Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 67

Thread: Dog castration vs. tail docking

  1. #1
    As a mother, I am telling you Syzygys's Avatar
    Posts
    12,645

    Dog castration vs. tail docking

    In another thread, emotions flared when the issue of docking a dog's tail came up. Beside aesthetic reasons, there are practical ones for vermit hunting dogs, when they go into small, defined spaces.

    Those people who are against tail docking most of the time don't see any problem with cutting the dog's balls of. Sure that has health reasons and behavior issues behind it, but from the dog's point of view, a ball is way more important than a tail.

    So the bottomline is, if you cry about tail docking, you should whine about neutering too...

    Oh yes, what is the point of human circumcision???? (beside being a barbaric religious leftover)

  2. #2
    There is a completely different reason to desex animals. Every year 250,000 animals are put down because they can't be homed. 50% of animals the RSPCA held during 2008 were destroyed and the councils had around an 86% euthanasia rate.

    http://www.givepetsachance.org.au/in...d=15&Itemid=11

  3. #3
    As a mother, I am telling you Syzygys's Avatar
    Posts
    12,645
    I understand, but from the animal's POV, what is more important, balls or tail?

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Syzygys View Post
    I understand, but from the animal's POV, what is more important, balls or tail?
    You are missing the point. Asguard made it quite clear. Neutering animals prevents over population, which diminishes neglect and suffering. All three of my dogs are rescues, so we are looking after other people's mistakes.

    Also if you have a bunch of intact male dogs, they are more likely to fight that neutered males. They are going to get into a few fights purely through testosterone in their lifetime, which means bites, pain,possible infections and vet bills. The latter is when many animals get abandoned.

    Taking off a dog's balls has very definite positive effects. The same cannot be said for tail docking.

  5. #5
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    1,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Syzygys View Post
    In another thread, emotions flared when the issue of docking a dog's tail came up. Beside aesthetic reasons, there are practical ones for vermit hunting dogs, when they go into small, defined spaces.
    Not relevant for a rottweiler. Tail docking and hunting dogs has the point of long hair and burrs/matting, which can easily be handled with pre-field trimming. I would also point out that hunting dogs have longer hair in places besides their tails and hunters figure out how to get around that without skinning their dogs bellies.
    Those people who are against tail docking most of the time don't see any problem with cutting the dog's balls of. Sure that has health reasons and behavior issues behind it, but from the dog's point of view, a ball is way more important than a tail.
    Its not about the dogs point of view. Its about health/behavior and pregnancy prevention. Tail/ear docking is only about aesthetics.

  6. #6
    As a mother, I am telling you Syzygys's Avatar
    Posts
    12,645
    Quote Originally Posted by milkweed View Post
    Not relevant for a rottweiler.
    Not relevant for this thread. This is about all dogs.

    Its not about the dogs point of view.
    Well, it might as well be. Who is more important, your view or the dog's? And morally speaking why causing pain for health reasons is better than for beauty??

    If you are a good owner, you should be able to prevent your dog breeding without cutting his balls off. And behavior? Teach that damn dog. Isn't that behavior is normal and the balless behavior is unnatural??
    We might as well lobotomize bad behaving dogs.
    (mind you I am just arguing here for the sake of argument)
    Last edited by Syzygys; 04-17-11 at 01:31 PM.

  7. #7
    C'mon, get happy! chimpkin's Avatar
    Posts
    4,416
    If you are a good owner, you should be able to prevent your dog breeding without cutting his balls off. And behavior? Teach that damn dog.
    My current behavioral issue with one of my dogs: I can't be there 24 hours to supervise him, and I can't trust him around my cats.

    Keeping an animal restrained at all times is ideal...that having been said, I may only now have the cash, energy and time to build him a good enclosure. He's on a long tie-out cable...I don't consider the arrangement safe or entirely humane, even if it gives him 60 feet of run line.
    There's nobody standing in line waiting to take this dog off my hands either. Finding a home for him would be hard.

    That's for the same reason that training him is hard too. Combination of high energy and very little brain. In a 60-pound dog this makes him prone to injure his owners; not out of malice, just out of happy-to-see-you exuberance.
    He's pulled me off my feet, knocked me over, bruised my arms up, bonked me in the jaw when he went airborne to lick me in the face, and scarred me with his toenails. I'm 5'9", not exactly a small woman.
    I have yet to ever have a dog that didn't escape at one point or another...or a cat for that matter. I tried not to spay one of my female cats, she squeezed out around the dryer vent.

    Animals want to please you, yes...but it would take a better trainer than I am or could afford to pay for to keep my dogs from acting on their desires given opportunity.

    At this point my physical health is sliding into the gutter again...I'm getting somewhat frustrated at having animals at all. I never intended to get the ones I have. They all just arrived because somebody threw them out.

    There is an alternative to spay/neuter: you can give a dog/cat a vasectomy or tubal ligation.

    However, the animal so treated is more likely to end up with reproductive cancers...it also costs a lot more.
    Last edited by chimpkin; 04-17-11 at 03:28 PM.

  8. #8
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    1,080
    Originally Posted by milkweed
    Not relevant for a rottweiler.
    Not relevant for this thread. This is about all dogs.
    It became relevant when you brought up hunting dogs as an example of potential need for tail docking.

    Who is more important, your view or the dog's?
    My view is the most important. It is my view that directly affects all of the dogs life.
    And morally speaking why causing pain for health reasons is better than for beauty?
    How does the above even make sense? Both dogs and cats offer bobtail breeds.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_bobtail

    A cat who is not spayed (female) often develops cancer (breast and uterine) that is virtually unheard of in spayed females. Feline leukemia is spread sexually (along with other avenues) and can be carried by both females and males.
    *note for Chimpkin. Tying off tubes/vascectomy does not stop heats so breeding behavior would still be present.

  9. #9
    C'mon, get happy! chimpkin's Avatar
    Posts
    4,416
    Quote Originally Posted by milkweed View Post
    *note for Chimpkin. Tying off tubes/vascectomy does not stop heats so breeding behavior would still be present.
    Exactly...as would the potential for reproductive cancers...but the animal would naturally do what unaltered animals do.

    In my experience? That's to be really really motivated to run off and stay gone for days at a stretch...especially in the case of the males...males roam, they are far more motivated to find a way to escape enclosures...and this puts them at much higher risk for being run over.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Syzygys View Post
    In another thread, emotions flared when the issue of docking a dog's tail came up. Beside aesthetic reasons, there are practical ones for vermit hunting dogs, when they go into small, defined spaces.

    Those people who are against tail docking most of the time don't see any problem with cutting the dog's balls of. Sure that has health reasons and behavior issues behind it, but from the dog's point of view, a ball is way more important than a tail.

    So the bottomline is, if you cry about tail docking, you should whine about neutering too...

    Oh yes, what is the point of human circumcision???? (beside being a barbaric religious leftover)
    I didnt give anyone a hard time for docking the tail. The doggie was born, if a person traets the dog well then the tail docking will be pale in comparison. Some peeps like to BS.

  11. #11
    As a mother, I am telling you Syzygys's Avatar
    Posts
    12,645
    Quote Originally Posted by John99 View Post
    I didnt give anyone a hard time...
    Sorry, this thread is NOT about you.

  12. #12
    As a mother, I am telling you Syzygys's Avatar
    Posts
    12,645
    Quote Originally Posted by milkweed View Post
    It became relevant when you brought up hunting dogs
    Rotweillers are obviously not hunting dogs, so that argument doesn't apply to them.

    My view is the most important. It is my view that directly affects all of the dogs life.
    I tend to agree, and so says the taildocker.

  13. #13
    Monkey see, monkey denigrate visceral_instinct's Avatar
    Posts
    7,918
    As phlogistician said, the two are completely different. Neutering is vastly better for the dog's health as well as preventing suffering for a whole shitload of potential puppies. Less fights, less injuries, no puppies ending up abandoned or worse because no one wanted them. Tail docking isn't necessary unless the dog is actually a guard dog.

  14. #14
    Ignorance killed the cat Randwolf's Avatar
    Posts
    3,286
    Quote Originally Posted by Syzygys View Post
    Rotweillers are obviously not hunting dogs, so that argument doesn't apply to them.
    I'm not sure I totally agree with this assessment. To my knowledge, Rottweillers were, in fact, developed as a hunting breed.

    There were others who wanted to preserve the original Rottweiler and this large dog’s powerfulness, guarding abilities, transportation, and big game hunting abilities.
    Source: Rottweiler information There are numerous other internet references, but I'm kind of in a hurry, so I grabbed the first available. But trust me, there are a thousand more.


    These dogs were originally bred for hunting "large"animals, like wild boar. Their jaws actually "lock" into a closed position, so that it takes little or no effort for them to hang on to prey - whether it be a bull or a rabbit. (Rabbits probably being below the horizon as to the type of animal a Rottweiler hunts out, on a normal basis).

    If you dispute this, please give me links, or at least some form of anecdotal, reference.

    Thanks...

  15. #15
    As a mother, I am telling you Syzygys's Avatar
    Posts
    12,645
    Quote Originally Posted by visceral_instinct View Post
    As phlogistician said,
    He has me on Ignore and I have him on Ignore, so his opinion doesn't count.

    But anyway, both ways we are causing pain and we agreed that we don't give a shit what the dog thinks. Only the owner's POV counts...

  16. #16
    As a mother, I am telling you Syzygys's Avatar
    Posts
    12,645
    Quote Originally Posted by Randwolf View Post
    I'm not sure I totally agree with this assessment. To my knowledge, Rottweillers were, in fact, developed as a hunting breed.
    Don't get sidetracked, by hunting dogs I meant vermit hunting terriers or any other digger dogs where in a small space underground having a long tail would be a disadvantage. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

  17. #17
    Ignorance killed the cat Randwolf's Avatar
    Posts
    3,286
    Quote Originally Posted by Syzygys View Post
    Don't get sidetracked, by hunting dogs I meant vermit hunting terriers or any other digger dogs where in a small space underground having a long tail would be a disadvantage. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
    Different story, as it would obviously disqualify Rottweilers.

    But no, it wasn't particularly clear, else I would not have replied in such a matter - now that you have qualified and constrained your definition[s], I do, in fact, agree.

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Syzygys View Post
    So the bottomline is, if you cry about tail docking, you should whine about neutering too...
    If you've ever been in a room with an excited great dane that still has a tail, you will understand that the tail is a dangerous weapon that needs to go, and if you don't want puppies the other stuff needs to go too.

    Don't make dog owning any harder than it has to be, and remember that a happy master has a happy dog.

  19. #19
    Valued Senior Member
    Posts
    1,080
    Quote Originally Posted by Syzygys View Post
    Don't get sidetracked, by hunting dogs I meant vermit hunting terriers or any other digger dogs where in a small space underground having a long tail would be a disadvantage. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
    Like scottie terriers bred for going face first into badger holes? They all grab the face of their target or go face first at them. Long tails are not a disadvantage in that situation. Neither are longer tails for guard dogs or we would be snipping the tails off our police dogs. These are long standing myths to justify an unnecessary practice.

    I would add into this mix, the fact that most of these dogs are not being used for their original breed purpose and are mostly pets whos primary job is making sure someone pets them when their people come home. Companion animals.

  20. #20
    C'mon, get happy! chimpkin's Avatar
    Posts
    4,416
    I personally wouldn't dock a dog's tail...but I do know about those big tails beating you up.
    Of course my crazy-hyper dog likes to climb in laps...all 60 bony-assed pounds of him...then he wet-willies your ears. So with him, love hurts, stinks, and drools.

    I can't help but think neutered dogs-the guys-are happier. The intact males I've met? they seem very frustrated and restless.
    And again...more motivated to escape, more motivated to take off on long trips when they do escape. Also more aggressive, more prone to get in fights with other intact male dogs, more energetic (which generally equals more work for someone who's busy), pushier, more temperamental...

    The females I don't really see a change.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. By Saint in forum Free Thoughts
    Last Post: 07-13-13, 04:58 PM
    Replies: 269
  2. By GospelJohn in forum Religion Archives
    Last Post: 02-16-11, 09:54 AM
    Replies: 10
  3. By Paul W. Dixon in forum Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology
    Last Post: 12-30-10, 10:07 AM
    Replies: 1953
  4. By ElectricFetus in forum Ethics, Morality, & Justice
    Last Post: 10-12-08, 04:58 PM
    Replies: 56
  5. By Tnerb in forum Ethics, Morality, & Justice
    Last Post: 03-14-08, 09:26 AM
    Replies: 22

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •