Veterinary Position on Debarking

As our correspondent from across the pond has noted, as well as the story about the schnauzer, things are different in Eurpoe. There is a lot of 'humane legislation' on all levels, and less 'freedom' for pet owners. For example, I believe that declawing is flat out illegal both in the UK and most of the continent. Does the government have the right to do this?

Well, consider the elastrator. This is a cheap method of castrating young sheep. It is basically a big tough rubber band, and while i will spare the details, the terms 'strangulation' and 'dry gangrene' come into play. Should the elastrtor be banned by law? In my opinion, yes.
So how far is it from banning elastrators to banning declawing? Or ear cropping? Do not tell me ear cropping is not painful, for at least several days to a week.
In general, I do not buy the 'slippery slope' argument. 'If we ban elastrators, then it will lead to banning declaws, ear crops, tail docks, debarking, dewclaw removal, nail trims under sedation....' No. There are overly radical positions at both ends of the spectrum, and the rationale person must decide where they choose to draw the line.
So I think that the arguments for all of these procedures DO tie in together.(In my opinion spaying and neutering do NOT, and are not part of this discussion, but others may differ.) I have opinions, because in my business I need a position, on each of the above and how we will handle it in our practice. and my view on each of the above is a little different.

Once again bringing the discussion home, this is why I found the veterinarians' position of interest. When asked whether they supported the legislation or not they did not give a yes or no, rahter a qualified, measured answer, as they probably would to any of the surgeries under consideration. - Dr. Mac
 
Dr. Mac, your last statement is very well laid out there. Yes I too believe its between the owner and the vet.

This ear cropping surgery to me is brutal. I have seen the consequences too, the ears became so infected.

Through the years we have seen the show dogs with docked tails and ears fixed in the AKC ring. Stupid me, if the dogs weren't cosmetically fixed, I might be wondering what that breed is.
 
So, Dr. Mac

You've stated the vet association's position, but I don't think we saw yours????

I assume you favour the middle-ground, as with the association?
 
BarbV said:
So, Dr. Mac

You've stated the vet association's position, but I don't think we saw yours????

I assume you favour the middle-ground, as with the association?
Click to expand...

He stated his view a couple of pages back in this thread.

My position is fairly similar to that of the veterinary association, which is one reason I started yet another thread on debarking, because I found the 'position statement' interesting and clearly stated as a basis for discussion.

I would tend to take a somewhat softer line, for example I don't see where 'after attempts at rehoming ' should enter into the conversation. Yes, I see it as a 'last resort', as I also see declawing an adult cat, but a 'last resort' that comes before giving the dog up to someone else rather than after.

I also think that Ann's contribution -
====I must admit that I was one of those people who was horrified by the concept of surgically altering a dog's voice until I had firsthand experience of what it is, and what it does. When I realized that they aren't rendered mute, and are perfectly comfortable with their new voices -- indeed, don't even seem to notice the difference -- my opinion changed.

I think that's the problem with the general populace. We judge something before we have all the facts. Debarking has been one of the third rails of dogdom for a very long time. Perhaps if the proponents got the word out there as much as the detractors have, people might become more educated and realistic about the process.
__________________
Ann aka Sheltiholic===

is a very good one from the standpoint of 'shedding more light than heat' on the situation. Our positions on such matters should always be open to change based on listening to what experienced people have to say.
One of the more important mantras of business is 'If you are doing something the same way you were doing it 2 years ago, you should be reconsidering it and seeing if a change is in order.' - Dr. Mac
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I personally don't really care if people de-bark or not, it is also none of my business who on this forum does it or not. I try not to judge people if they choose to do that- I also don't want to be judged for my opinions either. I have my own thoughts about spaying and neutering pets. So.
 
Originally Posted by KarenCurtis
I don't lump debarking in with spaying and neutering- which I don't feel are convenience surgeries, as you suggest. Spaying and neutering are preventative and necessary surgeries to prevent an unwanted over-population of dogs. And I am not talking about responsible breeders here- most dogs are not produced from responsible breeding.

ClantyreSheltie said:
Sure they are convenience surgeries. It's more convenient for you (imperial you) to spay your bitch than to keep her contained while she is in heat. Whether that is because you (imperial you again) are lazy or ignorant, that's not my problem. I shouldn't have to spay my bitch because you can't be bothered. Dogs do not immaculately conceive. It 100% comes down to the owner, and what they want to deal with.
Click to expand...
Who are you refering too ????????
 
Last edited:
The state of New York has a bill in committee banning bark softening. I have talked to the senator who proposed the bill and he absolutely refuses to even listen to the other side of the story. He seems to think that dogs communicate only by barking and that debarking involves riping out the dogs throught. Now though it's done mostly by laser to deaden the vocal cords, they don't even make an insicion at my vet to do it.

While I personally do not de-bark I know lots of people who do, and believe me, I've considered it on one of my dogs(went with a bark collar first and it worked)

My major concern is if they do that, then BSL, then mandatory spay/neuter, then why not go the full monty and just ban dog ownership, it's a very slippery slope and when the government starts it's hard to stop them.

My opinion on government involvement in anything, is stay out of it, you meddle and screw it up. I elected you to lower my taxes and get less government involvement, not more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top