AngelicRaindrop wrote: » I have to agree in some way with whitser. at the minute as far as i can see if vets refuse to do it the breeders will just do it themselves. our boxer (that was gotten from a rescue) had an awful job done on his. this is going to happen on some level because of breed standards for showing. so is it not better for it to be done by a vet under an anesthetic with pain relief after than someone doing it with a stanley knife and a bucket of boiling water?
Guineapigrescue wrote: » I've been in vets where pups have been brought in for tails to be docked and I could heard them crying (not a normal puppy cry an Im in pain cry) from the room they were doing it in. It's totally pointless, the reason that some get them docked is because they are afraid the dogs tail will get caught or damaged in the undergrowth which is rubbish their ears could get damaged their eyes could get scratched doesn't mean their eyes need taking out or their ears removed. It's a poor excuse, esp. as there are some breeds that work in the field and have very long tails and aren't docked. It's the most pointless thing ever.
Jules wrote: » Whitser that is bull. It is not essential for working dogs to have their tails docked. And it is not a simple and quick procedure. It is extrememly painful and totally unwarrented.
peasant wrote: » Complete and utter rubbish !! ...of course they have nerves in their tails, or do you think they get implanted at a later stage? (At that stage everything (including bloodvessels) is of course rather small and therefore easier to sever (and with less mess) than in a fully grown animal ...but everything's there alright)
markos79 wrote: » they have no nerves in their tails when they are less than 12 weeks old
manukahoney wrote: » Ear cropping; thats so cruel.The only down side of boxers not having tails docked anymore is that their whole bum wont wobble when they're excited. But thats obviously a stupid reason. I'd imagine a boxer would entertain itself with its tail if it had one; mine certainly would anyway, shes such a clown!!
lightening wrote: » I think they look way better with the tails docked!! :eek: I guess that is just programing and my mind telling me a (for example) Doberman should look like this.... I suppose it is cruel though, there is no need for it. Hunting dogs would be more at an advantage with the tail than without the tail.
Themadhouse wrote: » Can i ask, why would someone get the hind dew claw removed?
SunnyP wrote: » Has anyone else out there got a boxer with a tail?