Tail-docking of lambs is routinely performed in many countries to reduce flystrike risk. The welfare cost of the procedure and availability of alternatives raises questions about when docking is justified.
Lamb tail-docking involves a genuine welfare trade-off: the acute pain of docking versus the risk of flystrike suffering if tails are left intact. However, this trade-off is often presented as more absolute than evidence supports. Longer tail stumps that cover the vulva in ewes provide adequate flystrike protection without removing the entire tail. Genetic selection for breeds with naturally less wool around the tail and breech area eliminates the need for docking entirely. Pain relief during docking dramatically reduces the welfare cost when the procedure is genuinely necessary. The continuation of docking without pain relief in contexts where alternatives exist represents an unnecessary welfare harm that farm welfare standards should address directly.