OFFICIAL ear cropping/tail docking debate thread

Talk about diets, exercise, and disease.

Postby mnp13 » Sun Sep 12, 2004 9:03 pm

carlinneworleans wrote: PUT AN END TO THE ENDLESS DEBATE!


um... this debate is the point of this thread... So that when cropping/docking threatens to hijack yet another thread people can come here.

Michelle
mnp13
 

Postby AllAmericanPUP » Tue Sep 14, 2004 8:25 pm

I'm going to guess they were docked by a vet without the benefit of anestetic?


There was no anesthetic.
Anybody and everybody I have ever talked to, has said that there is never anesthetic invovled in docking tails on puppies.

anesthetic is only used when cropping.
AllAmericanPUP
 

Postby STITCH » Tue Sep 14, 2004 10:44 pm

opinions are like bungholes we all have them, eventhough bungholes tend to voice their opinions louder than others we all have the right to voice them weither through a piercing, a tattoo an offencive t-shirt or even the way we parade our pups around with big floppy ears and long waggy tails or is it short pointy ears and blunt little tails....either way all we can do is be good little bungholes....smile and keep our negative opinions to our selves :peace:
STITCH
 

Postby mnp13 » Wed Sep 15, 2004 3:35 pm

AllAmericanPUP wrote:There was no anesthetic.
Anybody and everybody I have ever talked to, has said that there is never anesthetic invovled in docking tails on puppies.


Like I said earlier, tail dockings at a vet are horrible. It's about the same as having the last joint of your finger cut off. As if they 'don't feel it'.

The 'traditional' docking method of banding is FAR more humaine, provided it is done correctly. I would never have a vet dock a tail except for a medical reason and under general anestetic.

Michelle
mnp13
 

Postby AllAmericanPUP » Thu Sep 16, 2004 4:50 pm

I would never put a rubberband around a tail and just let if fall off..
i think that's horrible.

then again I would never dock a puppys taill... :))
AllAmericanPUP
 

Postby katch22 » Thu Sep 16, 2004 10:43 pm

No crop - No dock - here

I have never taken in a dog from puppyhood - just a bunch of lost and founds in my house and I wouldn't change a thing about them :inlove:
katch22
 

Postby mnp13 » Fri Sep 17, 2004 7:54 am

AllAmericanPUP wrote:I would never put a rubberband around a tail and just let if fall off..
i think that's horrible.


Sorry, I was not clear about it - That's not how it works... the band cuts off the circulation and deadens the nerve. It has to be put on in the first few days of life, because the animal is growing so fast in the first few weeks. Then when the tissue is basically just attached with no feeling it is cut off. It also doesn't need stitches at that point because it was banded so much smaller.

If you waited until it 'fell off' your dog would die of septic infection or gangrene.

Michelle
mnp13
 

Postby JCleve86 » Fri Sep 17, 2004 12:02 pm

Our Boxer-Boos tails were docked at two days old. We saw them the first day and seriously considered keeping Molly's tail (we were only going to get her at that time) because she had that cute paint-dipped looking tail, but we decided to have it docked. Her breeder told us that they took them in at day two, the vet just docked the tails (no, he didn't use anesthetics) and they whimpered for about a half second as he snipped, but they were perfectly fine after. Personally, a half second of pain for a two day old puppy is not worth using an anesthetic, which only puts un-due risk on the puppies (in this case). Ewwww...Molly just ripped one...I can no longer think clearly
User avatar
JCleve86
Forum Junky
 
Posts: 3173
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 11:38 pm
Location: Puyallup, WA

redux

Postby duckzilla » Sat Sep 18, 2004 2:30 am

Posted: Fri Sep 17, 2004 8:18 pm Post subject: cut ears, docked tails --- whats up with that?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have an innocent, perhaps naive question for all and anyone. I am a lover of the breed. Obviously. I wish to fight BSL, I wish to spread the love and joy of the APBT to all, just like "everyone" here. I say "everyone" as not all of you are owners of "APBT" but are "AMSTAFF" or "STAFFIE" owners or "MUTTS" :thumbsup: . ANYWAY... I get sidetracked so easily...

I'll preface the following with ... TO ME... it looks horrible. the dogs lose all sense of outward emotion. The ears of dogs are our closest link to their imagination, their hearts, their souls even. I know if my dog is going to have a good day when I see those perky ears half falling to her jowles, and when I see her tail going in FULL CIRCLE, I mean sometimes I think shes going to lift off, ass first its spinnin so fast. I love it... And speaking of tails... well same deal man... when my dog is pissed, that tail is as straight as a pointer, when she's happy its bowed and crooked sticking straight up, and oh when she wags... she cant even walk straight, its like a shimmy or something. Its totally hilarious and I have never seen anything like it. If she's going to have a bad day her ears are slovenly hanging down her head and its round you know people, when they have their ears down, and her tail isn't wagging its just sort of there. It breaks my heart to see her worried or having a bad day because i strive to make everyday better than the last for her. She is my life. And it's all so very clear that this breed supercedes all other dogs on the planet for their ability to be so compassionate. And I would never know that with out her tail and her ears.

Why do people, breeders, professional dog show people etc. still insist on docking tails and hacking ears off of these amazing, wonderful, sensitive, and intuitive companion animals. :huh?: I mean, isn't one of our PRIMARY functions in this forum, and beyond, to end the stigma of our beloved breed being a ring champion and morbid implement of destruction? Why must these same individuals speak out in hatred of the rest of society, when they themselves add to the negativity by having the tell tale signs of a ring dog, attack dog, vicious killer if you will...

I know that some of you on here have your dogs ears and tails hacked, and, I mean you no disrespect. I have honestly pure intentions to work together, and to fight the impending ban on our dogs, and to ensure (avoiding cliche) and secure for our posterity life, liberty and the persuit of happiness for this American Legend. :peace:
duckzilla
 

Postby JCleve86 » Sun Sep 19, 2004 12:23 am

Why must these same individuals speak out in hatred of the rest of society, when they themselves add to the negativity by having the tell tale signs of a ring dog, attack dog, vicious killer if you will...


Thats a rather "un-informed" statement. There are FAR more show dogs that have cropped ears than fighting dogs. For most, they do it because it emphasizes some of the facial features of the pitties noggin. I really, honest to God, think there are FAR greater issues at hand than this (like the BSL you mention). We just go round and round...but I suppose that's what the thread is for, eh?

While I disagree with your opinion, I can see why you would be against it as far as public perception goes. Most people won't even recognize a pit as a pit if it has natural ears, and they DO look more friendly with big ol floppy ears (or a set of gorgeous rose ears). So from that standpoint, I understand what you mean.
User avatar
JCleve86
Forum Junky
 
Posts: 3173
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 11:38 pm
Location: Puyallup, WA

Re: redux

Postby mnp13 » Sun Sep 19, 2004 8:27 am

duckzilla wrote:I'll preface the following with ... TO ME... it looks horrible.


That's fine, you are entitled to your opinion. But telling me my dog looks horrible is the RIGHT way to really piss me off.

duckzilla wrote:the dogs lose all sense of outward emotion.


Untrue. Ruby's ears show plenty of emotion. I just have to look a little closer. BFD. She still feels those emotions, and that's what's important.

duckzilla wrote:And speaking of tails... well same deal man...


Yup, same deal. Her nub shows all the same emotions as your dog's full length tail. Connor's stub does as well.

duckzilla wrote:Why do people, breeders, professional dog show people etc. still insist on docking tails and hacking ears off of these amazing, wonderful, sensitive, and intuitive companion animals. :huh?: I mean, isn't one of our PRIMARY functions in this forum, and beyond, to end the stigma of our beloved breed being a ring champion and morbid implement of destruction? Why must these same individuals speak out in hatred of the rest of society, when they themselves add to the negativity by having the tell tale signs of a ring dog, attack dog, vicious killer if you will...


There are TONS of dog breeds who are typically cropped and docked. If you look at old pictures of fighting dogs you will notice that many (if not most) are NOT cropped or docked. The 'a dog with cropped ears is a pit fighter' BS is due to the media more than the truth

duckzilla wrote:I know that some of you on here have your dogs ears and tails hacked, and, I mean you no disrespect.


No. They are not 'hacked' they are cropped and docked. Truthfully, Ruby's ears WERE hacked - by her breeder, with scissors (according to what he told me.) Her tail was banded and then cut - the least painful method of docking actually.

Someone else brought this up earlier, and it is something I have thought for years. Before you decide to crusade against cropping/docking perhaps you want to think of the rights of humans not to have parts chopped off without the benefit of their consent - or even anestetic. When chopping parts off of baby boys (for no medical reason) becomes illegal then we can move on to 'protecting' the dogs.

Michelle
mnp13
 

Postby duckzilla » Sun Sep 19, 2004 9:47 am

Michelle, while I value your opinion and expertise... If you want you dog looking like a vulcan thats awesome, I stand on freedom of choice as much as the next American.
Alas, I for one would imagine, given the dogs had a choice they would prefer to be left in tact. The earlobes are desiged, by nature to carry sound waves to the brain. It is a known fact that sound waves deviating from the natural path from ear lobe to the ear canal can and does cause developmental as well as perceptual and mental problems animals. You might perform a GOOGLE search on such a topic. You might be amazed. Refer specifcally to tests performed on persons having lost thier ears in accidents and the likes by neuropathologists etc.

However, I must protest about the trimming male parts. There are several very vaible hygenic and medical reasons for "male babies" parts to be trimmed. This forum, however, is neither the time, nor the place as there are probably children viewing.

Thus, I digress, this appears to be an age old debate (*the former)... perhaps on which folks will agree to disagree. And, in closing, I aplogize to those who might become irritated or offended at my humble opinion.
duckzilla
 

Postby Leslie H » Sun Sep 19, 2004 10:39 am

The earlobes are desiged, by nature to carry sound waves to the brain. It is a known fact that sound waves deviating from the natural path from ear lobe to the ear canal can and does cause developmental as well as perceptual and mental problems animals

Hold on a minute, that is a vast oversimplification, as well as an overgeneralization. To follow this train of logic, you'd have to conclude that we would be helping basset hounds, springers and the like if we were to crop their ears into a more human-like shape, to help their hearing. External ears are not directly connected to the nerves that conduct the electric impulses resulting from sound waves to the brain. They do help channel that, but you are making direct correlation where none exists. Don't bother quoting studies on humans to me, I'm a special ed teacher, the last neuropsych report I read was on Fri, I took a course on deafness and hearing impairment w/a deaf instructor, and I work closely w/a speech and language pathologist.
I don't approve of cropping and docking either, but I support my opinions w/fact.
User avatar
Leslie H
Regulator
 
Posts: 9937
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 1:06 pm

Postby duckzilla » Sun Sep 19, 2004 11:15 am

Here's one of millions of hits one might get when doing a google search on EARS.

http://www.earaces.com/anatomy.htm

This site should explain for you some fact, which Leslie kindly pointed out I neglected to include. Granted, it is only one. But the other 10 million ought to support it to some extent.

Then what happens in the brain with those electrical impulses well... theres another 10 million pages you might select to learn more.

I've 'oversimplified, and overgeneralized' as many of these kind readers are not ready to embark on an all emcompasing tour thru the ear, sound and development, and how it relates to the brain.

Taking a few classes perhaps provides a foundation on how humans use sound and language. And I commend your selection of occupations. But thats not the discussion. I don't claim to be an expert, but anyone can locate hundreds of sources to support my indications provided they perform a little freelance research, and not simply relying on a strangers [read 'me'] thread on a forum post. Folks, anyone can say anything and say they have "sources". But it is up to the reader to really find out for themselves what is fact and separate from fiction.
My train of logic is simply that ears are designed by nature to best suit the organism on which they reside. Evoloution has made mistakes, and granted so has the course of human interruption in a vast array of organisms on planet earth. This is quite clear, and one can see human involvement simply by looking at our beloved dogs... These aren't natures plan as they weren't naturally occurring, but had involvement by humans. However, nature still has a control over how each part of the organism functions to facilitate life. This is found in the DNA. And as I've said earlier we simply don't have time to go over all of this in a post.

I would like any and all critics to debunk my approach by performing thier own research on aural makeup and how sound travels over the ear lobes into the canal, and how frequencies and electrical impulses provide development of the physical and mental aspects of the brain.
duckzilla
 

Postby Maximus » Sun Sep 19, 2004 1:58 pm

duckzilla wrote:However, I must protest about the trimming male parts. There are several very vaible hygenic and medical reasons for "male babies" parts to be trimmed.


That isn't true at all. If you go back a few pages, you'll find a link to a super-fun discussion about this very topic! But I agree that this thread isn't the place for it, so I digress......
Maximus
 

PreviousNext

Return to Health Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], MSNbot Media and 2 guests