Cropping and docking illegal in New York

[123-muttley]

Against my better judgement I'm wading deeper into this argument. I looked up one of the links posted in a previous thread in regards to the HSUS. I found that this site is run by the Center for Consumer Freedom a group which lobbies on behalf of the fast food, meat and tobacco industries. They obviously have a vested interest in undermining the efforts of the HSUS to bring a certain level of clemency to factory farming. Please do not take my word for it, but instead read this article The Escalating Obesity Wars.

Furthermore I think it makes perfect sense that someone in the higher echelons of this organization may not own or even like animals. The HSUS operates primarily on the political front, and as such certain employees may be invaluable due to their connections and prowess in this area.

As a student of political science I can appreciate the role that the HSUS plays in legislative process. They are able to do what local shelters cannot and that is to be a voice in Washington. As with any bureaucracy there will be inefficiency and mistakes, but it would be unfair to take these isolated incidents and condemn every aspect of the organization. I recently wrote a paper on dogfighting legislation and I listened several times to Wayne Pacille's testimony. As president of the HSUS he argued intelligently, realistically and moderately for tougher laws on animal fighting. In everything I have read of what the Humane Society has actually done, and not just been purported to do, they have been consistent with their stated mission and ideals. I think it would be prudent for everyone to be alert for smear campaigns from seemingly innocuous sources lest we inadvertently fall victim to them.

 

[puppydog]

123Mutley, how do you feel about working dogs who have to go through the pain of their tail being amputated as an adult because of docking bans?
What about dew claws? What if we are prevented from removing those? Have you ever seen a dog that has ripped off it's dew claws as an adult? Can you imagine ripping your finger off?

I had my bitch done when I got her at 4 years old. She still had her dew claws. It was a horrible surgery. I felt aweful that she had to go through that as an adult, but, she had one half hanging off and causing pain and bleeding. I had both removed.

Please air your views on these issues.

 

[Dekka]

Against my better judgement I'm wading deeper into this argument. I looked up one of the links posted in a previous thread in regards to the HSUS. I found that this site is run by the Center for Consumer Freedom a group which lobbies on behalf of the fast food, meat and tobacco industries. They obviously have a vested interest in undermining the efforts of the HSUS to bring a certain level of clemency to factory farming. Please do not take my word for it, but instead read this article The Escalating Obesity Wars.

Furthermore I think it makes perfect sense that someone in the higher echelons of this organization may not own or even like animals. The HSUS operates primarily on the political front, and as such certain employees may be invaluable due to their connections and prowess in this area.

As a student of political science I can appreciate the role that the HSUS plays in legislative process. They are able to do what local shelters cannot and that is to be a voice in Washington. As with any bureaucracy there will be inefficiency and mistakes, but it would be unfair to take these isolated incidents and condemn every aspect of the organization. I recently wrote a paper on dogfighting legislation and I listened several times to Wayne Pacille's testimony. As president of the HSUS he argued intelligently, realistically and moderately for tougher laws on animal fighting. In everything I have read of what the Humane Society has actually done, and not just been purported to do, they have been consistent with their stated mission and ideals. I think it would be prudent for everyone to be alert for smear campaigns from seemingly innocuous sources lest we inadvertently fall victim to them.

For all the good they have done.. they have done more harm. Keep digging, and of course look at the source. (very important)

 

[corgipower]

For everyone who feels that it is their explicit right to breed dogs, I would like to say that I feel that I should have a right to live in a society where dogs are not euthanized. It is society that shoulders the financial and emotional burden of unwanted dogs, and as a result it is fair game for the legislative process. Irresponsible breeders and owners create a problem that must be dealt with. If these issues did not affect others then it is unlikely that they would ever be up for debate in the general public. I am shocked at the venom with which people are attacked only for their desire to live in a society which is resourceful enough to at least examine solutions other than euthanasia for the surplus of unwanted pets. It seems as if many feel as this is an all or nothing debate, which is a fallacy of hasty generalization resulting from weak deduction. Just because some laws are passed which address animal welfare or restrict breeding it does not logically follow that all breeding will be outlawed and purebred dogs will cease to exist.

When the good breeders are unable to afford the huge license fees in order to continue breeding, the dogs that get bred will be of poor quality - health and temperament problems that will land them in shelters and end with them being PTS.

When the law puts restrictions on breeding that aren't even possible to meet, then no breeding can occur. The laws don't differentiate between the irresponsible and the responsible. Many of the people who breed responsibly, who fight against anti-breeder laws have also had numerous discussion on how to prevent the euthanasia of so many dogs.

The problem is not one of overpopulation. There are some cities that have pet overpopulation while other shelters are struggling to find dogs for the people who want them. There are shelters that are poorly managed to the point where it's easier to euth then to clean kennels every day. There are shelters that place unrealistic restrictions on potential adopters. There is a pet retention problem. People no longer want the dog when he grows up and surrendering him becomes easier than training him. There's a consumer awareness problem in so far as people are still spending money to buy from irresponsible breeders.

Have you looked at the work of Nathan Winograd? He's done a lot to significantly reduce euthanasia rates without placing any restrictions on breeders.

 

[MafiaPrincess]

So go do some of your own research. That was 5 minutes worth of googling for links for someone else pushing blindly on another board for HSUS.

 

[Criosphynx]

The problem is not one of overpopulation. There are some cities that have pet overpopulation while other shelters are struggling to find dogs for the people who want them. There are shelters that are poorly managed to the point where it's easier to euth then to clean kennels every day. There are shelters that place unrealistic restrictions on potential adopters. There is a pet retention problem. People no longer want the dog when he grows up and surrendering him becomes easier than training him. There's a consumer awareness problem in so far as people are still spending money to buy from irresponsible breeders.

This this this.

I used to blame the breeders. I now realize that the problem and the burden lies on the consumer. People are purchasing dogs from bad sources (thus keeping them around) and then discarding the dog when it misbehaves than then starting fresh again with another dog from a bad source.

If no one was "consuming" these dogs and discarding them there wouldn't be a market for BYBs to sell too.


oh yes and HSUS and peta is evil...that is all.

 

[123-muttley]

123Mutley, how do you feel about working dogs who have to go through the pain of their tail being amputated as an adult because of docking bans?"
What about dew claws? What if we are prevented from removing those? Have you ever seen a dog that has ripped off it's dew claws as an adult? Can you imagine ripping your finger off?

This argument is about docking not dew claws and in order to argue more efficiently I suggest we focus on the subject at hand.
From that viewpoint I don't know why we don't just amputate dogs legs because later in life they might have an injury and need one amputated. Surely it would be more humane to just do it when they are puppies?
Furthermore most of the docking that I have encountered in my life has been purely for aesthetics, and any surgical procedure carries the risk of complications which could potentially outweigh any hypothesized benefit.

I am having a very difficult time finding peer reviewed research studies and statistics to back up many of your claims. Could anyone provide me with such information? Not what you have seen or believe or heard, but actual scientific or statistical studies. Here is the only one I have been able to find.

Behavioural responses of Canis familiaris to different tail lengths of a remotely-controlled life-size dog replica





I also liked this article...
"Tail Docking
Tails are usually docked on 2-10 day old puppies, without either general or local anesthesia. If the procedure is done by a veterinarian, the tail is clamped a short distance from the body, and the portion of the tail outside the clamp is cut or torn away. Many breeders dock their pups themselves using a method that has been proven to be far more painful - "banding," or tying off the tail. This stops the blood supply, which results in dry gangrene. The dead portion of the tail usually falls off about three days later. This can be likened to slamming your finger in a car door - and leaving it there.

Two cases involving home tail docking were recently reported by the Michigan Humane Society. One woman was tried and found guilty of cruelty for allowing rubber bands to become embedded in the tails of four puppies. In a similar abuse case, a four-week-old Rottweiler mix puppy's tail had been improperly rubber banded. His infected tail had to be amputated.

Puppies undergoing any method of tail-docking squeal and cry, yet advocates assert that the newborn's nervous system is unable to feel the pain. They point out that puppies immediately crawl to their mothers to nurse. But don't all hurt or frightened children immediately cry for their mommy? Moreover, research indicates that suckling causes the release of endorphins, the body's natural pain relievers, which may be a more realistic way to view the puppies' desire to nurse. Docking advocates ignore the fact that a newborn puppy simply is not capable of a wide range of responses. It is very difficult to accurately assess the degree of pain a newborn is experiencing. Just because a puppy is not actively vocalizing does not mean she isn't feeling any pain.

The pro-docking lobby claims that since puppies are less developed at birth (altricial) than, say, fawns or colts - which stand, walk and run within a very short time after birth (precocial) - their nervous systems are less sensitive, therefore tail docking is not painful. However, it is well documented in the human medical literature that newborn humans, who are also altricial, do feel pain - and neonatal pain management is taken seriously. "Clinicians believe that infants can experience pain much like adults, that [hospitalized] infants are exposed daily to painful procedures, and that pain protection should be provided . even very prematurely born infants respond to pain," states one report from the Department of Pediatrics at the Washington University School of Medicine.

Proponents of tail docking claim that their favorite breeds "often" have their tails damaged while hunting. No statistics or percentages of dogs so damaged are given. However, explicit photos of such injuries are prominently displayed in their literature and web sites. This vague potential risk for future tail injury theoretically justifies docking the tail of every single puppy of traditionally docked breeds. It does not matter whether any particular puppy will ever be used for hunting or any other activities that carry a significant risk of tail injury. One study of 12,000 canine cases over seven years found only 47 cases of tail injuries from any cause, or about 0.003% of dogs seen at that hospital. Another survey reviewed 2,000 canine emergency cases, and turned up only three tail injuries - all of them complications from docking.

One certainly wonders about the validity of the "tail injury" argument, when sporting breeds such as Labrador Retrievers, Golden Retrievers, Irish, English and Gordon Setters, Beagles, Foxhounds, and Pointers do not have their tails docked, while Vislas, Weimeraners, German Shorthaired Pointers, and Springer, Brittany and Cocker Spaniels do. Spaniels have long, heavy, furry ears that appear more hazardous in thorny, brushy terrain or water than a long tail. Spaniels are also notorious for severe, chronic ear infections. Does it make any sense that they are allowed to keep their pendulous ears, but not their tails?

The tail injury argument also doesn't explain why Rottweilers, Dobermans, Poodles, Schnauzers and Old English Sheepdogs (as well as Australian Shepherds unfortunate enough to be born with tails instead of without), routinely have their tails docked. These working and non-sporting breeds aren't running around in the brush and woods. Old English and Aussie breeders might offer that a tail is a liability around livestock. But why isn't this so, then, for Border Collies, Shetland Sheepdogs, Australian Cattle Dogs, Great Pyrenees, or other herding breeds? The argument seems very thin when examined logically."

article by: Jean Hofve, DVM
Cosmetic Surgery for Dogs and Cats

Here is the AVMA stance - WSAVA Tail Docking Position Statement

Welfare Implications of Dogs: Tail Docking Backgrounder

 

[RedyreRottweilers]

I am not responsible for stupid people. Banding tails is painless, clean, and very effective, however, anyone with a brain knows it must be done in the FIRST WEEK. A 4 week old puppy is up and about and has a big strong tail with well developed nerves. Only an IDIOT would put a band on a puppy's tail of this age.

I would like to know how many dockings you have witnessed. (My guess is none)

 

[123-muttley]

This this this.

I used to blame the breeders. I now realize that the problem and the burden lies on the consumer. People are purchasing dogs from bad sources (thus keeping them around) and then discarding the dog when it misbehaves than then starting fresh again with another dog from a bad source.

If no one was "consuming" these dogs and discarding them there wouldn't be a market for BYBs to sell too.

If we have learned anything from our current financial crisis it should be that the consumer is often not very responsible. It would be fine to let the individual suffer the consequences of their mistakes were they the only ones affected. Unfortunately this is rarely the case. When people by dogs from BYB it is not the owners nor the breeders that suffer but instead the dog. And it is society and my tax dollars that must pay the tab to "dispose" of this unwanted "product."

 

[Dekka]

Yep.. but you know what is interesting.. you would think that rescues and shelters would love the HSUS wouldn't they. (if they were doing good).. but they don't. Perhaps you should find out why...

And have you read the other responses?

And as I have pointed out.. pups cry from being held upside down. Yes how many dockings have you been too? I find it interesting those who decry it have never seen it... and only take the word of people who are against it.

 

[corgipower]

Behavioural responses of Canis familiaris to different tail lengths of a remotely-controlled life-size dog replica

Yea, I've seen that before and it makes me wanna laugh, cry, scream and throw things this time just as much as it did then.

I have an incredibly hard time believing that dogs are stupid enough to believe a remote control dog is a real dog. They approached it more readily when the model had a long wagging tail - I'd bet the results would be similar with a stick - long and moving = fun to play with.

Anyone who has watched REAL, LIVE dogs interact can tell you that

a. canine body language and communication goes far beyond the tail.
b. the tail can be inaccurately interpreted - a dog with a wagging tail may very well be aggressive while a dog with a still tail may very well be friendly.
c. dogs with tails and dogs without tails have no trouble communicating and interacting with each other.

 

[corgipower]

If we have learned anything from our current financial crisis it should be that the consumer is often not very responsible. It would be fine to let the individual suffer the consequences of their mistakes were they the only ones affected. Unfortunately this is rarely the case. When people by dogs from BYB it is not the owners nor the breeders that suffer but instead the dog. And it is society and my tax dollars that must pay the tab to "dispose" of this unwanted "product."

It is impossible and impractical to create legislation based on the stupidity of JQP. Society has become very "me" oriented and very "now" oriented. Selfishness and irresponsibility have become the norm.

We are mourning the loss of a beloved old friend who recently passed away. His name was Common Sense. Common Sense lived a long life but died in the United States from a vicious contagious disease.

He selflessly devoted his life to service in schools, hospitals, homes and factories, helping folks get the jobs done without fanfare and foolishness. For decades, petty rules, frivolous lawsuits, and ludicrous verdicts held no power over Common Sense.

He was credited with cultivating such valued lessons as to know when to come in from the rain, why the early bird gets the worm, and that life isn't always fair. Common Sense lived by a simple and sound financial policy. Don't spend more than you earn. Common Sense also lived by other time-tested strategies like: The adults are in charge and not the kids, and it's okay to come in second or third.

A veteran of the Great Depression and the Technological Revolution, Common Sense survived cultural and educational trends such as body piercing, 'whole language' and 'new math'.

But his health declined when he became infected with the I'm-not-responsible-for-my-own-actions and It's-alright-if-it-feels-good viruses. He watched in pain as good people became ruled by self-seeking lawyers. His health rapidly deteriorated when schools endlessly implemented zero-tolerance policies. Reports of a six-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment for kissing a classmate and a teacher fired for reprimanding an unruly student only worsened his condition.

It declined further when schools had to get parental consent to administer aspirin to a student, but could not inform the parents and get their permission when their children were given mind-altering drugs or birth control pills; and when universities turned into cesspools of debauchery and socialist propaganda.

Common Sense lost his will to live when criminals received better treatment than their victims, the Ten Commandments became contraband, and priests molested young boys. When a woman failed to realize that a steaming cup of coffee is hot, and was awarded a huge settlement; and when the president sold security related technology to a hostile nation, Common Sense fell into a coma.

As the end neared, Common Sense drifted in and out of consciousness, but was kept informed of new questionable regulations, such as thought control and partial birth abortion. Finally, when another president, claiming to staunchly protect the country from terrorist atrocities, yet allowing the same villains to invade the country through borders that are strangely very penetrable; being fully aware of what the grave consequences of such deliberate and ominous neglect can be, Common Sense died of sudden cardiac arrest.

Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust, his wife, Love; his daughter, Responsibility; and his sons, Diligence and Reason. He is survived by three stepbrothers, Deception, Greed and Ignorance. Not many attended his funeral, because so few noticed he was gone.

I believe that the time spent trying to pass anti-pet legislation would be far better spent educating the consumers.

 

[Dekka]

Yea, I've seen that before and it makes me wanna laugh, cry, scream and throw things this time just as much as it did then.

I have an incredibly hard time believing that dogs are stupid enough to believe a remote control dog is a real dog. They approached it more readily when the model had a long wagging tail - I'd bet the results would be similar with a stick - long and moving = fun to play with.

Anyone who has watched REAL, LIVE dogs interact can tell you that

a. canine body language and communication goes far beyond the tail.
b. the tail can be inaccurately interpreted - a dog with a wagging tail may very well be aggressive while a dog with a still tail may very well be friendly.
c. dogs with tails and dogs without tails have no trouble communicating and interacting with each other.

This is so true. I have seen more issues with dogs trying read the body language of all black dogs than those with short tails. I can tell you the whippets (full tails) have NO problem reading the JRTs (1/2ish tails). Once again it makes the people against docking look awfully silly.

 

[123-muttley]

Yea, I've seen that before and it makes me wanna laugh, cry, scream and throw things this time just as much as it did then.

I have an incredibly hard time believing that dogs are stupid enough to believe a remote control dog is a real dog. They approached it more readily when the model had a long wagging tail - I'd bet the results would be similar with a stick - long and moving = fun to play with.

Anyone who has watched REAL, LIVE dogs interact can tell you that

I understand that you disagree with the study, but your observations are too small of a sample size and potentially biased so that accurate conclusions cannot be drawn. "Anyone who has worked with dogs can tell you...
" is not a viable basis from which reliable and consistent conclusions can be drawn. What evidence do you have that dogs will more readily approach a longer stick and how do you know this is not related to their instinctual reactions to tail length? What you believe is your prerogative, but from my interpretation this study recorded the differences in how dogs approached the mechanical dog and found consistent results in these differences to back up the hypothesis. As long as results were accurately recorded it would eliminate the most potential damaging design flaw. I read the study and it seems as if it was executed properly and accurately recorded the dogs reactions. Your personal belief that dogs could not possibly think it was a real dog does nothing to explain why dogs reacted differently to varying tail lengths on the mechanical dog. The point of the study was to prove a statistical correlation, which it did. The rejection level of the null hypothesis was often well below the standard p level of .05 at p<0.01 which means that the mathematical probability that a relationship between variables found within a sample may have been produced by sampling error was far below the standardly accepted 5 percent.

 

[Dekka]

Ok.. how about as a breed, going to shows, hanging out with friends, talking to other trainers and behaviorists... I am talking watching HUNDREDS of dog dog interactions.

You are talking about a mechanical dog. To make the study decent you would have to use real dogs. Dog language is a lot more complicated than just the tail.

How about this.. when you take ALL OTHER forms of communication out and only leave teh tail.. then the tail becomes significant. But in the large scheme of things the tail is like saying people who are missing a finger can't communicate. Now if all you gave them was a finger to communicate with then yes it could be a problem.

Correlation does not always mean causation.

If this was a problem you would hear of short tailed dogs (natural and docked) being a problem at dog parks, in homes. As a trainer I can't say I have ever noticed a correlation between dogs who have poor social skills and tail length. I have noticed all black dogs often have issues.

Perhaps you are misunderstanding of how short most docked breeds are. And that many breeds have naturally short tails (that are usually shorter than those that are docked)

 

[corgipower]

I understand that you disagree with the study, but your observations are too small of a sample size and potentially biased so that accurate conclusions cannot be drawn.

My observations are too small a sample??? I've seen hundreds of dogs communicate with each other. I've worked at kennels - large kennels, small kennels, breeding kennels. I've trained dogs. I've been to dog shows. I've been to dog parks. I've been a doggie daycare supervisor. There is no bias in my observations. I own a docked breed. I don't breed them, and as such I don't have to decide whether or not to dock the puppies. It wouldn't bother me in the least to own an undocked corgi.

My observations have not been scientifically recorded. I'm not a scientist, I don't know how to record data for such a study. If I was, I'd be more than happy to do so.

Where the study is flawed is in the fact that it doesn't take into account a long list of other aspects of canine behavior. The dogs that showed interest in the long wagging tail weren't studied against other long wagging objects. The study didn't account for the idea that maybe the dogs simply wanted to know WTF this thing was. The study didn't account for the fact that dogs often have difficulty reading black dogs. The study didn't account for the fact that there is much more communication done by body stance, ear set, lips, eyes, voice than there is by tail. As Dekka said, a study would really have to use real dogs in order to be meaningful.

 

[123-muttley]

My observations are too small a sample??? I've seen hundreds of dogs communicate with each other. I've worked at kennels - large kennels, small kennels, breeding kennels. I've trained dogs. I've been to dog shows. I've been to dog parks. I've been a doggie daycare supervisor. There is no bias in my observations. I own a docked breed. I don't breed them, and as such I don't have to decide whether or not to dock the puppies. It wouldn't bother me in the least to own an undocked corgi.

My observations have not been scientifically recorded. I'm not a scientist, I don't know how to record data for such a study. If I was, I'd be more than happy to do so.

Where the study is flawed is in the fact that it doesn't take into account a long list of other aspects of canine behavior. The dogs that showed interest in the long wagging tail weren't studied against other long wagging objects. The study didn't account for the idea that maybe the dogs simply wanted to know WTF this thing was. The study didn't account for the fact that dogs often have difficulty reading black dogs. The study didn't account for the fact that there is much more communication done by body stance, ear set, lips, eyes, voice than there is by tail. As Dekka said, a study would really have to use real dogs in order to be meaningful.

Even more reason why the study was accurate. If the study took into consideration all canine behavior there would be too many variables to draw an accurate conclusion. You defend docking and believe it is acceptable and beneficial to the dog therefore you are biased. This is not a bad thing, you are entitled to form your opinions however there are many things that your personal observations may not take into account which is why the scientific research method is used. In such studies such things as design flaw, rival hypothesis and sampling error are taken into account. There are mathematical equations for this and this allows the researcher to specify the likelihood of such an error within a certain range. There is no way to know from your observations what measurement of central tendency was used, what the standard deviation was, how many outliers there were and so on. These are all things that a research study has taken into account. Was the data nominal, ordinal or ratio? How was it recorded? What is the dependent and independent variable. I do not expect that in your observations all of these were taken into account as they were in the study conducted. However in order to present data in a way that shows consistent results these are all things that must be considered.

 

[Criosphynx]

If we have learned anything from our current financial crisis it should be that the consumer is often not very responsible. It would be fine to let the individual suffer the consequences of their mistakes were they the only ones affected. Unfortunately this is rarely the case. When people by dogs from BYB it is not the owners nor the breeders that suffer but instead the dog. And it is society and my tax dollars that must pay the tab to "dispose" of this unwanted "product."

Whats your solution then??

I blame the consumer because no one is forcing them to buy the "product".

Educate the breeder it wont matter, money speaks loudly, educate the consumer and the cycle ends because they will vote with their money.

The public is irresponsible, yes, I think I said that already.

 

[corgipower]

Even more reason why the study was accurate. If the study took into consideration all canine behavior there would be too many variable to draw an accurate conclusion.

:rofl1:
To claim that a dog is unable to communicate without a tail, then other communication behaviors need to be included and proven irrelevant. You first need to show that the dog's tail is his primary form of communication - which has not been done and is not true.

You defend docking and believe it is acceptable and beneficial to the dog therefore you are biased.

I don't defend docking. I defend my right to make informed veterinary decisions with my vet. But I don't defend docking. Maybe you missed it when I said

It wouldn't bother me in the least to own an undocked corgi.

.

In such studies such things as design flaw, rival hypothesis and sampling error are taken into account. There are mathematical equations for this and this allows the researcher to specify the likelihood of such an error within a certain range. There is no way to know from your observations what measurement of central tendency was used, what the standard deviation was, how many outliers there were and so on. These are all things that a research study has taken into account. Was the data nominal, ordinal or ratio? How was it recorded? What is the dependent and independent variable. I do not expect that in your observations all of these were taken into account as they were in the study conducted. However in order to present data in a way that shows consistent results these are all things that must be considered.

Yea, see...I need that repeated - in English cuz none of it made any sense. I already said, I AM NOT A SCIENTIST!! I never claimed that my PERSONAL OBSERVATIONS were scientific. But I can assure you - based on my involvement with dogs and with people who are involved with dogs - that I am not alone in my observations.

 

[Dekka]

Even more reason why the study was accurate. If the study took into consideration all canine behavior there would be too many variables to draw an accurate conclusion. You defend docking and believe it is acceptable and beneficial to the dog therefore you are biased. This is not a bad thing, you are entitled to form your opinions however there are many things that your personal observations may not take into account which is why the scientific research method is used. In such studies such things as design flaw, rival hypothesis and sampling error are taken into account. There are mathematical equations for this and this allows the researcher to specify the likelihood of such an error within a certain range. There is no way to know from your observations what measurement of central tendency was used, what the standard deviation was, how many outliers there were and so on. These are all things that a research study has taken into account. Was the data nominal, ordinal or ratio? How was it recorded? What is the dependent and independent variable. I do not expect that in your observations all of these were taken into account as they were in the study conducted. However in order to present data in a way that shows consistent results these are all things that must be considered.

Ok you make me laugh. So if I tie your mouth, tie your head still, shut tie your hands behind your back and you are left to communicate with your feet. I can then decide that people with leg amputations are then inferior to fully legged people when it comes to communication?

Sorry that study is very badly done. It is very easy to poke holes in it. As CP said they needed to include general wagging objects NOT attached to a mechanical dog, the needed to compare the reaction to a real dog as compared to the mechanical dog to show that the dogs responded to a robot dog as they would a real one.... I could go on. As I AM in the science field I know a good study.. and that is not one.

So what about the stats.. you can push the stats to mean various things depending on how you massage the numbers. Come on.... I have worked with enough Proffs and PhD students to see that in action.

Anyway.. IF that study had real world application then why isn't there a problem? Perhaps because dogs CAN read short tails, especially when there is the rest of the dog's body to go with it! Occam's razor.....