Tail Docking, Dewclaws On Table In PA

    • Gold Top Dog

    Tail Docking, Dewclaws On Table In PA

    House Committee Holds Firm On

    Pennsylvania Tail Docking Ban

     

    Dewclaw Removal Added To Animal Cruelty Bill

     
    by JOHN YATES
    The American Sporting Dog Alliance
     
    HARRISBURG, PA – The state House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday postponed a vote on a measure that would essentially ban tail docking by a puppy’s breeder, but also added removal of dewclaws in puppies to a list of acts that would be called animal cruelty. The committee delayed the vote until June 24, in order to resolve differences of opinion about a measure to allow state dog wardens to enforce cruelty statutes in some counties.
     
    House Bill 2532, sponsored by powerful Judiciary Committee Chairman Thomas Caltagirone (D – Berks County), would prohibit breeders from docking the tails of puppies that are more than three days old.  Only veterinarians would be permitted to dock the tails of puppies once they reach four days old.
     
    However, there would be no way for a breeder to prove the age of a puppy when its tail was docked, even if it was docked legally before four days of age. This would be impossible to prove even a few days after the tail was docked, and this impossibility would continue for the dog’s entire life. Since the burden of proof rests solely on a dog’s owner in H.B. 2532, this legislation represents a de facto ban on tail docking by owners at any age.
     
    This legislation was drafted under the guidance of Gov. Ed Rendell and has the strong support on animal rights groups in Pennsylvania. It is part of Rendell’s package of legislation that purports to crack down on “puppy mills.” The centerpiece of the Rendell initiative, H.B. 2525, faces a hearing tomorrow before the House Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee.
     
    Animal rights groups are touting the H.B. 2532’s ban on anyone except a veterinarian from performing Caesarian sections and debarking procedures, which they allege is sometimes done by “puppy mills.” The American Sporting Dog Alliance has never known of these procedures being done by anyone except a veterinarian, but Rendell and his allies are getting a lot of support by animal lovers and biased press coverage based on this emotionally charged allegation.
     
    However, the legislation also tacks on prohibitions against tail docking and maintains current prohibitions against ear cropping. The committee also voted 29-0 on Tuesday to add the removal of dewclaws to the list of acts that constitute animal cruelty. These three provisions alone directly affect tens of thousands of dogs in Pennsylvania, including several of the most popular breeds.
     
    Breeders have traditionally had the right to perform tail docking and dewclaw removal procedures, which are considered safe and painless, and many people say that they were taught how to do the work by their veterinarians. These procedures are sometimes described as akin to clipping toenails.
     
    An amendment offered by Rep. Ron Marsico (R- Dauphin County) would have extended permission to owners of litters of puppies to do their own tail docking until the puppies are five days old. This amendment was defeated by an almost party-line 13-16 vote, with only one Republican and one Democrat switching sides.
     
    Democrats are the majority party in the House, and Rendell, also a Democrat, has lined up strong support for these measures in his own party. The legislation may have a more difficult time in the Senate, which has a slim Republican majority.
     
    Several amendments were offered during yesterday’s Committee meeting, but their text is not available. At this writing, the amendments had not been posted on the House website or incorporated into the text of the legislation.
     
    Approved amendments include penalties for cutting off a dog’s dewclaws (29-0 vote), adding stealing dogs for use in animal fighting to the cruelty law (29-0 vote), requiring owners to keep records of dogs that have had Caesarian sections of have been debarked (29-0 vote) and repealing record-keeping requirements for ear cropping (29-0 vote).
     
    The delay in the final vote was caused by a difference of opinion about a provision that would have allowed state dog wardens to enforce animal cruelty laws in counties that do not have an assigned Humane Society police officer. Under current law, dog wardens cannot enforce animal cruelty laws.
     
    Based on Tuesday’s voting pattern, the American Sporting Dog Alliance expects the Caltagirone legislation to be approved by the committee and sent to the floor of the House for a vote by all of the legislators, unless large numbers of dog owners express clear opposition well before June 24.
     
    While we support some provisions of this legislation, we oppose H.B. 2532 as a whole for several reasons, and urge dog owners to contact members of the Judiciary Committee to clearly ask them to either make major changes in the legislation or reject it outright.
     
    Our reasons for opposition are:
     
    • Tail docking and dewclaw removal in young puppies is safe and painless. Breeders have done it for centuries, and there have been no problems reported from this practice. Ear cropping requires the use of a local anesthetic but is considered to be a minor procedure, and in show dogs this work often is done by out-of-state specialists who are not licensed veterinarians in Pennsylvania. Animal rights groups see these procedures as acts of mutilation.
     
    • The legislation places the burden of proof on a dog’s owner, who would be required to produce proof that a tail was docked or dewclaws were clipped by a licensed veterinarian in order to avoid serious animal cruelty charges. This simply isn’t workable, because many people buy a dog or move here with a dog from states where this is not a requirement. People who now own a dog with a docked tail, cropped ears or removed dewclaws often have no idea who did the work, as it already had been done when they obtained the dog. The issue of burden of proof also means that people who legally docked the tails of puppies would have almost no way of proving the work was done before four days of age (barring affidavits of witnesses).
     
    • Anyone who brings a dog into Pennsylvania for hunting or competition in field trials, dog shows and other events, or simply comes here for a vacation or passes through the state, would be subject to being cited for animal cruelty. This essentially would destroy many dog shows, field trials, and obedience and herding events in Pennsylvania, and have a very detrimental economic impact on tourism here. Dozens of breeds of dogs traditionally have docked tails or cropped ears, including breeds as diverse as Brittanys, German shorthaired and wirehaired pointers, Rottweilers, Australian shepherds, fox terriers, springer spaniels, miniature schnauzers, doberman pinchers and Airedales. Dewclaw removal is a standard practice in all breeds of dogs.
     
    • Many dog owners would be placed in a pointless “catch 22” situation, and could not avoid being charged with animal cruelty through no fault of their own. Some breeds of dogs are born with naturally short tails that resemble docked tails, but this could not be proven. Some dogs have dewclaws torn off while hunting, which is a common hazard and the reason why many breeders remove them (the danger of a torn off dewclaw is serious in an older dog). Other puppies are born with a broken tail from prenatal injuries, or have their tail broken by their mothers in the whelping box; the tails of these puppies often atrophy and fall off naturally, and the owner of one of these dogs could not prove that it was not done surgically. Other dogs have their tails broken accidentally, such as by banging them on hard objects or getting them caught in a door.
     
    • And this legislation would destroy the work of many shelters and rescue groups, make it impossible for good Samaritans to help a lost or abandoned dog, and result in the needless and cruel euthanization of thousands of dogs every year because required proofs could not be obtained. People who help lost or abandoned dogs have no idea who docked their tails, cut off their dewclaws, cropped their ears, or even who performed dangerous procedures like Caesarian sections or debarking. Thus, the simple possession of one of these dogs would constitute animal cruelty. Euthanasia would be the only way to avoid prosecution for animal cruelty. The legislation provides no alternatives.
     
    The American Sporting Dog Alliance urges all Pennsylvania dog owners and people who bring dogs here from other states to immediately contact the members of the House Judiciary Committee well before June 24 to voice opposition to H.B. 2532.
     
    Here is a link that will list every member of the Judiciary Committee: http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/cteeInfo/cteeInfo.cfm?cde=24&body=H . Simply click on each committee member’s name and his or her web page will open, giving complete contact information. Handwritten and mailed letters are the most effective form of communication, followed by faxes, phone calls and emails.
     
    The American Sporting Dog Alliance represents owners, hobby breeders and professionals who work with breeds of dogs that are used for hunting. We are a grassroots movement working to protect the rights of dog owners, and to assure that the traditional relationships between dogs and humans maintains its rightful place in American society and life. Please visit us on the web at http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org. Our email is ASDA@csonline.net.
      The American Sporting Dog Alliance also needs your help so that we can continue to work to protect the rights of dog owners. Your membership, participation and support are truly essential to the success of our mission. We are funded solely by the donations of our members, and maintain strict independence. 

    PLEASE CROSS-POST AND FORWARD THIS REPORT TO YOUR FRIENDS

      

     

    • Gold Top Dog

     So, why is it that the UK can live without docking and we don't seem to be able to? 

    • Gold Top Dog

    Because we don't want to...and because some of us still believe in personal freedom...

    And for the same reason you may have bought your daughter braces for her teeth, which are a thousand times more painful and traumatic...and for the same reason that my mother-in-law had eyebrows tatooed on her skin....

     They are our dogs. No one can claim that 99% of us don't love them and give them the very best.

     

    • Gold Top Dog

    Add Australia to the illegal to dock list. Dewclaw removal is still allowed at this stage. Breeders hate it, the public doesn't seem to care, vets that I've spoken to universally love it. Breeders I've heard ranting about it like to pretend the vets have nothing to do with it, but there were vets over here prior to the law that refused to dock. My mother has a dog with a natural bob tail and it's quite easy to tell it's not surgical. It feels and looks quite different to my corgi's docked tail (which was done incorrectly so there's more tail left than there is supposed to be). It's tiny, but it's still tapered ever so slightly and he can't even move it.

    • Gold Top Dog

    spiritdogs

     So, why is it that the UK can live without docking and we don't seem to be able to? 

     

    See, I don't have an issue with docking if it is done correctly, and I can see why people, especially with breeds prone to tail injury would do it.

    Jack injured his tail repeatedly while young just by slamming it into things.  It got so bad at one point that he literally went for over a month with a tail that was repeatedly breaking open.  It was terrible--we could not bandage it for very long because he would wag the bandage off and he had to wear a cone most of the time because he would lick/chew that wound.  If it had not gotten better we may have had to have the very end of it amputated (eventually the tail formed a callus).  I cannot imagine that repeatedly breaking your tail open, having to wear a cone (which he hated), having to deal with the pain and itching of the wound, and then breaking it open again would be any less bothersome (probably worse actually) then having it docked by someone knowledgeable at 3 days old.  

      
     

    • Silver

    eaglerock814

    Because we don't want to...and because some of us still believe in personal freedom...

    Exactly!Yes 

    I feel that it is up to the breeder to decide whether or not they will crop or dock, not for a bunch of politicians to say that it is wrong.  In some working breeds, docking tails can be a painless procedure done when it's a puppy that will prevent pain and surgery at a later date.

    I strongly suggest to anyone who doubts that docking has any purpose, to visit this site: http://www.cdb.org/  The Council of Docked Breeds has photographic proof of what happens when a tail breaks on a working dog, and the stories of countless surgeries done to repair the damage, which have caused more pain and suffering to the dog then what the actual docking would have done in the first place.  [NOTE: Some people may find some of the pictures disturbing, so I wanted to post a warning.]

    Let politicians ban animal cruelty, dog fighting or vivisection; but to ban cropping or docking it is a step in the wrong direction.  When done safely and by knowledgeable hands, there is little to no trauma to the dog.

    • Gold Top Dog

    Considering how wildly against docking ALL breeders of traditionally docked breeds appear to be, I can't say I'd believe anything I heard from them. I think their hatred of anti-docking laws goes beyond dog welfare and the right to choose. Like I said, still haven't met a vet that thinks docking is worthwhile. Ask me in another ten years when the anti-docking law has been around for longer.

    I would just like to point out that even the people vehemently for docking in this country are generally against ear cropping. It's been illegal here so long a lot of people don't even know what it is. I wonder if that's the way docking will be after another generation. 

    • Gold Top Dog

    I'm in the UK and I disagreed with the anti docking law.  Not that it did any good.  Oddly, I shiver at the thought of ear cropping, I just imagine that must hurt loads and I can't see what its for other than aesthetics, which means I can't find any way to justify it.

    • Gold Top Dog

    I'd like to see some solid proof that tail-docking of young puppies is "painless". Flat-out don't believe it. They used to claim circumcising young boys was painless and whoops, it wasn't.

    • Gold Top Dog

    I'd like to see solid proof that tail-docking of young puppies is painful?

    You can't.  Period. 

    I'm pro-docking.  I could count the reasons why, but I won't.  It's The United States of America... I don't have to.
     

    • Gold Top Dog

    Interesting.  I can never see the purpose of tail docking but I did have my GD pups' ear cropped.  I also have a Dane with natural ears.  I like the cropped ears and the public does too.  The cropped ears on the Dane definitely changes their look, their image.  To me tail-docking does not and my impression is just the dog is missing its tail.....hmmm strange looking.  If the law says no more ear cropping...thats ok with me.  I wonder what those who care for Weimers would think if they saw one with the ears cropped.

    • Gold Top Dog

    How we'd feel if you cropped weimaraner ears?  They'd look like a fawn doberman, in essence, except wtih a slightly longer tail.  Dobes were created using heavy weimaraner influence. Often times you cannot tell the difference between a fawn/Isabella doberman and a dobe/hound marked weimaraner. But this has nothing to do with anything, I don't even understand why it was brought up.

    I don't see how you feel a docked tail is worse than cropped ears.  Croppd ears is aesthetic, docked tails is because a lot of the hunting breeds have whip like tails when hunting prone to injury. Docked tails are done very close to birth before, before it's surgery. Whereas cropped ears are done at any age, usually after 8 weeks. 

    But the great thing about the USA is it doesn't matter why you prefer cropped versus docked.  You can do that.  I wouldn't crop a dog.... but I would dock.  To each their own.

    • Gold Top Dog

    Certain breeds are defined by their cropping/docking per their breed standard such as Rottis, I've recently seen them with tails and they remind me of some hairy hound mix, not the bred it is at all

     

    Yes, America, land of the free and brave, unless of course you defy the new laws or then again, don't..what do we lose?? freedom! 

    • Gold Top Dog

    mudpuppy

    I'd like to see some solid proof that tail-docking of young puppies is "painless". Flat-out don't believe it. They used to claim circumcising young boys was painless and whoops, it wasn't.

     

    So do you think that tails repeatedly broken open are painless? 

    • Moderators
    • Gold Top Dog

    corvus
    Considering how wildly against docking ALL breeders of traditionally docked breeds appear to be

     I cannot speak for Australia, but I consider this a laughable presumption when speaking of breeders in the US.  I don't know a single Dobe breeder who would prefer to leave their dogs undocked.  The only ones that do, do it because they are competing in sports internationally - in countries that ban cropped/docked dogs.  But it is not their preference... .and if you lived w/an undocked Dobe, you might know why.