This article is from the K9 Magazine archives, subscribe to our newsletter & get our best dog news, tips and articles ---->Dogs with docked tails are significantly less likely to sustain tail injuries, finds research published in this week’s Veterinary Record. But the overall level of tail injuries is very low, say the authors of the study, which is based on more than 138,000 dogs seen at 52 veterinary practices across Britain between March 2008 and March 2009.
The practice of tail docking to remove most of the tail to prevent this type of injury in dogs was banned in Britain in 2007, although some exemptions apply for specific breeds of working dog.
Among the 138,212 dogs seen by vets at the 52 practices during the study period, 281 were treated for a tail injury – a rate of 0.23%, adjusted for sampling.
The owners of 224 of these injured dogs, as well as a random sample of 799 owners whose dogs had not been treated for tail injury were sent a questionnaire on dog tail injuries and docking.
Only 97 of the owners whose dogs needed treatment and 227 of those whose dogs had not been injured replied.
But their responses indicated that around one in three tail injuries (36%; 35 cases) had occurred at home as a result of the dog knocking its tail against a wall, kennel wall or other household object.
A further 17.5% (17 cases) were sustained outdoors, while 14.4% (14 cases) were caused by the tail being caught in a door. In 15 (15.5%) other causes were cited; and in 16 (16.5%), the cause was unknown. Almost half of the injuries (44%) were recurrent.
Over half the cases were treated with drugs and dressings, but in almost one in three cases, amputation was required. Eleven dogs did not need any treatment.
Certain breeds seemed to be more at risk, with springer and cocker spaniels almost six times as likely to sustain a tail injury as labradors and retrievers.
Greyhounds, lurchers, and whippets were almost seven times as likely to do so, possibly because of the lack of protective hair on their tails, say the authors. Dogs with a wide angle of wag were also almost four times as likely to be injured in this way, while dogs kept in kennels were more than 3.5 times as likely to sustain a tail injury.
Only 35 owners said their dogs had had their tail docked, and on the basis of their overall findings, the authors calculated that tail docking would reduce the risk of injury by 12%.
But in absolute terms, 500 dogs would need to have their tail docked in order to prevent one tail injury.
“Tail docking remains a controversial issue,” say the authors. “The debate is centred on whether non-therapeutic tail docking reduces the risk of tail injuries sufficiently to justify the ethical concerns regarding this [preventive] intervention.”
Source: Veterinary Record
Highly Recommended: As summer approaches, your dog will thank you for – clicking this link…!
Related posts:
June 29, 2010 at 6:12 pm
The Council Of Docked Breeds would like to congratulate the team on undertaking what appears to be an excellent study. We ourselves appreciate that collating worthwhile data from dog owners who are experiencing tail damage is not a simple task, due to their minds being concentrated on getting the dog well again and not on filling out paperwork. The data available to the research team is impressive.
Having said that, the timing of the research seems to be too early to establish the true effect of the tail docking ban which came into force early 2007. The research was carried out during March 2008 and March 2009 and tail damage cases were defined as any dog presented to veterinary practices within the previous 12 months (just as the ban had begun). The mean age of the controls was 4.2 years old and of the tail damage cases 3.8 years old, so the majority of dogs recorded were born before the ban came into force, when tail damage cases are expected to be far lower than since the ban.
It is our experience that damage is less likely to occur in undocked dogs before they have reached the age of twelve to eighteen months. Traditionally docked breeds ceased being docked early 2007 and the number of undocked examples being born slowly increased initially. At the time of the research, the new influx of previously docked breeds were still too young to add to the number of tail damage cases to get a true picture. The study accepts that it does not reflect differences in the risk due to the legislation.
We also note that there were 281 tail injuries recorded from a population of 138,212 dogs attending the 52 participating practises. From this it was deduced that the risk of tail damage was just 0.2% or that 500 docked dogs would only prevent 1 tail damage case. Unfortunately, this simply shows the risk as a percentage of the total dog population and does not represent the risk to undocked dogs in previously docked breeds. Conversely, a number of breeds shown to damage their tails were breeds which have NOT historically been docked.
We read with interest that undocked dogs were most likely to damage their tail in the home and that dogs which were NOT worked would be just as likely to damage their tails, both points have been put forward by the CDB for many years.
To gauge the full effect of the legislation, a repeat study would be required comparing only dogs in those breeds which were traditionally docked before the ban, were born AFTER the ban and the percentage of those that required veterinary attention to their new long tails.
This study was a giant leap forward but unfortunately, not breed specific and too early to evaluate the extent to which tail docking reduces the risk of tail damage in Great Britain, one of its primary aims.
Reply
June 30, 2010 at 3:10 am
there is nothing wrong with tail docking. all those ar idiots, such a pain in the neck.
done correctly, the pup doesn’t even know after a couple of days.
in a year or so, i will get another Doberman, and yes, she will have her tail docked and ears cropped.
so, there you have it!
Reply
July 1, 2010 at 2:17 pm
I really don’t know why docking was banned. I see so many spaniels in my local paper or on the Internet, being sold as pets and yet they are docked. Just because their parents are classed as the working type. The pups are not going to working homes so they shouldn’t have been docked surely. And yet, because I like the “show” type I can’t buy one with a docked tail!
My docked spaniels show me how happy they are all the time with their little stumpy tails. I think that the ban on docking was just another stupid law brought in.
Docking should only be done by vets, but all breeds that were traditionally docked should still be docked!!!
Reply
July 1, 2010 at 4:26 pm
i tend to keep an open mind, but to say a dog forgets in a couple of days is a bit silly. If you cut a new born babys finger off, it would forget in a couple of days, does this make it right. of course not, dogs were given tails for a reason, and that is to show other dogs and people if they are friendly or not, it is all in the dogs behaviour which shows other dogs if they are submissive or aggressive and to cut ears is just bloody stupid, totally unnecessary.
Reply
July 2, 2010 at 5:57 pm
What I should have pointed out in my original post is that the 281 dogs with damaged tails were from just 52 veterinary surgeries. There are circa 1000 surgeries in the UK (TBC) so if these 52 were representative of them all, then circa 6000 dogs suffered tail injuries in the UK for that 12 month period and circa 2000 had to undergo adult amputation!
That is a lot of unnecessary suffering
Reply
July 27, 2010 at 6:46 pm
I think common sense should prevail. Those pups born with long whippy tails should be partially docked, ie leave enough thick tail so they can wag them. The same with working spaniels. Leave enough to show other dogs they are friendly but not enough to get caught up in brambles etc. I have seen undocked pet corgis with lovely tails and I rescued one which had no tail at all – very sad. I have looked after a labrador which kept damaging his tail because it was very long and he wagged it too much.
Reply
July 28, 2010 at 1:39 am
hello,
done by a vet when the pups are 2/3 days old. it is just minor surgery.
i’ve seen Dobes, Boxers, Rotts with long tails. ugh!
give over for heaven’s sake.
i have a number of surgeries in the past, and the first week is not so great, after that, it gets better, same with docked breeds.
so, there you have it!
Reply
July 29, 2010 at 1:51 pm
I think to have a dog’s tail docked or ears cropped for aesthetic reasons is absurd. On the other hand, we had to have our springer spaniel’s tail amputated after she was a year old because she kept hurting it. She would bloody the end of it, sling blood all over the furniture, carpet and people, and then lay on the floor and chew the end of it until it was worse. In her case it became a necessary surgical procedure. We have another springer spaniel that is 5 years older than her, and we’ve never had a problem with her tail.
Reply