A change in the rottwailer FCI standar

Good news!!
In the FCI has forbidend to cut the tail in the rottweiler, now the rott. show whit they tail intact, but the dog who they tails have being cuted before this are still alowded to show.

See:
TAIL : In natural condition, level in extension of the upper line; at ease may be hanging.

Whit they tail intact resembles the aGreat swiss mointaing dog.

I hope the AKC can do this too, but is difficult 'cause they idenpendence.

FCI rottwailer standar http://www.fci.be/uploaded_files/147gb2000_en.doc

That's great news!! I hope the akc will follow along too!!
Thanks for sharin!

Well, I'm not jumping for joy at the news. lol I prefer the Rotties to have a docked tail. I just can't help thinking: If people start focusing on the tail now, will the head or movement or whatever be thrown of balance? Rotties had a docked tail when they were first "created". It is part of their history. I don't see why we need to change that now since breeding is about preserving the breed.

I liked the look of docked Rotties too....I've seen them without being docked, and I'd own a Rottweiler that wasn't docked, but I like the docked look.

I'm not jumping for joy either. The docked tail is docked for reasons other than purely looks. It's the same with the Doberman. The dog needs to be free of hanging apendages that serve as handles to grab and injured or getting in the way of the work they are bred to do. They were meant to be a dog with a compact, atheletic, unfettered, all-in-one body. Docking causes no pain when done at the typical age of 3 or 4 days old before the nervous system detects pain in that area. They do not "miss" having a tail. Their body language is not disrupted by having a short tail. It's ridiculous for any government to get involved. This is not a political issue, so what's up with all this nonsense?

I can't believie they did that. The crop is there for a reason and should especially be there in show and working dogs. I worry about them doing things like this with the dobe too!

Looks wise yeah, i think i would prefer docked tails. buuuut...

I'm not familiar with the full story behind it, so feel free to totally ignore my opinion , but my understanding is they can feel ghost pains their whole life. Does the 3-4 days docking prevent this? Are people good about following that guideline, for real?

I'd have to say I'd rather play it safe and not dock. As far as function etc, i understand small details can make a difference, but still. Some 'dog fighters' cut off their dogs ears...totally..not just a bit..to make them better at what they do. So I don't think our chosen theoretical function for the dog alone makes mutilation justifiable. It's not like it's passed on generation to generation, any ways. If a smaller tail is desired, breed for it, just like other characteristics.

If someone's really using their dogs for their intended jobs, and it's legit, necessary, and it is a crucial procedure for that lifestyle, I suppose I wouldn't really object as much.

What i don't like though is un voluntary mutilation for vanity. I don't even think babies should get pierced ears until they make the decision themselves, when they are older, so i might be a bit overly biased here

Well in europe many countries are in a debate of banning the tail/ears trim, in egland is forbidden to cut ears of ANY breed, and it looks like germany will be next.

Here pics of rott whit tails:

How could they feel ghost pains when the tail was removed (simple procedure) prior to the central nervous system developing. There are no brain or spinal pathways which have received the message that the tail was there and then not there.

It is the norm and reputable breeders dock at that 3 or 4 day age.

Why can't they breed for it? It's a huge task to breed for all the other things that good breeders strive for....good conformation, eliminating or lessening all the many health problems that are inherent in a particular breed, good temperament. Do you know what a monumental challenge that is? Now, how could breeders possibly find all the best of those attributes in a pair of dogs and find ones which happen to have slightly shorter tails or fewer tail vertabrae (a 1 in a kazillion chance) in order to breed for a stub tail? Not practical and probably not possible. Docking is not cruel, painful, psychologically damaging or anything else that uninformed people think is negative.

I'm not knocking the docking if there is function to it AND it's done in an appropriate manner (ie, 3-4 days etc...). However, all you need to do is look at the number of uninformed people who get hold of a dog and attempt the do-it-yourself docking with an elastic band past the age docking should occur. The fact of the matter is some people are, shall we say 'one brick shy a load' - and it's those people who you have to account for.

Another point to look at is that if docking is not needed, why bother? I see no reason to doc a tail if the only work a rottie is going to do is go for a walk or play fetch.

Personally, I don't think rotties with full-length tails look any less handsome than those who have docked tails - but I'm sure it's a matter of what you're used to.

I guess that's why folks differ in opinions there. I wouldn't classify anyone as uninformed in a topic that no one really knows the pure facts for sure. It's a lot of he said/she said, it seems.

Lots of research shows they do feel pain during the procedure. Again, lots of breeders say the puppies don't even wake up. Then again...some psychologist might argue the puppies feel pain, just don't know how to express it yet... and then....some folks monitoring it say there are definite signs of physical duress but no expression of pain...and then...some puppies develop complications and even die from the procedure...some breeders are not as ethical as we'd like...some vets refuse to do the procedure...other vets don't have a problem with it...more tail injuries reported without docking...broken arms decline in amputees...but even if it hurts, even humans seem unaffected by trauma that happens at an early age...or does it affect them and we just don't realize it...soooo...what risks are worth us arguing that we know something for sure, or letting it happen just because we feel we're too uninformed to speak up about, or ignore because we're convinced one way or another.

I'm one of those who is just not 100% convinced their nervous system is not developed enough to not feel pain. The pros don't out weight the cons , to me.

I don't think I'm uninformed, I just don't really accept most of anything as fact, and rather take educated gambles based on what i believe and the harm done if i am wrong.


I'd rather play it safe, and wish conformation didn't demand the tail docking. That pretty much seals the deal, even if the breeder doesn't approve. They'd be hard pressed to place the puppies otherwise.

I wouldn't really suggest breeding for no tail, any ways. I don't see the benefits as realistic.

I realize not docking would give breeders one more thing to work for...but I'm not really too sympathetic there. I'm more for temperament and health as priorities, which is easy to ignore in conformation breeding. So it might take a few decades to get the perfect tail. If the breeders are responsible enough to be docking (which i think should be a vet thing, if it must be done), then they can deal with adding another thing to work on. Challenges to improve the breed is what it's all about. If not, why bother? Other breeds deal with tails without detracting. Just a bit of catch up involved here.

I could understand some of the heavy docking advocates being breeders who don't want to have to fix their lines to adjust for new tail demands. I can see how that would disrupt that breed's status quoin the AKC. Can't say I care bout that though. It won't corrupt good breeders, and it won't fix bad breeders.

Those are very cute rotties, Sapphire-Light. Most rotties i've seen have had tails. I think they look cute either way. There is a certain 'cool' factor though when it's docked. I think it's mostly from not being able to tell as much what the dog is thinking. Kinda like a person wearing shades. I do prefer uncropped ears for any breed, for sure No cool factor can out cute floppy ears. Danes in particular.

Well I have bing searching and it looks like the countries that have the tail/ears cuting banned just one or bout are:

egland
finland
germany
switzerland
norway

I having reading some of the others german dogs that is normal to cut tail or ears.

In the great dane (the breed real name is german doge) don't say anything about cuting them, but after all the german line is a LOT different that the american.

In the dobermann says this:

Ears : The ear, which is set high, is carried erect and cropped to a length in proportion to the head. In a country where cropping is not permitted the uncropped ear is equally recognized. (Medium size preferred and with the front edge lying close to the cheeks).


TAIL : It is high set and docked short whereby approximately two tail vertebrae remain visible. In countries where docking is legally not permitted the tail may remain natural.


I haven't read the others breeds for know.


I know the boxers and dobermanns look better whit they ears/tail cutted, but that's just Stanna says is just for a estetic look, they suffer only 'cause whe humans want to see them in some way.


If the animals that have tail don't need it the mother nature had get rid of them years ago.

And know the breeders can focus in getting corect tails, some of rotts that I have seen that have tails got incorret ones culed like a malamute but this is incorret, the rot tail is stray, just like the champions in the pictures I posted.

Yaaaay for rotties!! This warms my heart.

Don't forget, Stanna, that breeding for desired physical features to one extreme or another is what got purebred dogs into such serious genetic medical shape in the first place. If it was a choice only between docking and selective breeding, a lot less suffering would come from docking in the long run for the breed as a whole.

Very true. I was being slightly sarcastic on the tailess breeding, but not on the adding a tail to the 'breed standard'.

I suppose they wouldn't allow for tail tea cozies at shows, for breeds who's tails have been neglected all these years. A karmic tail handicap.

Hopefully attittudes to breeding will slowly but surely change and show dogs won't have perfect tails but charles manson temperament.

Oh, also, it is actually good that Boxers have a docked tail because they often suffer from a "happy tail". Docking it prevents later pain in life from having their tail split open.

I heard a horror story where a Boxer that was not docked broke it's tail, which was very painful to the dog. They ended up docking the dog so he couldn't injure his tail again.