Pets.ca - Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 

-->

Illinois holds hearing on tial docking, ear cropping restrictions

ancientgirl
March 16th, 2009, 01:00 PM
This is a really good article. It's interesting to see that the AKC is trying to get this bill opposed. Why do they oppose it?

The AKC said it “recognizes that ear cropping, tail docking and dewclaw removal, as described in certain breed standards, are acceptable practices integral to defining and preserving breed character and/or enhancing good health. Appropriate veterinary care should be provided.”

While I get that some breeds have a certain look, I don't feel putting an animal through an unnecessary surgery is justified. A Doberman pinscher would look just as beautiful with floppy ears and a tail.

Here's the entire article:

Illinois Holds Hearing on Tail Docking, Ear Cropping Restrictions


The Illinois Senate Agriculture & Conservation Committee held a hearing on March 10 concerning SB 139, which limits the practices of tail docking and ear cropping in the state.

Results of the hearing were not available at press time.

The bill amends the Humane Care for Animals Act and considers ear cropping and tail docking “animal torture” unless the procedures are performed by an Illinois licensed veterinarian for a medical reason.

Torture, as defined in the bill, means the infliction of or subjection to extreme physical pain, motivated by an intent to increase or prolong the pain, suffering or agony of the animal.

A person convicted of violation would be guilty of a Class 3 felony.

The American Kennel Club posted a news alert March 10 encouraging dog owners and breeders to contact their state legislators to oppose the measure.

The AKC said it “recognizes that ear cropping, tail docking and dewclaw removal, as described in certain breed standards, are acceptable practices integral to defining and preserving breed character and/or enhancing good health. Appropriate veterinary care should be provided.”

BenMax
March 16th, 2009, 01:11 PM
.

The AKC said it “recognizes that ear cropping, tail docking and dewclaw removal, as described in certain breed standards, are acceptable practices integral to defining and preserving breed character and/or enhancing good health. Appropriate veterinary care should be provided.”

AKC says it is acceptable to 'preserve breed character'? Where those breeds not born with tails and normal ears as part of their characteristic? So altering it 'enhances' good health? Are these people friggen crazy??? They are so full of crock...and we wonder why we don't like breeders of any sort...well this is good enough for me to stick to my guns.:evil:

ancientgirl
March 16th, 2009, 01:18 PM
Exactly. These breed standards are man made. Nature doesn't make a doberman look the way it does, and other animals who go through these procedures. These are things humans create and saying it's a breed standard suddenly makes it okay?

I don't think it's right either.

I mean it's the same as saying, the human breed standard for women should be tall, slim, big bust, small waist. :rolleyes:

BenMax
March 16th, 2009, 01:19 PM
I mean it's the same as saying, the human breed standard for women should be tall, slim, big bust, small waist. :rolleyes:

Well then I am in a world of hurt. So I guess I should go in for some adjustments to enhance my health right????

Good point AG. I will never ever go to a breeder....EVER! With stupidity such as this it goes to show that they think that they are talking to dumbies.

ancientgirl
March 16th, 2009, 01:26 PM
My friend, if this were the standard for women then I'd have to form my own country, because I could not conform to that standard.

What gets me is, if you are a breeder, you should want to protect your animals from harm. This is harmful to them. It's man playing with nature. There are enough problems with some breeds, health wise because of the way they are bred, so why cause more harm unnecessarily just for the sake of looks?

hazelrunpack
March 16th, 2009, 02:20 PM
I wonder about the dewclaws, though. Dewclaw removal can be integral to health because the darn things snag on brush and can actually be broken and/or ripped off. It makes sense to remove them before that happens because it can be very painful for a dog, especially if the injury occurs miles from the nearest vet. However, before the dog is feeling the agony of a broken dewclaw, it likely won't qualify as a 'medical reason'. :shrug:

ancientgirl
March 16th, 2009, 02:30 PM
Hazel, I've read that about the dewclaws. But that to me seems more acceptable, because if it's something that snag and get torn off, while they are playing or doing something, I imagine it would be better to get rid of it before it causes a problem to them. If it gets torn away they will be in pain, and if you don't see it for some reason, that could cause an infection. My issue is with the whole aesthetic thing. Like the ears need to be cropped and tail docked because the animal doesn't "look" right otherwise. That's the way I see it.

babymomma
March 16th, 2009, 09:26 PM
Although i do agree with dewclaw removal at a young age.

I dont know how i feel about the docking of tails is SOME breeds.

Take the yorkie for instance. I cant imagine keely with a Full legth tail. Because of sanitation issues.. To much fecal matter can get stuck with a full lentgh tail, and can be hidden by the tail.. Which could cause problems..

Also, The docking of tails Is a practice used in some working breeds for protection of the tail, Like the boar hunting breeds. They have docked tails so the pig thing cant pull them by the tail and use it to their advantage. Or soemthing, I watched a documentary for the reasoning for docking the tails of working dogs) And yorkie tails were originally docked for a similar reason.

And I have been informed that docking is done before the age of three days because the puppies nerves arent fully develpoped in that part of it and they hardly feel anything (Or something like that, wasnt paying much attention..lol ) I mean, If u watch a video of a puppies tail being docked, it doesnt cry anymore then it already was before getting its tail docked.

Ear cropping, Again sometimes that is done in working breeds like the wild boar hunters, as the ear could be ripped off or they could be dragged to the ground.. Ears and tails are sensitive, if another animal that its hunting gets ahold of either of it, the dog will most likey surrender.. Plus it would be alot more painful to have a body part ripped off by the apponent..

Not That i Agree with doing it just for looks. Or with it at all, just trying to look at both sides.. :shrug:

babymomma
March 16th, 2009, 09:28 PM
I dont like that it is done just for looks tho..

JennieV
March 16th, 2009, 10:23 PM
My :2cents: - from what I know about docked ears and tails, it is done for estetic purposes only. It does not add any special traits of character to the dog, nor does it remove anything. It is done by humans, for human estetic pleasure. And my personal opinion is that all creatures are created the way nature intended them to be, cats have naturally "docked" ears, dogs don't..Wolves do, dogs don't...I guess that is my point.
As far as the dew claw goes - I guess I agree with Hazel, if it is a concern - it better be removed in advance.

aslan
March 16th, 2009, 10:46 PM
I agree with Hazel 100% about the dewclaws... Personally I can't remember the last time we had wild boars running around down town toronto causing a need to have my dogs tails cropped, but you never know...As for docking the tail because of poopie butt, i have a large long haired golden who has mastered pooing without the use of toilet paper.

LavenderRott
March 16th, 2009, 10:50 PM
When these breeds were developed there certainly was a reason to dock tails or crop ears. It is part of the history of the breed in question - much like circumsizing a male child.

Personally - I have found that, almost without exception, the dog breeds that I prefer all have docked tails.

I have absolutely NO problem with tails being docked or ears being cropped so long as it is done by a professional.

Seems to me that with the economy going the way it is and the number of puppy mills cropping up in the state of Illinios - they have considerably more to be worried about then whether a couple of breeds of dogs have docked tails or cropped ears.

sugarcatmom
March 16th, 2009, 11:43 PM
And I have been informed that docking is done before the age of three days because the puppies nerves arent fully develpoped in that part of it and they hardly feel anything

Not true. http://www.rspcavic.org/campaigns_news/campaigns_tail_docking.htm
Tail docking is painful

Advocates of tail docking claim that it does not cause pain or discomfort, as the nervous system of puppies is not fully developed. This is not the case. The basic nervous system of a dog is fully developed at birth and the available evidence indicates that puppies have similar, if not increased, sensitivity to pain as adult dogs. Docking a puppy's tail involves cutting through muscles, tendons, up to seven pairs of highly sensitive nerves and severing bone and cartilage connections. Tail docking is usually carried out without any anaesthesia. Puppies give repeated intense shrieking vocalisations the moment the tail is cut off and during stitching of the wound, indicating that they experience substantial pain. Inflammation and damage to the tissues also cause ongoing pain while the wound heals.

http://www.wsava.org/Taildock.htm
http://www.k9obedience.co.uk/dogcare/ownership/taildockingban.html

The pro-docking lobby claim that puppies aged between 3-5 days old do not feel pain because their nervous systems and sensory organs are immature. This view lacks credibility especially as evidence given to the House of Commons Committee on the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs in 2004 by an expert from University of Birmingham Centre for Biomedical Ethics said:
"Very young animals are likely to feel more pain than older animals."
Studies have proved that cutting the tail tip of mice increases sensitivity to pain in later life, an effect known as hyperalgesia. In fact puppies do feel pain and sensitivity to pain for many months after docking. Rarely mentioned is the fact that tail docking can have far reaching health issues. Due to the relationship between muscles in the dog's tail and the pelvic area, docking can affect muscle function around the rectum and pelvis thereby carrying a risk of faecal incontinence, acquired urinary incontinence and hernias. The tail is an extension of the dog's spine including various muscles and tendons. An example of this is the rectococcygeus muscle on the hind wall of the dog's rear, near to the anus. This muscle is attached to the base of the tail as well and supports the anal canal and rectum along with the Levator ani muscle. These two muscles also assist in movement of the tail and when the dog has a bowel motion. Docking the tail must obviously affect these muscles, a fact that is backed by studies showing that breeds such as the Boxer have a predisposition to perineal hernia. The females in docked breeds such as Rottweilers, Doberman, and Old English Sheepdogs suffer more from urinary incontinence after docking than undocked dogs.

cell
March 17th, 2009, 12:48 AM
When these breeds were developed there certainly was a reason to dock tails or crop ears. It is part of the history of the breed in question - much like circumcising a male child.


I was going to make the same parallel. Circumcision is dated back thousands of years by superstitious tribal people (can't remember if it African of Asian in nature) but all I remember was it had something to do with sacrificing a snake to bring immortality. Then the superstition morphed into cutting off a piece of your own symbolic "snake". Then it was adopted by religion to reduce unwanted touching, and then it was suddenly made "medically necessary" and became standard especially in the USA and Canada. In other words the purpose has morphed past the reasoning of its original intent. I have also read articles on the topic which also mentioned the increase of hyperalgesia and also embedding the traumatic experience at a young age as a distrust of the parents who should be protecting instead of handing it over for a torturous event.
While my personal opinion on the crop/dock issue is still undecided. I have taken consideration to both sides of the spectrum and I am conflicted. I do like the look it provides to many dogs but at the same time I know for the most part is not no longer relevant to their current purpose. I personally would not get the procedure done to a dog but I would not reject one who had procedures done before my care.

ancientgirl
March 17th, 2009, 09:05 AM
All good points here. There are many breeds I like that have docked tails, however were I ever to adopt a dog, one that normally would have its tail docked, yet it does not, I would not do this to him/her.

LavenderRott
March 17th, 2009, 09:51 AM
Interesting.

I have met several dogs that suffer from spay incontinence but never met a docked dog that suffered from hyperalgesia. I don't hear anyone saying that spaying is a bad thing because of this long term affect.

As for proof of a puppies pain during docking being "intense shreiking vocalizations" - it is exactly the same noise a puppy makes if you take it away from a nipple when it is nursing.

Sorry - but I look at what is going on in the U.S. involving the economy, unemployment, foreclosures and such and I can't help but wonder why suddenly tail docking and ear cropping even shows up on the State Government's radar. Don't they have more important things to deal with right now?

Ford Girl
March 17th, 2009, 10:57 AM
As for docking the tail because of poopie butt, i have a large long haired golden who has mastered pooing without the use of toilet paper.

:laughing: This was the first thing that went thru my mind, Dazy has a huge amount of fluffy long butt and tail hair and Ive never had to remove poop from it. The only time Ive ever seen this issue is on small dogs who are not properly/routinly groomed.

Im not a fan of any kinda altering that doesnt serve a purpose in todays world. That being said, I adopted my kitty from the SPCA and he was declawed BEFORE I got him and that was a wonderful thing...I would never do it myself but I can see why people would.

Dogs dewclaws - Im for removeing it, Ive seen them ripped off and bleed and get infected, not an easy part of the dogs body to heal. :shrug:

sugarcatmom
March 17th, 2009, 11:36 AM
I have met several dogs that suffer from spay incontinence but never met a docked dog that suffered from hyperalgesia. I don't hear anyone saying that spaying is a bad thing because of this long term affect.

Spay incontinence is largely the result of early spaying, and yes, there are people now saying early spaying (as in before 12 months for bigger dogs) can be "a bad thing".

As for proof of a puppies pain during docking being "intense shreiking vocalizations" - it is exactly the same noise a puppy makes if you take it away from a nipple when it is nursing.

The "intense shrieking vocalizations" were determined to be considerably louder during the procedure than before and after it.

Sorry - but I look at what is going on in the U.S. involving the economy, unemployment, foreclosures and such and I can't help but wonder why suddenly tail docking and ear cropping even shows up on the State Government's radar. Don't they have more important things to deal with right now?

Life still goes on. Everything else doesn't just cease to exist because the economy sucks.