Memorandum submitted by Ernie Scales
SUMMARY
The submission seeks to include in the draft
legislation a ban on the docking of dogs' tails except on the
specific recommendation of a veterinary surgeon, and for working
purposes. It is supported by facts on the numbers of dogs which
are used for working purposes and which have their tails docked
normally vis-a"-vis the total number of dog breeds
registered with the Kennel Club which have their tails docked
routinely; but not compulsorily).
DRAFT ANIMAL
WELFARE BILL
1. It is interesting to note in paragraph
17 of the Regulatory Impact Assessment to the Draft Bill that
there is "widespread support from animal welfare organisations,
including the RSPCA, and the veterinarian associations for a ban
on the docking of dog's tails for non-therapeutic reasons".
It was no surprise that a ban would be opposed by breed societies,
and to a lesser extent those involved with working dogs.
2. A quick check of the Kennel Club web
site produces a list of 195 recognised breeds; of these 53, or
27%, are listed as having docked, or partially docked tails. By
further sub-dividing that total into dogs docked for historical
but now cosmetic reasons and those historically docked and which
continue to be docked for sporting interests shows that there
are five breeds in the Terrier Group and six in the Gundog Group
regularly used in connection with sport. In the Terrier category
would be the two Fox Terriers, the Lakeland, Parson Russell and
Welsh. In the Gundog Group only German Shorthaired and Wirehaired
Pointer and the following Spaniels—English Springer, Field,
Sussex and Welsh Springer are used regularly. There may be other
foreign breeds used infrequently as gundogs as indeed may be the
case with Clumber and Cocker Spaniels. Hunt Point Retrievers are
not listed on the Kennel Club site, but adding that breed to the
11 listed above would take the total to 12 breeds or just over
6%.
3. It is clear that there are very few dogs
used for sporting purposes which have docked tails. This leaves
the large residue of dogs docked for cosmetic reasons. And whilst
this may reflect a previous sporting interest, or any other working
need, it is more often than not the case that that requirement
no longer exists.
4. Therefore, it is only intransigence by
the breed societies, and the standards they set, which prevents
any legal change to the dogs' status and allows continued mutilation.
Notwithstanding that, those breeders who are more enlightened,
or less fixed in their stance, do produce dogs, traditionally
docked, with full tails. This includes Weimaraner, Mastiff and
Spaniels. This begs the question as to need and the unnecessary
suffering which is imposed on puppy dogs in the interests of the
breed standard.
5. I am firmly of the belief that docking
dogs' tails is an anachronism that is long overdue for abolition
as ear docking was many years ago. There may be a case for its
retention for sporting purposes, but that should not lead to automatic
docking. Of the 11 breeds listed above, there are many dogs produced
which will never be used in that way.
6. It should, then, be the case that docking
is banned except where authorised and agreed by a veterinary surgeon.
This was the case with two Springer Spaniels owned by friends
and which had never been docked. Although they were not used in
a sporting context, they did suffer from damage to the tail tip
from vigorous wagging and the tail connecting with hard objects.
After several treatments, the veterinary surgeon concluded that
the only recourse to stop tail damage was removal of two-thirds
of the tail.
7. As in the case above, I believe that
this should be a measure of last resort and as a general principle
docking should be banned. I hope that Committee Members will give
serious consideration to including a ban in the body of, or as
an Annex to, the Bill.
24 July 2004
| 
