IS DOCKING A NECESSITY?

Otago Witness, Issue 2342, 19 January 1899, Page 35

IS DOCKING A NECESSITY?

The Special Commissioner" in the Lorn don Sportsman, commenting on the subject of docking horses says:— l may say at onoe that I am utterly out of sympathy with Sir Walter Gilbey and others who are making ettorts to preserve this unnecessary and semibarbarous custom. Of course, to our eyes, accustomed as we have been always to gee^ hunters, hacks, and trappers docked, undocked horse doing such work look unwoikmaulike, but that is the merest flimsy fancy, which would soon pass away when another fashion is brought into vogue. The, only practical objection that can be urged to prohibiting the docking of horses is that the trouble is more serious if an <3hndocked horse gets his tail over the reins. This, no. doubt, is true, but it does not seem to present any very great difficulties in America, where the trotting horses always have their tails left in their natural state. Lord Coventry observed tho other day with considerabla forco that the mere act of docking foals or ypai lings is not in itself by any means bo cruel as the torment which it indirectly brings about by depriving the animals of their natural protection from flies ; and for this reason alone such a senseless practice should be discontinued. It is about the only practice of its kind which cannot bo supported withsome show of solid reason. Gamecocks are dubbed because, being fighting birds by nature, it savejfjthom. from a lot of punishment, in the" battles they are sure, to fight. The same remark applies to the cropping of bull turners and othor pugnacious breeds of dogsHounds' oars are "rounded" because otherwise they get torn and lacerated when dashing through covert, while spaniels and sporting terriers are docked because they lash their sterns so busily when in covert, and they i>:variably emerge with them scratched a--' bleeding if the caudal appendage is of its full and natural length. I express no opinion as to whether the reasons given ara sufficient to justify dubbing, cropping,, rounding, and docking in the case of gamecocks, hounds, or dogs, but it is certain that the reasons are substantial ones, as any practical sportsman knows. For the docking of horses, however, there is no similar reason. On the contrary, it protects them from no inconvenience and actually subjects them,, when turned out to grass, to the very considerable one of flies. Therefore, it ought t<. have been tho first to be put a stop to instead of one of the last, and 1 sincerely hope now that the matter has been carried so far no. influence that can be brought to bear will cau«e any retrograde step to bo taken.