Jack Russell Puppies - Tail Docking thoughts???

angelfire9

thebullkf wrote: »

i wasn't (good point though )

iwas going to say its the removal of an animals internal organs.
in his case- his gonads.

i understand it stops them marking their turf (weeing in the house etc)
but all's your doing is infinitely worse imo;) than docking.

i've heardof neutering to calm animals down- i think its worse than docking.

BTW- i don't like docking - i had a Boxer with a full tail (have only seen a couple since)

but despite Discodogs protestations its not illegal.
some frown upon it, some don't

IMO- Speying ie the surgical removal of the uterus and ovaries from the abdomen of Female cats is the equivalent of a full hysterectomy.
cats don't want it-never have-never will yet its still done daily.
the added protection from certain diseases is a nice aside,but is oft used as an excuse to get it done.
99 times out ofa 100 speying/neutering is done for the owners benefitas well as the animals.


I have rescue dogs- i have to get them done.

i don't want to. i must.:(

they were born with their bits-n-bobs and inners.... they should be left with them.
same for tails.
same for ears.

vanity is an obnoxious excuse ( Plastic surgery in humans also imo)

Excuse my ignorance (again) but in neutering a MALE cat you are not interfering with INTERNAL organs per se
Internal organs IMHO are things like lungs, liver, heart etc

Rescues insist on neutering (as far as i know) to try and reduce the amount of strays they end up with every year

Neutering an animal should not be an exercise in vanity
Docking IS an exercise in vanity

That's the difference

kaiser sauze

angelfire9 wrote: »

I don't think so
my male cat was neutered to reduce the risk of him roaming as i live in a housing estate and our last cat was killed on the road

It wasn't for aesthetic reasons in my view I am improving his lifespan

Getting cats spayed/neutered is a world apart from dog spaying/neutering.

angelfire9

kaiser sauze wrote: »

Getting cats spayed/neutered is a world apart from dog spaying/neutering.

ok, how come?
Genuinely i haven't a clue about mutts I'm a moggy person

Cherry Blossom

thebullkf wrote: »

if people here get their animals spayed/speyed/neutered etc for non life threatening treatments isn't that a much worse crime than Docking

Your not seriously going to tell us that mutilating a pup for asthetic reasons under local or no anesthetic is comparable to spaying a dog under general anesthetic to help prevent hormone related tumors and prevention or complete elimination or uterine pymotera.

This claim would have no credibility whatsoever. What is a non life-threatening treatment? I'm not familiar with this term, is this a reference to some sorts of alternative therapies or something

kaiser sauze

angelfire9 wrote: »

"Nature" does not provide for human contraception either so are we supposed to abstain from sex when we do not wish to procreate?? :eek:

What sort of an insane question/statement is this?

To answer you: yes.

OR, use contraception.

Neither of these options are available to animals, so comparing the two is ridiculous.

thebullkf

angelfire9 wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance (again) but in neutering a MALE cat you are not interfering with INTERNAL organs per se
Internal organs IMHO are things like lungs, liver, heart etc

Rescues insist on neutering (as far as i know) to try and reduce the amount of strays they end up with every year

Neutering an animal should not be an exercise in vanity
Docking IS an exercise in vanity

That's the difference

you're female i'm guessing????


his gonads are internal. an incison needs to be made,and his nuts removed.
to me, thats internal.

thebullkf

angelfire9 wrote: »

Neutering an animal should not be an exercise in vanity
Docking IS an exercise in vanity

That's the difference

some would argue,that dogs look better docked.


no dog looks better neutered.

i mean vanity in a broad animal sense (more human)

as in its done more for the owners benefit than the animals.

thebullkf

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

Your not seriously going to tell us that mutilating a pup for asthetic reasons under local or no anesthetic is comparable to spaying a dog under general anesthetic to help prevent hormone related tumors and prevention or complete elimination or uterine pymotera.

This claim would have no credibility whatsoever. What is a non life-threatening treatment? I'm not familiar with this term, is this a reference to some sorts of alternative therapies or something

No.

please re-read my pos . FFS.

you're not seriously gonna put words in me mouth are you:rolleyes:

Cherry Blossom

thebullkf wrote: »

No.

please re-read my pos . FFS.

you're not seriously gonna put words in me mouth are you:rolleyes:

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth at all, you said this

thebullkf wrote: »

if people here get their animals spayed/speyed/neutered etc for non life threatening treatments isn't that a much worse crime than Docking

As I all ready said, I have no idea what you mean by "non life threatening treatment"

From my point of view the fact that I don't have to worry about my bitches heat cycles is a 'nice aside'

I find it odd that you yourself have rescue dogs yet don't understand the logic of the shelters for the only 100% effective method of preventing further unwanted dogs being created.

(I haven't mentioned docking once in this post therefore now going off-topic, this is for a different thread of which there have been plenty already)

thebullkf

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

I'm not trying to put words in your mouth at all, you said this



As I all ready said, I have no idea what you mean by "non life threatening treatment"

From my point of view the fact that I don't have to worry about my bitches heat cycles is a 'nice aside'

I find it odd that you yourself have rescue dogs yet don't understand the logic of the shelters for the only 100% effective method of preventing further unwanted dogs being created.

(I haven't mentioned docking once in this post therefore now going off-topic, this is for a different thread of which there have been plenty already)

then whydidn't you just put the above in your OP??

instead you put this:

Your not seriously going to tell us that mutilating a pup for asthetic reasons under local or no anesthetic is comparable to spaying a dog under general anesthetic to help prevent hormone related tumors and prevention or complete elimination or uterine pymotera.

This claim would have no credibility whatsoever. What is a non life-threatening treatment? I'm not familiar with this term, is this a reference to some sorts of alternative therapies or something

i never mentioned aesthetics,anaesthetics,mutilation,tumors etc etc..

you're sensationalising Docking.

there are pro's and con's to every procedure.
you are correct in your OP about Uterine pymotera,but it is treatable... but the crux is .. its costly.

hence the prudence in getting it done early.


here's a question... what about show dogs????

they can't win if they're fixed...


so , if they can win a title.. feck the health risks???

Advantages
Besides being a birth control method, and being convenient to the owner, neutering/spaying has the following health benefits:

• Sexually dimorphic behaviors such as mounting, urine spraying and some forms of male aggression (relating to females in estrus) may be reduced due to the decrease in hormone levels brought about by neutering. This is an especially significant benefit in male cats due to the extreme undesirability of male cat sexual behavior for pet owners.[2]
• Prevention of mammary tumors: Female cats and dogs are about seven times more likely to develop mammary tumors if they are not spayed before their first heat cycle.[3] Female dogs that have been spayed before their first heat have a lifetime chance of developing mammary tumors of about 99.5% less than that of intact females. If allowed to go through their first heat before spaying, then their risk is close to 92% less. Also, spaying female dogs more than two years before the removal of mammary tumors increases the dog's survival odds by 45%.[4]
• Without its ability to reproduce, a female animal effectively has a zero risk of pregnancy complications, such as spotting and false pregnancies, the latter of which can occur in more than 50% of unspayed female dogs.[5]

URL="http://www.boards.ie/w/index.php?title=Neutering&action=edit&section=3"][COLOR=#0645ad]edit[/COLOR][/URL Disadvantages

URL="http://www.boards.ie/w/index.php?title=Neutering&action=edit&section=4"][COLOR=#0645ad]edit[/COLOR][/URL General

• As with any surgical procedure, immediate complications of neutering include the usual anesthetic and surgical complications, such as bleeding and infection. These risks are relatively low in routine spaying and neutering; however, they may be increased for some animals due to other pre-existing health factors. In one study the risk of anesthetic-related death (not limited to neutering procedures) was estimated at 0.05% for healthy dogs and 0.11% for healthy cats. The risk for sick dogs and cats were 1.33% and 1.40% respectively.[6]

• Neutered dogs of both sexes are at a twofold excess risk to develop osteosarcoma as compared to intact dogs,[7][8][9]

• Studies of cardiac tumors in dogs showed that there was a 5 times greater risk of hemangiosarcoma, one of the three most common cancers in dogs, in spayed females than intact females and a 2.4 times greater risk of hemangiosarcoma in neutered dogs as compared to intact males[10][11]

• Spaying and neutering is associated with an increase in urinary tract cancers.[12]

• Neutered dogs of both sexes have a 27% to 38% increased risk of adverse reactions to vaccinations. The incidence of adverse reactions for neutered and intact dogs combined is 0.32%[13]

• Neutered dogs have also been known to develop hormone-responsive alopecia (hair loss).[14]

• A 2004 study found that spayed and neutered dogs had a higher incidence of CCL rupture, a form of ACL injury[15]

• Early age gonadectomy was found to be associated with an increased incidence of noise phobias and undesirable sexual behaviors[16]

pokertalk

kaiser sauze wrote: »

Yes.

I will not explain it here, I am sure you know a person/Vet who could refer you to someone who does it this way.

i am not llooking for a refera land im not looking to get it done,just to clear that up . i just asked what the procedures were.if ya dont want to tell me thats cool.

rabbit.84

Theres a boxer that is walked past my house very often who has his tail. It looks so much nicer. I would def perfer a dog who had a tail.

Discodog

kaiser sauze wrote: »

How do you riddle this one out?

Can you translate

kaiser sauze wrote: »

The method I use is well known, there is no secret or mysticism involved. The fact that you are up on your soapbox over those who use knives, and other sharp implements, and projecting your vitriol over them onto me is amusing.
People can ask "why" all they like, I am not here to justify it, but I am here as a counterbalance to a one-sided argument that uses knife wielding crazies as their target.

So you believe that banding, placing a tight rubber band over the tail to kill it, is humane & way better than cutting. This Vet disagrees & has a suggestion as to what he would like to do with one of those bands !.

"Using elastrator bands causes prolonged pain in the puppy and is one of the least humane methods around. Imagine having a tight elastic band around your own, or even worse your baby's finger until it literally rots and falls off. Tetanus can also very easily develop in puppies with this barbaric method. The Clostridium tetani bug causing tetanus is an anaerobic bacterium which means that it lives in an environment with very low oxygen. The bloodless necrotic stump of a puppy's tail docked in this way is an ideal medium for Clostridia to grow in.

The elastrator ring was originally designed for the castration and docking of lambs tails. I would love to use it in the way it was originally intended on the people advocating this barbaric form of tail docking."

Gerry Retief
Veterinarian.
Owner: Montwood Park Veterinary Clinic

thebullkf

Discodog wrote: »

Can you translate



So you believe that banding, placing a tight rubber band over the tail to kill it, is humane & way better than cutting. This Vet disagrees & has a suggestion as to what he would like to do with one of those bands !.

"Using elastrator bands causes prolonged pain in the puppy and is one of the least humane methods around. Imagine having a tight elastic band around your own, or even worse your baby's finger until it literally rots and falls off. Tetanus can also very easily develop in puppies with this barbaric method. The Clostridium tetani bug causing tetanus is an anaerobic bacterium which means that it lives in an environment with very low oxygen. The bloodless necrotic stump of a puppy's tail docked in this way is an ideal medium for Clostridia to grow in.

The elastrator ring was originally designed for the castration and docking of lambs tails. I would love to use it in the way it was originally intended on the people advocating this barbaric form of tail docking."

Gerry Retief
Veterinarian.
Owner: Montwood Park Veterinary Clinic

why quote a Sth. African vet????

Whispered

Yeah DD surely you know that pups in Sth. Africa are completly different to the pups we have here.

thebullkf

Whispered wrote: »

Yeah DD surely you know that pups in Sth. Africa are completly different to the pups we have here.

people in Sth Africa are different it seems......



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-11717466

Whispered

thebullkf wrote: »

people in Sth Africa are different it seems......

What has that got to do with a vet commenting on docking pups?

thebullkf

Whispered wrote: »

What has that got to do with a vet commenting on docking pups?

same as your comment. nowt;)


i just find it strange that a quote from Irish vet can't be found......

is docking illegal in SA??

(seeing as how its not here,might explain lack of comments)

Susannahmia

I have a jrt with a docked tail and I hate it, its so unnecessary and cruel plus imo a tail looks so much better. The dog was a gift so I didn't have any say in buying her etc but if I had I would have much preferred to buy from a breeder who didn't dock tails.

My uncle who bought the dog was told by the breeder that JRTs had to have their tails docked because they got back problems if they didn't?! I'm guessing its an old wives tale.

Whispered

thebullkf wrote: »

same as your comment. nowt;)


i just find it strange that a quote from Irish vet can't be found......

The quote was not about the legalities of docking. It was about the pain caused by docking. It makes no difference where the vet is from, the pain factor and risk of infection is the same.

Questioning where the vet is from does not make what he is saying any less relevent.

thebullkf

Whispered wrote: »

The quote was not about the legalities of docking. It was about the pain caused by docking. It makes no difference where the vet is from, the pain factor and risk of infection is the same.

Questioning where the vet is from does not make what he is saying any less relevent.

thats a matter of opinion tbh.

wolfpawnat

Tail docking is a painful thing to do. Wrap a string around your finger as tight as possible. that is the pressure on their tails.

And since the tail is a continuation of their spine, veterinary research shows a badly docked tail can cause damage in the spine.

The reason people suggest such a young age to dock a pups tail is they are too helpless to do anything about it.

Also badly docked tails can get very badly infected and the skin may not heal properly over the end. So the cruel act for aesthetical value becomes an eye sore!

Many of Ireland's lead vets and those teaching the course in UCD are asking for it to become illegal.

Whispered

thebullkf wrote: »

thats a matter of opinion tbh.

How is it a matter of opinion? Do you mean that because he is South African, you think what he is saying has less relevance than if he was Irish?

I don't understand.

(EDIT: Before you say I'm putting words into your mouth, I'm not, I'm wondering what you mean by saying it's a matter of opinion, how relevant his quotation is, based on where he is from.)

thebullkf

you must forgive me as i thought you were being 'smart' with this comment.

Yeah DD surely you know that pups in Sth. Africa are completly different to the pups we have here.

were you

DD seems to feel quite strongly about this,we've seen otherthreads where its been maintained that it's illegal when DD knows well its not (in ireland)

Whispered wrote: »

How is it a matter of opinion? Do you mean that because he is South African, you think what he is saying has less relevance than if he was Irish?

of course not. (raciallyspeaking)

I don't understand.

(EDIT: Before you say I'm putting words into your mouth, I'm not, I'm wondering what you mean by saying it's a matter of opinion, how relevant his quotation is, based on where he is from.)

you're grand;)

my earlier quote

i just find it strange that a quote from Irish vet can't be found......

is docking illegal in SA??

(seeing as how its not here,might explain lack of comments)

certain things may be illegal elsewhere other than ireland,therefore quotes from said place would tend to make stronger arguements against said illegal operations. for instance -Docking.

Whispered

But the quote you questioned was not about legalities, it is about pain and possibility of infection. Which will be the same in Ireland as in South Africa etc.

Stop trying to cloud the issue.

thebullkf

Whispered wrote: »

But the quote you questioned was not about legalities, it is about pain and possibility of infection. Which will be the same in Ireland as in South Africa etc.

Stop trying to cloud the issue.

i'm not :pac:... methinks you might be

Discodog

thebullkf wrote: »

why quote a Sth. African vet????

Why not ?. He has given a professional public opinion regarding the cruelty involved in banding.

Ask your own Vet if they think it is cruel. Mine used the phrase "utterly barbaric" & she is Irish.

thebullkf wrote: »

people in Sth Africa are different it seems......
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-11717466

What an total ridiculous & off topic post. Trying to link rape to tail docking ?. Something similar was happening in Irish schools once.

You also forget to add that South African has better Animal Protection Law, & enforcement that we do - but it's hardly difficult to be better than Ireland

wolfpawnat

thebullkf wrote: »

why quote a Sth. African vet????

My housemate is studying veterinary in UCD. An Irish college. There is a guy in his year that is from Botswana. He is being educated here to the same high standard as our vets. Is his opinion any less valid?

Whispered

thebullkf wrote: »

i'm not :pac:... methinks you might be

I'm really not - A vet is quoted explaining the risks of docking, and you're talking about it not being relevant as he is south african, then saying it is relevant but still, somehow, not? Because docking may or may not be illegal in S.A.

legalities have nothing to do with what tht vet said. where he is from has nothing to do with what he said. what he said was about pain and risk of infection.

Do you agree?

Graces7

thebullkf wrote: »

same as your comment. nowt;)


i just find it strange that a quote from Irish vet can't be found......

is docking illegal in SA??

(seeing as how its not here,might explain lack of comments)

SA vets are clearly waaaaaaaaaay ahead of Irish vets. And more caring and realistic clearly also.

They do this to lambs too. Barbaric.