To Dock, or Not to Dock?

Two young Rat Terriers, two "looks".

Gigi, owned by Deb Harper, uses her tail for balance
as she prepares to turn in flight.
Photo by TC-Pro.

Pro-Docking

Pro-Natural

1.

Docked tails are traditional for the Rat Terrier. And traditions are important. A docked tail is part of the historical look and function of this breed.

Traditions change, sometimes for the better. "Traditional" does not automatically mean "correct" or "best." Some ancestors of the Rat Terrier were used for gambling profits in rat pits. Pit bulls and other breeds were set against each other to fight to the death. Most of us rejected those traditions up long ago, and legislation now reflects the majority view. But this was not accomplished with without debate, one that likewise employed arguments about breed traditions and personal freedom of choice.

Docking has a functional purpose: to protect the tails of working dogs as they chase their quarry through brush, thorns, and rough territory. Tails can get cut, injured, and broken and this causes great pain for the animal.

Rat Terriers were traditionally used for ridding the barn of rats, and for squirrel hunting. Only a small fraction of purebred Rat Terriers today are serious "working dogs." In any case, it is unclear that tail injuries in the course of work are a significant problem for Rat Terriers or any other docked breed, for that matter. An anecdotal case here and there proves nothing. Working dogs injure their toes, noses, genitals, and eyes too--but no one suggests removing these as a preventive measure.   :^)

The docked tail makes for a beautiful topline, which is spoiled by a tail that is left naturally long. I can't stand the look of a long tail on a Rat Terrier--it just looks weird, clumsy, and ugly.

This is a matter of what we are used to; the perception has nothing to do with the conformation of the dog. Consider the Jack Russell Terrier, Basenji, Patterdale Terrier, Border Terrier, Papillon, Chihuahua, Feist, Manchester Terrier, or for that matter, our hairless siblings--the American Hairless. Compare Pit Bulls vs. Staffordshires, Bull Mastiffs vs. Rottweillers, Dobes vs. Danes. These breeds all represent every possible variation of tail length, from docked short to docked medium to natural medium to natural long, with no discernible pattern related to conformation. Whether any of these dogs look "ugly" with tails is entirely in the eye of the beholderÖ and again, perceptions can change.

If we leave tails undocked, who knows what we'll get in a breed that has never been selected for tails? We could get tails that are curled tight or loose, "gay" tails, natural bobs of varying lengths, thick tails, thin tails, whatever! And what if some people start breeding for this or that kind of tail? Won't that restrict our gene pool?

Looking at the natural tails of Rat Terriers as well as various other terriers, feists, and related breeds, it seems that we'll mostly see tails that are carried high, gay, and with a curve or curl--but not a tight curl like a Basenji. Natural bobs can be of any length, within the same litter. With education, and given the fact that docked vs. natural tails are now to be judged equally per UKC rules, there should be little incentive to start a "trend" toward a particular kind of tail. However, it is possible that folks breeding for performance dogs (agility, squirrel hunting) might start to breed away from natural bobs and in favor of a full tail, which helps the dog to balance and turn more effectively at speed.

Tail docking, done properly and under sterile conditions, is neither cruel nor "mutilating." Tails are normally docked at 1-3 days of age, when the tails are still soft and cartilaginous, and the bones have not hardened. There appears to be only momentary discomfort when the tails are docked.

The use of the words "cruel" and "mutilation" with respect to tail docking does seem extreme, and I do not condone it. Pain is a more significant issue with respect to ear cropping, especially when done by amateur breeders and puppy millers, but tail docking is a fairly simple procedure, and when done properly, does not require anesthesia or pain killers. However, it must also be mentioned that docking and banding are not always done properly. See next point.

There are no long-terms negative effects of tail docking; in fact, the dog is better off without a tail, because it won't get injured.

The latter part of this argument is covered in Point 2 above. Regarding long-term effects, there is some evidence that docked tails are subject to the "phantom pain"--a perceived pain in a limb or digit that has been removed. The phenomenon of phantom pain is well known among human amputees, and there is some evidence that dogs with docked tails suffer from occasional to frequent pain or itching of the tail, caused by scar tissue and nerve damage. It seems that most tail amputation of Rat Terriers is done by breeders, either by cutting or banding. Some are experienced; others are not. If docking is done improperly, the result can be spinal infection, extreme pain, and even death of the puppy. Finally, there is some evidence that full, wagging tails can help strengthen sphincter muscles to prevent anal hernias and other problems in some breeds.

7.

This is a free country, docking and cropping are legal, and it is my democratic right as an American to do as I wish with my dog.

Tail docking is currently a legal practice in the U.S. But the "democratic rights" argument is a non-sequitur: it's about dog-owner rights, and has nothing to do with what is best for the dog and the breed. Besides, it should be remembered that many democratic nations have eliminated most cosmetic docking and cropping, either through the education or legislation. Democratic nations including Australia, Great Britain, and many European democracies have made cosmetic surgery against the lawósome over 100 years ago!

There is no hard evidence that the dog "needs" a tail or that the tail has any essential function of communication, movement, or balance. My dog has a short docked tail, and he does not fall over or look clumsy when he runs. Dogs who are natural bobtails, and dogs with docked tails, are able to communicate just fine with other dogs, and to participate in canine sports such as flyball, agility, and hunting. So obviously they don't need tails to communicate or move or turn.

As with people who have disabilities, dogs can learn to compensate astonishingly well after losing a toe, an ear, an eye, a few teeth, or a chunk of flesh. Cut off a child's ears, and he won't grow up deaf... but would anyone argue that external ears have no function? Dogs can get around fine without their full tails or ears... but that does not mean that the dog enjoys the same abilities that he might have had if those body parts had not been removed or altered? There's no practical way to set up a controlled study to prove this, but it seems ludicrous to argue that tails are NOT used for balance. In most fast-moving species of mammals, birds, and reptiles, tails have evolved, in all their glorious variation, mainly to serve as a counterbalance during locomotion and turning at speed. Why would dogs be any different?

Certain dog breeds that have a wide, stocky body and a low center of gravity might have less need for a tail because they are not built to move and turn at speed, and they can rely on their squat bodies to provide stability. But anyone who watches an agility trial or lure course in slow motion can immediately see that tails are employed constantly, and in predictable patterns, as dogs of all breeds negotiate obstacles and turns.

Finally, there are studies indicating a correlation between tail docking and incontinence in older dogs, apparently because wagging a long tail exercises the anal sphincter muscles and keeps them strong.

Very true. But our UKC breed standard is confusing and ambivalent on this point. It states: A docked or natural bob tail is preferred, but a natural tail is not a fault.How is a judge to interpret that in practice? If a judge is to "prefer" something, how can s/he "not fault" the opposite? Fortunately, with the new memo* that the UKC has sent out, the interpretation should be less ambiguous.

In any case, getting more undocked dogs out there in public will help overcome prejudice against natural tails among the show fancy and general pet owners.