificent show coat, but it really isn't practical for what these dogs were meant for. Then we get to health issues, we've bred for a look, and temperment, to make these dogs the wonderful, loveable, pets and showdogs they are. I do think the breed as a whole could be in serious trouble if breeders don't put health and temperment first, looks last. Our breed is so small genetically, which means any health issue can snowball, proliferate throughout the breed, and take decades to push it back or get rid of it. I love a beautiful showdog, preferably without a tail, but an oes is an oes, and I adore them. |
SquirrelBoy wrote: I hate to weigh in on such a sensitive subject. However, sometimes I feel it’s worth making a comment/offering another input.
I respect the fact that some see this as a governmental restriction on their ‘freedoms’, but let us not forget that we have, in the past enjoyed ‘freedoms’ which were eventually found to be degrading, dehumanizing or just plain erroneous. Having worked in vet practices on both sides of the Atlantic, I was amazed to see the continuation of routine docking in the US. I don't agree with the allowance of a potentially painful purely cosmetic procedure. In defense of my stance, I offer the following excerpt from a British Veterinary Association Brief (2006): For the avoidance of any doubt, any instance of tail docking which is found to have been undertaken for reasons which were not truly therapeutic or prophylactic will necessarily constitute an unacceptable mutilation of the dog, which, if carried out by a veterinary surgeon who knew or ought to have known of the lack of true justification, would almost certainly be considered to be conduct disgraceful in a professional respect. The full brief can be Googled for, or is available at http://www.bva.co.uk/policy/issues/pol_brief_docking.pdf While I too enjoy the look of the Sheepies, I don’t know if I have the right to inflict a body modification on an animal for cosmetic reasons. We as a global breed group should be interested first in our dogs’ welfare, and second on anything/everything else. If this means not docking, then so be it. I will say I don’t engage in showing myself, but I do attended them infrequently, and I really appreciate the effort that goes into showing, and applaud those that do, worldwide, for the continuation of such a wonderful breed. jonathan just because it is politically correct to write this opinion doesn't make it so. |
| Also, I instinctively feel that there is a certain backlash against the excessive "artificiality" of dogs in the show ring, and the practice of docking tails ultimately intensifies this sentiment. For instance, while I don't claim to fully understand audience psychology, I suspect people applauded Uno the beagle so boisterously when he won at the Westminster show, because Uno (a humble little beagle) beat those foofy poodles -- a breed representing the epitome of manicured, manipulated aesthetic artificiality in dogs.
This is partially the reason I've always liked OES (besides their great temperament): the OES is an impressively beautiful animal, yet behaves and looks spontaneous enough to be a "real" dog, unburdened by artificiality. |
| I'll never understand the big deal about tail cropping and why it becomes so heated with some people. It's a quick little snip a few days after they're born, there are very few reported complications with the procedure and any pain involved is over in a couple of days. People in the western world don't consider circumcision in male babies "uncivilized" and that's a pretty common cosmetic practice that the baby has no choice in and, from the same argument, it's a cosmetic procedure that is inflicted on it. No one's looking to ban that.
I don't want a tail on an OES. I like the look, I like the way the gait is without the tail and I like not having my coffee table swept every 5 seconds. Will I stop loving the breed if we're forced to have tails on them? No, but I'm not going to be happy about it either. I also don't think we should have Nazi-like attitudes against the dogs from countries that do have docking bans. It's the law for them and we can't shut them off from the rest of the world just because we disagree with their views. A tail doesn't ruin a dog overall so the addition of a tail shouldn't make it a show pariah. There's definitely a lot more to an Old English Sheepdog than a tail. Ultimately, until dogs and babies start paying for their own food and vet bills, they'll just have to live with choices that we make for them, even if some of those are cosmetic. |
ButtersStotch wrote: People in the western world don't consider circumcision in male babies "uncivilized" and that's a pretty common cosmetic practice that the baby has no choice in and, from the same argument, it's a cosmetic procedure that is inflicted on it. No one's looking to ban that. No?
http://www.norm-uk.org/news.html?action ... &item=1222 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3190632.stm http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007 ... 113665.htm (Already banned in public hospitals in Southern Australia) http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007 ... 088006.htm |
Quote: People in the western world don't consider circumcision in male babies "uncivilized" and that's a pretty common cosmetic practice that the baby has no choice in and, from the same argument, it's a cosmetic procedure that is inflicted on it. No one's looking to ban that.
As all the men in the audience cross their legs... 
I must admit that I've never seen tail docking done. BUT I was on a farm once where the farmer was castrating all the lambs with the use of super tight rubber bands. If they went to lie down, they'd get them back on their feet quickly (not sure why... shock??) Is there a less painful way to to dock tails? We had an OES-mix that had a tail... it was very strong appendage that could clear off a coffee table... she'd beat us with it while greeting someone else. http://oesusa.com/Nikki/Nikki-2.htm When she died, we purposely went searching for a purebred OES puppy with a tail. We had zero experience with full-sheepies and had seen only one in real life (blue eyes, shaved down, didn't even know it was an OES). Needless to say we couldn't find any puppies with a tail. If we were going to experience a full-OES we had to settle on one without. It was difficult for us to tell at first if the dog was happy or not. If they don't wiggle their whole fanny when they're happy, you almost have to put your hand on their rump to tell if they're wigglin'. Darby and Kaytee wiggle ALL over. Emma is just a little movement with her almost non-existent tail... Panda wasn't docked improperly so she has a stump that goes back and forth. I now enjoy the look. A positive is when you've got 6 dogs lying on the floor around you, you don't have to worry about stepping on someone's tail. There's just one in the pack that we have to worry about and there have been numerous times we've stepped on her tail fur only to have her stand up
Just my two-cents... |
Ron wrote: ButtersStotch wrote: People in the western world don't consider circumcision in male babies "uncivilized" and that's a pretty common cosmetic practice that the baby has no choice in and, from the same argument, it's a cosmetic procedure that is inflicted on it. No one's looking to ban that. No?http://www.norm-uk.org/news.html?action ... &item=1222 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3190632.stm http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007 ... 113665.htm (Already banned in public hospitals in Southern Australia) http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007 ... 088006.htm Ugh. Seriously. On my baby board, it is a million times more heated conversations about circumcising babies or not. It's like the people who believe that circumcising is wrong, feel that all who even entertain the thought are evil and are bad parents for purposely inflicting pain on their precious child  |
| The anti-circumcision argument is exactly the same argument as the anti-docking argument.
Who do you think will win? The pro-ban people, because the pro-dock and/or pro-circumcision people get tired of the argument. |
barney1 wrote: Ugh. Seriously. On my baby board, it is a million times more heated conversations about circumcising babies or not. It's like the people who believe that circumcising is wrong, feel that all who even entertain the thought are evil and are bad parents for purposely inflicting pain on their precious child And of course, there are grown children actually trying to sue their parents in court for circumcising them as infants, i.e., when they were unable to consent to the procedure. It's a good thing our sheepies cannot sue us for cutting off a part of their bodies without their consent! |
| I hope they also don't sue for fixing cosmetic birth defects, cutting of the umbilical cord and tying a nice innie (or outie), or for haircuts...
Of course they'll only be successful if they find a society that is willing to allow bans on docking/circumcision/haircutting. When your turn comes and society decides to ban your favorite parenting or grooming pleasure or ritual, who will speak up for you? |
| Although it may seem this way I do not consider this a heated argument in any way at all, we are taking the chance to discuss a subject that concerns a breed of dog we all love and adore. Yes I love to see the gait of a real bobtail, in my opinion there is nothing else like it in the canine world they move so gracefully when moved properly. After ten years of the docking ban in Germany I would say most of us have accepted this, although secretly we still long for the good old days and those beautiful bobtails of the past. However our politicians in their ultimate wisdom decided otherwise and banned the docking and cropping of many breeds, this is something we now have to live with and we have accepted this fact, the outcome we no longer show bobtails but instead we show our much prided Old English Sheepdogs with a tail which is carried by the dog with infinite pride. To close let me say something to a couple of things said in this thread: They can clear a coffee table with their tail but this is just a matter of training and they learn quickly, the problem is not the back end of the dog clearing the table with their tail the problem is if you happen to turn your back on them the clear the table with their ernormous appitites. As far as cleanliness is concerned believe it or not they do keep themselves cleaner when they have a tail. |
ButtersStotch wrote: I'll never understand the big deal about tail cropping and why it becomes so heated with some people. It's a quick little snip a few days after they're born, there are very few reported complications with the procedure and any pain involved is over in a couple of days. People in the western world don't consider circumcision in male babies "uncivilized" and that's a pretty common cosmetic practice that the baby has no choice in and, from the same argument, it's a cosmetic procedure that is inflicted on it. No one's looking to ban that.
Thank you - and having sheep a hundred years ago which we docked ourselves I can tell you that they don't seem to notice the discomfort after a few minutes. |
| I was present for tail docking of 6 Boxer pups. The only noise they made was when the Dr clamped the tail with the COLD clamp.
Absolutely no noise out of them when the Vet put the one or two stitches in. I was nervous they would be crying and I would end up telling the Vet to stop. My first question before he started was, do you numb the area? He said no and asked me to stick around to prove that the pups were not put in any pain. I was very surprised as they seemed to have no reaction whatsoever to the actually docking. The Vet said, see it's nothing. The tail is a very soft area at that age. The Vet compared it to having your ear pierced. One of the major reasons that they OES appeals to me is the lack of tail. Especially after owning a German Shepherd. There are many dogs with equally lovable personalities. But I am not a fan of tails or shedding. And I love the bear like appearance. It's funny, because after our OES passed away when I was 11, I told my parents I really wanted a dog with a tail.... So been there, done that and definitelty prefer a dog without a whip on it's rear end. |
Quote: They can clear a coffee table with their tail but this is just a matter of training and they learn quickly, the problem is not the back end of the dog clearing the table with their tail the problem is if you happen to turn your back on them the clear the table with their ernormous appitites.
It was easy to train her nose/mouth end to "leave it"... she wouldn't touch anything left on the coffee table. It was next to impossible to curb the enthusiasm of the tail end when it expressed joy. But that's ANY dog with a tail. She was a majestic, noble, aloof beast.  |
Ron wrote: The anti-circumcision argument is exactly the same argument as the anti-docking argument.
Who do you think will win? The pro-ban people, because the pro-dock and/or pro-circumcision people get tired of the argument. In terms of circumcision, I don't know about that because there's a lot more to it than a tail dock at birth. No boys wants to be the uncut one in a locker room full of circumcised boys. There's very few women I've ever met that, uh, love that look either and it can be traumatizing to be different as a teenager. There's a lot more factors to think about because there's a lot of emotions about the "appendage" by the boy. A dog doesn't really think the same-- most of the time. |
| I look at the reasons for the docking bans in a global way. They are intended to eliminate tail-docking and ear-cropping in all breeds, not just the OES.
All of these procedures cause pain.They are therefore lumped into the intent to prevent cruelty to animals. Anything that lowers the incidence or removes entirely an unnecesary painful procedure on an animal is fine by me. However, I am thinking that it should be a choice. Jsut like circumcision, it should be the choice of the parents/ owners whether or not they wish to inflict the pain on those in their charge. No matter how small that pain might or might not be. I, personally. would never do anything to cause Quote: needless pain to an dog, so it would be my choice not to do it..... dock or crop or anything like that... |
| Pain is relative. My dog yelps like crazy when he gets a booster shot. One of my dogs literally hates to have her feet touched. (she is really cute though when the paws disappear underneather her )
Inflicting pain for the sake of inflicting pain is inhumane. But where does it stop? In some countries crating dogs is considered inhumane. This is a slippery slope. But it does appear to be an easy band wagon for people to jump on. |
ButtersStotch wrote: Ron wrote: The anti-circumcision argument is exactly the same argument as the anti-docking argument. Who do you think will win? The pro-ban people, because the pro-dock and/or pro-circumcision people get tired of the argument. In terms of circumcision, I don't know about that because there's a lot more to it than a tail dock at birth. No boys wants to be the uncut one in a locker room full of circumcised boys. There's very few women I've ever met that, uh, love that look either and it can be traumatizing to be different as a teenager. There's a lot more factors to think about because there's a lot of emotions about the "appendage" by the boy. A dog doesn't really think the same-- most of the time. But that's the thing--on this other forum all these people arent' circ. their kids, so in 15 years there will be a mix and both will be 'normal' (at least according to them). (But I agree with you) |
barney1 wrote: ButtersStotch wrote: Ron wrote: The anti-circumcision argument is exactly the same argument as the anti-docking argument. Who do you think will win? The pro-ban people, because the pro-dock and/or pro-circumcision people get tired of the argument. In terms of circumcision, I don't know about that because there's a lot more to it than a tail dock at birth. No boys wants to be the uncut one in a locker room full of circumcised boys. There's very few women I've ever met that, uh, love that look either and it can be traumatizing to be different as a teenager. There's a lot more factors to think about because there's a lot of emotions about the "appendage" by the boy. A dog doesn't really think the same-- most of the time. But that's the thing--on this other forum all these people arent' circ. their kids, so in 15 years there will be a mix and both will be 'normal' (at least according to them). (But I agree with you) Steph, what's the reasoning behind wanting to keep the turtleneck anyway? Is it seriously just about inflicting pain? |
| As far as I can tell from reading people's posts, it pretty much is all about not wanting to inflict unnecessary pain on their precious babies...along with the 'if God wanted them to not have the flap, he would have created them that way.' A few of them are for religious reasons and a few are because the husband never had it done and doesn't want his son to look different than he does.
Okay, I just found the thread...here are some reasons... 1. If God didn't want it there, he wouldn't have put it there... 2. We felt that it should be our son's choice (yeah, like a 32 year old man would choose to have it done retroactively for fun). 3. Felt it was unnecessary 4. Didn't feel right about removing something from the body when medically unnecessary 5. Afraid the child will be missing out on something sensitive during intimacy 6. Traumatic for the child 7. I would never give my baby a tattoo, this is the same thing 8. I worked 9 hard months to get him perfect--why mess with perfection... 9. It's the same as cutting off an arm or a leg... |
barney1 wrote: As far as I can tell from reading people's posts, it pretty much is all about not wanting to inflict unnecessary pain on their precious babies...along with the 'if God wanted them to not have the flap, he would have created them that way.' A few of them are for religious reasons and a few are because the husband never had it done and doesn't want his son to look different than he does.
Okay, I just found the thread...here are some reasons.... We felt that it should be our son's choice (yeah, like a 32 year old man would choose to have it done retroactively for fun). My dad had it done (count 'em) two additional times as an adult in addition to the one at birth. He evidently had a very specific idea of what he wanted, lol. The one about cutting off an arm or a leg made me laugh out loud. These people are going to be in a bad place if their kid ever skins a knee or needs stitches from losing skin. How will the child ever function? 
Why do people feel so strongly about turning their children into wimps? |
| Actually, a friend's child had a circumcision when he was about 2 years old because of medical reasons. He had some medical issues as a newborn, which is why they didn't have the procedure done then. Unfortunately, the little boy was one of a small percentage of males who do have problems without circumcision.
There are also studies which suggest that the sexual partners of circumcised males have fewer STDs and fewer cases of HPV than those of uncircumcised males. In Europe, are dew claws typically removed? |
ButtersStotch wrote: barney1 wrote: As far as I can tell from reading people's posts, it pretty much is all about not wanting to inflict unnecessary pain on their precious babies...along with the 'if God wanted them to not have the flap, he would have created them that way.' A few of them are for religious reasons and a few are because the husband never had it done and doesn't want his son to look different than he does. Okay, I just found the thread...here are some reasons.... We felt that it should be our son's choice (yeah, like a 32 year old man would choose to have it done retroactively for fun). My dad had it done (count 'em) two additional times as an adult in addition to the one at birth. He evidently had a very specific idea of what he wanted, lol. The one about cutting off an arm or a leg made me laugh out loud. These people are going to be in a bad place if their kid ever skins a knee or needs stitches from losing skin. How will the child ever function? Why do people feel so strongly about turning their children into wimps? Seriously. Some of these people are a little over the top. About the STD thing...that's one reason someone was saying that it SHOULD be done and someone came back to say that she was teaching her children abstinence, so they wouldn't have to worry about STDs. And, if they go against their morals and get an STD, then it's their fault! |
| It really makes you wonder what color the sky is in their world. |
barney1 wrote: As far as I can tell from reading people's posts, it pretty much is all about not wanting to inflict unnecessary pain on their precious babies... [emphasis mine]
4. Didn't feel right about removing something from the body when medically unnecessary Ack! I've been studiously avoiding this whole debate and as I skim through I realize it's taken on a life of it's own and gone in a very odd direction...
Here's another one - the statement above can also most certainly apply to dogs. Oh, did you think I was talking about docking? No, I was talking about spaying and neutering. Think about it. Dogs come with a uterus or testicles, and we routinely remove them/chop them off for our convenience (yup, me too - sort of routinely anyway). OK, allegedly to prevent unwanted puppies from being born, but, really, what that boils down to is that our dogs bodies' bear the brunt of our inability to care for them responsibly (not let them reproduce unless so planned). In a nutshell. (says she who couldn't get the lone male in the house neutered fast enough...) We don't even think twice about it (most of us, anyway). We've been indoctrinated to believe it is medically necessary, when really, the dog CAME with this equipment and it does in the great balance of things (hormonal influences) contribute to their overall wellbeing. In the US, the same groups that want to outlaw docking are often the same people who have been (succesfully in places) pushing through MANDATORY spay/neuter at four months old even though the veterinary community in large part agrees that this is medically inadvisable. That's what I want: more idiotic laws that counteract sound medicine. Let's see - last time I attended a docking: my vet does them shortly after the puppies are born, no waiting, numbs them, snips them, puts a stitch in there. Neither puppies nor bitch was stressed. Human (me) a little queasy, can't help it. Last time someone on the list had a bitch spayed (today) we all electronically held her hand, understood her fears (you're talking major surgery) and listened to her describe her girl as being in pain post-op. Hm. I'm not saying don't spay/neuter. But take a minute to consider the schizophrenic attitude we have in this country when it comes to animal welfare and file that away under "things that make you go "hm"..." Kristine |
| Yes Kristine you are right this thread has went a funny direction but a lot of threads on the forum do. I have read and also heard a lot about breeders having a paragraph where puppy buyers are made spey or neuter their pets, WHY, is this to prevent other people breeding with their dogs then again I ask myself WHY, then they breed themselves which right do they have to dictate to puppy buyers regarding the puppy they have just sold, in my opinion none. Every Op which takes place carries a risk and now I have another question if you get a sheepie speyed or neutered because it is in the contract 1) who pays for the Op and 2) if it tragically goes wrong and the young dog dies does that breeder supply another dog for free, or refund your money, I would really like an answer to these questions. |
dairymaid wrote: I have read and also heard a lot about breeders having a paragraph where puppy buyers are made spey or neuter their pets, WHY, is this to prevent other people breeding with their dogs then again I ask myself WHY, then they breed themselves which right do they have to dictate to puppy buyers regarding the puppy they have just sold, in my opinion none. It is definitley a geographically issue. I am on several internatinal forums and the whole spay/neuter things is so much bigger in North America then many other countries. In North America there is a HUGE pet over-population crisis. Spay/neuter is one of the things that is hoped to curb the flow. There are millions of dogs and cats euthanised yearly, just because there are no homes. People breed thier pets and the offspring are bred and it doesn't stop. Lisa has mentioned that in Australia you have to have a licence to breed, and both dogs have to be shown or some rules like that. If there were some controls so that people would not just create more dogs/cats then the spay/neuter thing would not be such an issue. I wish there was another way to stop the killing, but right now it is what we have to work with.. And although I hate to do it, rescue pups are done as early as 8 weeks. It is not unknown for single breed, unaltered dogs to be stolen, just to end up in mills churning out puppies for the rest of their lives. It is very sad. |
dairymaid wrote: Every Op which takes place carries a risk and now I have another question if you get a sheepie speyed or neutered because it is in the contract 1) who pays for the Op and 2) if it tragically goes wrong and the young dog dies does that breeder supply another dog for free, or refund your money, I would really like an answer to these questions. [/color]
In every case I can think of owner pays for surgery (though in my vet's case, and there may be others who do this, she returns a certain amount of the purchase price - $200 maybe? - upon proof of spay/neuter) and if you lose the dog/bitch, no, you don't get a replacement dog. I don't have first hand experience since my dogs were acquired either (1) after they were finished; breeder bred the bitch once then signed her over to me, no contract, no $$$ - she gave me the dog - just knowing that I'm a good home and I had no intention of breeding her. I did spay her a year later (with her permission, as a courtesy) because her seasons made training and trialing her difficult - in this country an intact dog/bitch is often treated like a pariah in training/trialing circles - well, at least the companion dog events (agility and so on - so, again, for my own convenience) The second dog was co-owned on a verbal show contract, meaning she was to be finished and bred (once only, my insistence) if all worked out. I paid exactly $0 for her and breeder would have paid to finish her had she done it herself. I finished her, we bred her and she is still intact, but I can spay her at my discretion and will probably do so for fear of pyo (risk/benefit analysis). The last are all of my (co) breeding, so a non-issue
I do, however, disagree, that the breeder should not have a say in whether or not a dog you sell gets bred. First of all, I'm (co) responsible for every puppy in that litter. For the life of the dog. And I'm also responsible to make sure none of those puppies end up churning out puppies for people who are not themselves responsible. It's part of our code of ethics and no litter is so wonderful that everything should be bred unless you are breeding for pets/$$$. And how many people do their homework (health issues, health screening, understand the breed standard, predigree analysis and so forth, are themselves prepared to take responsibility for what they produce for the life of the puppies?) and should be breeding in the first place? Co-breeder (she sold the puppies in the litter that she and I didn't keep, and on her contract) has a show contract for a show prospect - in which case most of the time she co-owns unless the dog goes to another experienced exhibitor/breeder or on a pet contract - puppy is sold strictly as a companion and should be spayed/neutered. Our problem was not in enforcing this, but in begging pet owners to wait longer than most pet people do to s/n - i.e. until the dog is reasonably mature and growth plates have closed. In one case, they opted to neuter at 6 months anyway, even though we had asked they wait. You can't - rather, we weren't going to dicate - that they wait. A bitch that went to a pet home was spayed at 10 mos. Again a bit earlier than I would have liked, but that's what the owners wanted. In an ideal world you sell only to people you trust 110% to do the right thing. In the real world you may not know all of the people who own your puppies that well. Dawn bought Chewie on a show contract BUT wasn't sure if she wanted to show. She was such a great home (performance, background in rescue, experienced OES owner), that I convinced the co-breeder to sell her (my) pick male anyway, even knowing that she might opt not to show him in conformation. Had she decided not to and told us "for health reasons I don't want to neuter this dog", I'd be fine with that knowing she's responsible enough to do the right thing. When breeding comes with that level of responsibility (you read the rescue horror stories of what happens to dogs in this country), as the breeder, you have to take precautions. Nothing is ever black and white except for an OES puppy, is it? And even then...
Kristine |
Bosley's mom wrote: In North America there is a HUGE pet over-population crisis. Spay/neuter is one of the things that is hoped to curb the flow. There are millions of dogs and cats euthanised yearly, just because there are no homes. People breed thier pets and the offspring are bred and it doesn't stop.
churning out puppies for the rest of their lives. It is very sad. Actually, though this too is somewhat geographical, there is no huge pet overpopulation crisis. That's a sound bite. In most areas, the numbers do not bear this out. In many parts of the country, including mine, we are importing adoptable dogs. In some cases, these dogs are even coming from abroad (Mexico most typically). People are SMUGGLING puppies in from Mexico. What there is a huge deficit in responsible pet ownership, and by this I mean that in most breeds you can sell as many puppies as you can breed, but then you have owners by the droves who dump them for every conceivable reason. Not the same thing. Pet overpopulation crisis would mean humane societies are being innundated with litters that people can't get rid of. Not true. It happens occasionally, usually mixed breed oops litters that don't have a nice doodle suffix, and these puppies are (depending on where in the country you are to some extent) adopted as soon as you get them in. Quite frankly, at the humane society where I volunteered before I moved we were funding our operations by importing young dogs from Southern Indiana. Hm. We have a waiting list right now for our OES here in WI rescue and have been referring people to rescues closer to them. People will ask me who to get an OES puppy from and if I'm to send them to a reputable breeder, it's with the understanding they may wait a year or more till one of those breeders has a litter. A puppy from a BYB or miller for that matter, can be shipped within weeks if not less, of course, but I try hard to convince them to either rescue or wait it out and go with a good breeder. When they don't, and some won't, they fuel the backyard bred population. (supply/demand). Then you just hope you won't be getting their puppy into rescue when they get tired of it in a year or two. File that also, please, under "things that make you go "hm" |
Quote: It is widely accepted that 9.6 million animals are euthanized annually in the United States.
Source: http://www.americanhumane.org/site/Page ... euthanasia This estimate was from 10 years ago and reflects human imposed suffering and loss of life due in part to ignorant, negligent and irresponsible breeding but also to pets no longer "fitting" the owner's lifestyle. I wonder what this number is today? I do think it depends a lot of where you live. Someone on the forum got a sheepie from animal control about a month ago... the next day all the puppies and dogs that had been received that week were euthanized so they could be ready for next weeks "batch" of dogs. I think it really depends on how shelters get the pets they offer for adoption... whether AC acts as a filter so the shelter can say they're no-kill. 
Another thing to consider is the OES are not the "popular breed" (TG and let's hope it stays that way). On one site that allows owners to sell their puppies there are currently 134 OES pups for sale compared to 814 goldens, 1,242 labs, 1,010 cockers, etc. Then take a look at the number of labs, goldens, cocker spaniels, etc. and mixes offered on Petfinder. They will not all find homes... Pets in the USA are suffering because there is simply too much supply compared to the demand. ALL of my girls are spayed and if I'm not a breeder of quality dogs, it's the way it should be (in my opinion ). |
Mad Dog wrote: Bosley's mom wrote: In North America there is a HUGE pet over-population crisis. Spay/neuter is one of the things that is hoped to curb the flow. There are millions of dogs and cats euthanised yearly, just because there are no homes. People breed thier pets and the offspring are bred and it doesn't stop. churning out puppies for the rest of their lives. It is very sad. Actually, though this too is somewhat geographical, there is no huge pet overpopulation crisis. That's a sound bite. In most areas, the numbers do not bear this out. In many parts of the country, including mine, we are importing adoptable dogs. In some cases, these dogs are even coming from abroad (Mexico most typically). People are SMUGGLING puppies in from Mexico. What there is a huge deficit in responsible pet ownership, and by this I mean that in most breeds you can sell as many puppies as you can breed, but then you have owners by the droves who dump them for every conceivable reason. Not the same thing. Pet overpopulation crisis would mean humane societies are being innundated with litters that people can't get rid of. Not true. It happens occasionally, usually mixed breed oops litters that don't have a nice doodle suffix, and these puppies are (depending on where in the country you are to some extent) adopted as soon as you get them in. Quite frankly, at the humane society where I volunteered before I moved we were funding our operations by importing young dogs from Southern Indiana. Hm. We have a waiting list right now for our OES here in WI rescue and have been referring people to rescues closer to them. People will ask me who to get an OES puppy from and if I'm to send them to a reputable breeder, it's with the understanding they may wait a year or more till one of those breeders has a litter. A puppy from a BYB or miller for that matter, can be shipped within weeks if not less, of course, but I try hard to convince them to either rescue or wait it out and go with a good breeder. When they don't, and some won't, they fuel the backyard bred population. (supply/demand). Then you just hope you won't be getting their puppy into rescue when they get tired of it in a year or two. File that also, please, under "things that make you go "hm" Very nicely put. I started to respond but deleted mine. now I am glad I did.  |
6Girls wrote: Quote: It is widely accepted that 9.6 million animals are euthanized annually in the United States. Source: http://www.americanhumane.org/site/Page ... euthanasia This estimate was from 10 years ago and reflects human imposed suffering and loss of life due in part to ignorant, negligent and irresponsible breeding but also to pets no longer "fitting" the owner's lifestyle. I wonder what this number is today? Jaci - I have class today but will look up a bunch of newer data and post links (in a new thread  ) as soon as I have time.
As a general rule, you always have to scrutinize the source of the data and how it was compiled. We are talking dogs. Those numbers (and the sources touting overpopulation are always looking for ways to inflate them) typically include unadoptable pets, including many who are taken to shelters specifically to be euthanized, as well feral cat populations which are periodically "cleaned up", but which certainly have no bearing on our discussion as it relates to dog rescue. We have to take a long, hard look at the those numbers and really question these things. Especially those of us who who are involved in rescue. Because to find a solution to a problem, you have to first define it accurately or you can't address the root cause. Now, you know I am not advocating that we all go forth and let our dogs procreate. Or that we support the proliferation of BYBs and mills. I want rescue to (almost) cease to have to exist (there will always be some dogs who need to be rehomed due to unforseen life-altering situations), if for nothing else for the selfish reason that I'd prefer to dedicate more time to my own dogs. And the bottom line is that in most cases (with the exception of some geographical areas) what we see is that we have rescue dogs more often than not because somebody fell for puppy cute, never bothered to research if cute puppy was of a breed (or breeds) appropriate for them and their situation, never bothered to train cute puppy, puppy grew up and became too much of bother, not so cute, puppy gets dumped. As often as not they turn around and get a new one! Is that overpopulation? No. Definition of problem: too many irresponsible dog owners. Most (not all; because reputable breeders can't and won't fill the demand on their own) BYBs and mills will cease to exist as soon as demand dries up. As long as there are people ready to buy, they will continue to find a way to produce and get the product to market. So who is responsible for BYBs and puppymills? And conversely, the need for rescue? We, the pet owning population. At some point you have to place responsibility squarely where it belongs. Yes, there are puppymill seizures. But the issue is not that they can't sell the puppies they're churning out, it's plain old criminal neglect. That's not overpopulation but something else sinister that has to be addressed. And, yes, I got my first OES from a BYB. And I didn't love her any less than any of my current dogs. Education. It's the only truly effective weapon we have. More in another thread later. Or start one and I'll look for it, because this is an important topic. Kristine |
Mad Dog wrote: In the US, the same groups that want to outlaw docking are often the same people who have been (succesfully in places) pushing through MANDATORY spay/neuter at four months old even though the veterinary community in large part agrees that this is medically inadvisable. That's what I want: more idiotic laws that counteract sound medicine. Spaying and neutering, while causing the animal discomfort, fulfills a humane and socially responsible function of preventing pet overpopulation, so the discomfort to the animal is justifiable. It is the equivalent of teaching proper sex education and/or abstinence to prevent teenage pregnancy. Tail docking OTOH is less justifiable on ethical grounds, because it is seen as merely a vanity procedure. I eagerly agree that many PETA type folks are simply insane, but they did have an influence towards the stricter regulation and treatment of research animals currently in the lab setting. If an animal will be potentially losing its life while contributing to scientific research, at the very least it deserves the respect to be treated well, and have its suffering minimized. |
Didn't find exactly what you're looking for? Search again here:
Custom Search
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|