Add Your Idea


1 Comment 2nd July 2010

Tail docking is not cosmetic.  It origins go back many, many years and it was done for a purpose.     As with everything else in the U.K. it's ALL or NOTHING and the majority of people who voted for the tail docking legislation to go through obviously know little or nothing about the procedure and the reasons for doing it.

If a puppy at three or four days old feels pain when its tail is docked, I have yet to see evidence of this.   Cannot some compromise be reached whereby the dogs whose tails were traditionally docked to the root are left with a small tail of a few inches in length?   I am sure this suggestion was put forward at some stage in the lengthy negotiations – can it now be reconsidered?



Why does this matter?

I regard my idea as important because it gives an element of choice to breeders and dog owners who feel strongly about the draconian legislation.    Many dogs injure their tails in many differing ways and getting them to heal is no easy matter.      There is also the matter of considerable expense in vets fees having surgery performed, in many cases, on more than one occasion to get the tail to a length where it will actually heal.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

Highlighted posts


  1. frank stelfox says:

    I have owned Rottweiler’s for over thirty years in all that time never had one of my dogs treated for tail damage however since the the ban 3 of my dogs have had damage to the tails whilst out exercising , tail damage to an adult dog is far more painful than docking a pup ,therefore I would be in favour of freedom of choice

Comment on this idea

Good idea? Bad idea? Let us know your thoughts.

Back to top
Add Your Idea