Subscribe to
Fully Vetted
Dr. Coates is a veterinarian based in the other “Sunshine State” – that's Colorado to the rest of you – where she lives and plays with a varied range of animals. She shares her professional and personal experiences, Monday through Friday, here on petMD's blog, the Fully Vetted. Log in for your daily dose of her insight and wisdom.

 

Nip, Snip, Clip, Crop, Slice, Tack, Glue, Tape, or Tuck? ... Dog Ears, of Course

March 29, 2010 / (84) comments


OK, so here’s another post where I ask for your opinion on a touchy topic and tell you how I handled it. This time on a subject we’ve tackled here before: Ears!


Every in-the-know pet owner knows it’s contentious, this issue of ear cropping for non-therapeutic reasons. In Europe it’s banned. Walk a Dobie with a crop down any street in Dusseldorf and you’re likely to earn yourself some cold stares — or worse. In the rest of the world it’s not illegal, but neither is it communally sanctioned the way it was before the ’60s and ’70s when animal welfare issues began to take firmer hold on our cultural conscience.

But the holdouts are firm. They say there are plenty of good reasons to crop a dog’s ears. Sure, it’s all about a big nod to the breed’s original purpose. But in a world where cropped dogs rarely work, and where form is no longer legitimately derived from function, detractors say the point of a crop is more about fashion than anything else. And fashion is no good reason to inflict unnecessary pain.

Still, the AKC (American Kennel Club), and plenty of other breed clubs remain staunch in their opposition to a ban: It’s a slippery slope, they say. What’s next, the gene police?

Enter The Miami Herald, and a recent column I wrote for it. In it, I’d pushed pretty hard on the issue of cosmetic ear manipulation, which bought me a talking-to from some of my readers.

Read for yourself, and see if you agree with their take:


Q: My male German shepherd will not keep his ears up all the time like his brother does. He is capable of getting them standing, and this occurs when he's swimming or playing with his favorite toy. Someone suggested I get an implant to make it stand or some cartilage removed so the ears won't be so heavy. Can you help me?

A: I’d love to help but you’re probably not going to like what I have to say. Here goes, anyway:

If having perfect hip conformation were as important to German shepherd owners as having great ears we’d have done away with hip dysplasia long ago. But it’s not just German shepherds I plan to pick on here. After all, lots of breeds come attached to owners who demand aural perfection.

So here’s where I have to ask: What is it about ears that leads so many well-meaning, otherwise rational owners to want to snip, crop, tape and glue them? If the ears don’t stand like they should there are probably as many ways to deal with them than there are breeders to recommend them.

I’ve seen owners use moleskin, plumbing insulation, industrial glues and solvents, Scotch tape, duct tape, plumber’s tape and even Crazy glue to get ears to stand or bend just right. Which means I’ve also seen weeping sores, infected ulcers and chronic skin irritation — all in the service of the almighty perfect ear.

Worse still are the surgical approaches. As if it’s not bad enough that we humans feel compelled to crop our dogs’ ears (and justify the act based on its historical significance). The idea that an implant might be necessary to turn an ear just so is repulsive — more so should you happen to be the veterinarian who treats these patients after their “repairs” have gone all wrong.

The ear of an animal is a delicate structure with a definite purpose. Just because we’ve bred our dogs in such a way so that their ears take on a specific shape does not alter this fact. Further manipulating it with surgical techniques, external support to help it stand, or fixatives to help it bend “correctly” should not be undertaken unless the stress and physical repercussions of doing so are negligible. Period.

So let me recap: Whoever suggested your puppy’s ear deserves either an implant or any less cartilage is a) wrong, and b) offering morally reprehensible advice. Don’t even consider it.



So what do you say?

Well, in any case here’s what was alleged:

Readers complained that it was not a fair and balanced response to a legitimate question. That’s an attack, they said. You should apologize, they added. Also, people should have the right to make up their own minds based on science, and not because you happen to be an animal rights activist up on your bully pulpit.

For the second time this week I’ll agree to being less diplomatic than I could have been. But this time I’ll stand firm: The science is pretty clear. There is no research to support the need for non-therapeutic ear procedures, surgical or otherwise. I mean, that’s the definition of “non-therapeutic,” isn’t it?

But you’re always free to disagree. So fire away and tell me whether you think I was evenhanded … or too tough for mainstream print …

 

 

Dr. Patty Khuly

 

 

Art of the day: dogear by lucianvenutian. I especially like his image (of what I suspect is an uncropped ear) because the artist explains the photo itself was totally uncropped while literally "shooting from the hip." That's how it happened and that's how it remains. Love the poetry of the single ear. The irony is that I cropped it for the title shot.

Subscribe to Fully Vetted
COMMENTS (84)
1
by on 03/29/2010 07:39am

My German Shepherd mix not only has massive ears, but the right one stands straight up and the left one flops over, and it never even crossed my mind to try and "fix" her floppy ear. I can't believe that people would risk potentially harming their dogs for something as ridiculously superfluous as a floppy ear! (And actually my dog is complimented constantly on how cute her ears are)


As a German Shepherd lover, I couldn't agree more with the tragedy that is what breeding has done to GSD's hips-it is beyond tragic and anyone who would subject dogs to unnecessary pain and suffering to create a certain "look" that is entirely unnatural cannot possibly be a true dog lover.

2
earclipping
by on 03/29/2010 07:45am

Bravissimaaa!! I would have unsubscribed if you would have thought otherwise. but then:.... I'm European...;0)

3
by on 03/29/2010 08:38am

Friend's dog is a dobi with a cropping gone wrong. The dog is the most friendly, adorable dog in the world unless you get close to her left ear. If you even brush it, then out of instinct she is going to attempt a bone deep bite. We assume it's a pain or nerve that is giving her trouble.

I am so far off the deep end when it comes to breeds that you know what my opinion is. Any sort of physical modification for the purpose of appearance is stupid and should be illegal as it's mutilation. Heck, I won't even declaw a cat.

4
cropping ears
by on 03/29/2010 08:49am

OK you got me going now. I am totally against cropping ears. If the owners could listen to the puppies' screams as they come out of anesthesia they would think twice about cropping their ears. I admit it was 30 years ago that I worked for a vet, but the puppies with their ears cropped seemed to be in the most pain. I am sure the drugs are better now and the pain better managed, but why put them through it.

5
ear cropping
by on 03/29/2010 08:52am

Often there is no rational explanation for what goes on in the show world (your comment about hip dysplasia is right on the mark), but as far as companion animals are concerned there's really no reason to inflict needless pain on our companions either on their ears or tails. Preach it!

6
by on 03/29/2010 08:58am

"Fair and balanced" is a BS concept. It means "including the opposing viewpoint, even when it's absolutely wrong."

If someone is demanding "fair and balanced reporting" (gak) instead of "reporting supported by the evidence," then they HAVE no evidence.

7
Nip, Snip and clip
by on 03/29/2010 09:04am

Some but not all Cosmetic surgery has just been banned in Nova Scotia by the NS Veterinary Association as of April 1, 2010 with a 6 month grace period.
I have not been able to find the complete list of procedures that are banned but ear cropping and tail docking are included. I for one am happy about this. There are many people up in arms about it but too bad. We already had many vets who refused to do these procedures.
They say they can't show their dogs etc.. The CKC will catch up and change their ruls as has every other kennel club has when their country has banned these procedures.
I wish that de clawing and de barking had been included as well. Hopefully that will change soon. Although I know there are a very few cases with real reasons for de clawing when you have someone in the home with immune system issues but other than that it should be banned..

8
ear cropping
by on 03/29/2010 09:08am

Why should we be "diplomatic" about unnecessary medical procedures? I'm glad you can tell it like it is. Its only if we are this straight-forward and passionate that people may eventually listen. You are awesome!

9
Cropping
by on 03/29/2010 09:21am

Puppies screaming as they come out of anesthesia? I have seen many puppies cropped and have never seen anything like that. I have had cropped breeds for a long time and have never run into head shy dogs or dogs who cry in pain when their ears or heads are touched. As with everything, obviously there will be some bad experiences but they are by no means the norm.

Standing ears are the norm in the animal kingdom. We have manipulated dogs ears to be drop or hanging ears. I personally see this as worse than cropping.

Additionally, if you look at pedigrees of German show line or working GSDs, you will see all of their hip ratings. With all that attention paid to hips, why exactly is it that hip dysplasia continues to afflict these dogs? I am sure the GSD community would love to know.

One other thing- we spay and neuter for our convenience. I would think a spay is a much painful and invasive procedure than cropping or docking. Why not recommend a leash and a fence as an alternative to spaying and neutering?

10
by on 03/29/2010 09:46am

Standing ears are the norm in the animal kingdom? For a wolf maybe, but not for a domesticated dog. It can be said that over the thousands of years the domesticated dog has evolved to have ears that do not stand. Breeding did not cause the ears to lay down; it was evolution. Breeding as we know it more resembles cloning and is a relatively new fad of the last couple hundred years. Dogs ears were laying down long before breeding. The domesticated dog also has an evolved brain and mental capacity as well as emotions to the point that the domesticated dog of our world is a highly evolved companion when compared to the dog of thousands of years ago. What I have stated is science, not an opinion so don't hang me out to dry on this.

I can respect that you have not seen dogs in pain or "head shy" but if folks here say it exists, then I would hope you accept it as a possibility.

As far as recommending a fence as an alternative to spay or neuter, I respect that point of view, and would agree if it was a realistic solution. I think you would agree it is not.

11
Ear cropping
by on 03/29/2010 10:19am

I think ear cropping is barbaric and should be illegal. My 10 year old dobie has beautiful, natural ears that I adore. I would never make him suffer for such a stupid procedure. The breeder I got him from included ear cropping from her vet in the package price, and needless to say, I will never buy from her again. Anyway, my vote is STOP the barbarism!

12
by on 03/29/2010 10:20am

donnadw,

You make some good points but, I don't think the fact that dogs have evolved into a distinct sub-species that generally have floppy ears, straight tails and bark more than they howl, is really justification for surgically undoing that evolution. Show me some physical, lifestyle or working benefit and I'll agree to cropping and docking, otherwise, it just seems superficial and unnecessary. If there's a working benefit, go right ahead and crop or dock, but if the dog isn't going to work, why put him through it?

AKC registered GSD's are being bred for an aesthetic extreme, the sloped back. Stop doing that, continue to test the hips and you will significantly reduce hip dysplasia. I don't think you'll ever entirely eliminate it, diet and lifestyle also play a huge role in HD.

I agree that we primarily spay and neuter for our convenience, because humans are lazy and irresponsible. It is not that hard to keep an in tact dog, but, if people aren't going to prevent unplanned litters, then spay/neuter, is the only responsible alternative.

Dr, Khuly's reply was entirely one sided, but it's an opinion piece, not a news story. She's not a reporter, she has no obligation to be "fair and balanced". That said, you catch more flies with honey. Diplomacy can be a very effective way to get people to see your point of view. A heavy handed approach is likely to shut them down and ensure they they will not listen to anything you have to say, ever.

13
observation
by on 03/29/2010 10:26am

This past Saturday I saw the nicest Boston Terrier older pup up close. I noted the really nice "ear crop" immediately, not too severe but just right. The rambunctious pup was full of spirit and I couldn't resist asking the owner where she was obtained--he bred her himself and was quite proud.

It ocurred to me to ask about the ear crop, but I thought better of it. Ear crops are obviously still readily obtainable in my area of New England.

As an owner/breeder of two breeds with natural ears , both drop and erect, I'm glad to have never having to deal with cropping or fussing with ear carriage.

14
Nip, Snip, Clip, Crop, Slice, Tack, etc. etc.
by on 03/29/2010 10:26am

I am not a dog owner, but I'm a big fan of dog shows. That aside, I think the cropping and docking thing has nothing to do with the soundness of a dog. But I think one of the problems is image. We don't see a whole lot of pictures of Dobes with natural ears or Danes or any of the others (it's too early in the morning for me) and I think if there was more exposure to natural dog ears it might not be such a big deal. But nope. What do we see on doggie calendars and anything where there are lots of pictures of these dogs? We see crops 'n docks.If it's for fashion's sake, start an anti-fashion movement.

But whoever suggested no spay or neuter-yes, maybe it IS for our "convenience," but it's at least a step toward stopping the holocaust of unwanted dogs all over this country. If you were truly a dog lover you wouldn't make such a lame suggestion.

15
EAR TAPING
by on 03/29/2010 10:36am

For corgis (Cardigans and Pembrokes), ear taping is recommended after 14 weeks. I don't believe in using harsh materieals and for a long period of time. I do believe that taping can help at a young age when the ears are forming cartilige. Ears that hang down don't allow the air to get inside like the stand-up ones. I've heard of more ear infections and wax problems in the hanging ears. In these breeds the ears are meant to stand.

A Pem, that we rehomed last year, had both ears down. He was over 1 YO then so they were left by us the way they were. The new owner loves his floppy ears and he has a perfect tempermant. She just checks his ears more frequently for wax, etc.

My opinion is that if taping slightly,for a short time, while monitoring health, can assist, then go for it. I am against extreme uses of the tape, etc. or surgical procedures that only benefit the owner's ego and not the dog's health.
JMO


16
by on 03/29/2010 11:41am

I am not a fan of cosmetic surgery for dogs.

Maybe dew claws if they are very floppy. I did have a puppy in one of my classes who had his dews removed when they neutered him, but they were attached by so little tissue, and he was so active, there was a real fear that he would tear one.

One weird thing I see in this area a lot is Boxers with natural ears, but docked tails. Not sure I have ever seen a natural tail, but mostly I see natural ears.

17
diplomacy schiplomacy
by on 03/29/2010 11:58am

Please don't pull back on your commentary because some have urged more "diplomacy." All that means is your words hit home.

If you start second guessing your opinions, their meanings will become muddy. And anyway, having them delivered straight-shooter style is far more entertaining.

18
Cropping
by on 03/29/2010 11:59am

You are my kind of Vet. Bravo for standing for your believes.
I don't believe in any kind of cosmetic surgery only if something would in danger the life of the pet.

19
cropping, docking
by on 03/29/2010 12:09pm

Thank you, Dr. Patty for taking a stand against unnecessary procedures that maim and and sometimes injure the animals in your care.

If only the monies wasted on these in-humane and idiotic procedures were available to use to spay and neuter the animals left in the wake of people who leave their pets intact, this would be a much nicer world.

20
Totally Unfounded Theory
by on 03/29/2010 12:23pm

I think that people who are against nip/snip/crop/etc, for dogs are also against child circumcision.

I believe its the same instinct in us that makes us think that both are wrong and we tend to stay consistent across "disciplines".

I would love it if everyone who has commented already stated their opinion on circumcision.

Does my theory hold water or is it a total hooey?

21
Nip, Snip, Clip, Crop, Slice, Tack, Glue
by on 03/29/2010 12:30pm

I believe everyone has a right to their opinion sure, but a reader asked for your professional opinion and you gave it. Personally, I would not put my pet through all that. In most cases imperfections result in individuality & personality. Accept them, love them and move on. It is nothing less than I would ask of or do for my human family. So the moral of this story for me, is to ask yourself, 'if my ears weren't up to my family's standards, would I want them to use Super Glue on them, or even worse, cut a chunk of them off'? Of course not!

22
by on 03/29/2010 12:52pm

My boyfriend wanted to crop our pitbull's ears, I explained how cruel I thought it was, how she was born w/ ears and we could not take those away "they are floppy for a reason". But when it was time to get her spayed his arguement was "she was born that way" why are you going to do that. He felt it was curel to deprive her of motherhood. Take in mind she has hereditary mange. Overall I won!

23
by on 03/29/2010 12:52pm

My boyfriend wanted to crop our pitbull's ears, I explained how cruel I thought it was, how she was born w/ ears and we could not take those away "they are floppy for a reason". But when it was time to get her spayed his arguement was "she was born that way" why are you going to do that. He felt it was curel to deprive her of motherhood. Take in mind she has hereditary mange. Overall I won!

24
by on 03/29/2010 12:52pm

My boyfriend wanted to crop our pitbull's ears, I explained how cruel I thought it was, how she was born w/ ears and we could not take those away "they are floppy for a reason". But when it was time to get her spayed his arguement was "she was born that way" why are you going to do that. He felt it was curel to deprive her of motherhood. Take in mind she has hereditary mange. Overall I won!

25
by on 03/29/2010 01:19pm

I'm actually kind of flabbergasted that ear taping is being compared to cropping. Do poorly-maintained tape jobs using inappropriate glue/tape cause harm? Of course. But those are also NOT the norm.

26
Cropping
by on 03/29/2010 01:51pm

EAB: what other animals can you think of that have drop ears? Besides elephants and certain types of domestic animals?

I do accept "head shy" as a possibility but many of the dogs I have interacted with have been show or working dogs. Being head shy or pulling away would have effectively ended their careers. A person could conceivably make a dog head shy by cleaning their ears or giving them a pill or clipping their face; it's all in the handling.

Lindsey: No where has it ever been proven that sloping toplines lead to bad hips. Please show me the scientific evidence for this. Working line GSDs, who have straight toplines and German showline GSDs, who have roached backs, both suffer from hip dysplasia, as so breeds such as Labs who have straight backs, and mixed breeds who aren't selected for anything.

Bunny woman: your comment is so emotional and baseless, I am not going to take the time to respond.

27
Nip, Snip, Clip
by on 03/29/2010 02:31pm

These are some of the reasons given for cropping and docking..
I still don't see any "valid" reasons in their list.
http://www.k9alliance.com/whycropdock.htm

28
Nip, Snip, Clip
by on 03/29/2010 02:56pm

First of all, I applaud Dr. Khuly, and I completely agree with her stance on this issue. Luckily, even though there are those who still carry on this barbaric custom, it is being phased out.

To say that an animal needs to have his ears cropped/taped in order to avoid ear infections is pretty absurd to me. For optimal animal health, you should be cleaning a dog's ears, or "checking them for wax", 1-2 times per month anyway, especially after bathing.

And to say that "bad" tape jobs, or "bad" crop/dock jobs are not the norm is simply not true. Perhaps if you work in the show environment, you see mostly "well done" jobs. However, during my extensive experience working at a small animal hospital, I can tell you that it's just not the case. The number of pets that we see for wound care management....with torn, infected, seeping ears, or with infected, and callused tails, is alarming. There are no benefits to ear cropping. I am not opposed to tail amputation when there is a medical reason. Sometimes it is necessary...if the dog is one of those who constantly bashes his tail into the wall until it bleeds.

Also, not directly related, but touched on in this discussion, Donnadw mentioned that spaying and neutering was done solely for the laziness of pet owners. Perhaps this is the case for some. However, there are countless benefits to spaying and neutering. Please do not think that if you spay or neuter your pet you are taking anything away from them. Well, actually, you are. For girls, you take away the risk of mammary tumors and mammary cancer, and the risk of pyometra (a uterine infection), that will kill a dog within about 4 days unless cured by an emergency spay. I can't tell you how many pyometra cases we see, with the dogs turning up at deaths' door...some are cured, and some are not. Many are probably never brought in to the hospital to begin with, and die at home. The pyometra spay is also much more expensive and risky than a routine spay, and there is zero risk of this happening, if you have your pet spayed.

By neutering your dog, you take away the chance that he will develop testicular cancer, and you drastically reduce his risks of developing prostate cancer, as well as some other types of tumors. Again, zero chance if he is neutered.

So, I have thoroughly defended spaying and neutering without even mentioning behavior benefits, or "convenience". To me, it is all about helping your pets to live longer, healthier lives. The benefits are worth giving up the misconceived human notion that either of these procedures affect a pet's masculinity or femininity.

I am hoping that by the time I finish Veterinary School, there will be more finite lines drawn between what is helpful to the pet and what is harmful.

29
Elective surgeries
by on 03/29/2010 03:15pm

I am finding a "disconnect" in this thread. I understand that many are opposed to docking, removal of dewclaws, and cropping. And that is fine. I understand why people would not want to do it. And that's their choice. So, why cannot it not be my choice TO do it? My ear crops have always been performed under anesthesia by a highly qualified vet, one of the few that will still crop ears. The quality of aftercare, and my own experience in caring for puppies after crops, is extensive, and I would NEVER recommend a crop for owners who were not completely committed to both caring properly for the ears (aftercare) or who did not have the proper support system for helping them to do so.
What I find interesting, is that the procedures discussed in this thread (cropping, docking, dewclaw removal, are so vilified, when the more invasive and potentially as dangerous, if not more so, spay and neuters are hailed, applauded, and eagerly supported for mandated legislation. Especially spays, which are a highly INVASIVE surgery, and has the same surgical risks, and perhaps even more short-term and long-term side effects, with neutering still having surgical side effects, and many potential long-term effects. NONE of the above surgeries are medically necessary...so why do make a clear distinction between them? Why is it okay to expose our pets to the very real dangers of spaying and neutering, but NOT okay to perform a procedure that in two cases, is much safer and when neonates, most likely less painful, and in the case of cropping, certainly no more dangerous than spaying. I've never understood why it is acceptable to cut open a female dog, and remove her reproductive organs, with all the surgical risk, recovery risk, and potential long-term effects, but not okay to dock a tail, or remove dewclaws or even crop an ear, (or for that matter, to de-claw a cat, or bark-soften a dog, if it means that animal can remain in it's home...) Understand, I completely support the spaying and neutering when the owner makes the choice to do so. BUT the fact is, they expose their pet to real risk when they make this decision, and it should be their's to make. We wish to mandate which surgeries I MUST have and those that are completely forbidden? When NONE of them are medically necessary? That's not even logical.

Shall we start mandating that the ears of infant or toddler girls not be pierced, and that our sons should not be circumcised? After all, these are HUMAN children, and these procedures are both potentially dangerous, and painful, and the risk of infection, real. Yet, I see no one opposing these procedures.

30
crop dock snip
by on 03/29/2010 03:33pm

well I tried to post.. was "flagged" for using the word bitch

31
by on 03/29/2010 03:33pm

ok it let me use that.. how about castrate.. is that offensive

32
Elective surgeries
by on 03/29/2010 03:34pm

Well, the conversation has naturally evolved from medically unnecessary surgeries, into spay/neuter to some extent, but I'm not going to go into a great deal of depth here. And many on this list I'm sure poo-poo the research that has been done concerning long-term health concerns on early spay/neuter. However, there are enough studies that have been completed by reliable sources, and peer-reviewed for me to accept there are REAL health concerns to removing our animals hormones, especially too early. Yes, there are benefits...BUT the truth is, there are dangers as well. And those are never discussed. Sometimes, because vets simply don't want to talk clients out of them, as it is a fairly expensive procedure...and sometimes because it's inconvenient for those that would like to legally mandate the procedure.
The fact is, that most Americans already spay and neuter.
The fact is, spaying and neutering has dangers.
The fact is, spaying and neutering has benefits.
The face is, owners DESERVE to weigh those dangers and benefits and make their own decision.
The fact is, that just because your pet is intact, does not mean it's going to breed. I have owned multiple intact animals of both genders for over 47 years, and I have yet to breed an "accidental" litter. As a matter of fact, in that time, I have bred exactly ONE litter total. Yes, it does require some "management", but it is NOT rocket science, and we are quite capable of keeping our animals from reproducing. The health benefits of keeping them intact, FAR outweigh the benefits of having them altered, to me. And for those people that simply want a pet, and want the convenience of NOT dealing with the management issues of remaining intact, then absolutely they should spay or neuter. But they should do so knowing both the good and the bad.
The fact is, that although we still euthanize approximately 4 million animals in shelters, that twenty years ago, we were euthanizing 15 to 16 million animals. So, we are moving in the right direction. Instead of looking at the "problem" let's look at what we've done that's been so successful. And then continue to work on the problem.
The fact is, that simply spaying and neutering everything will not solve the problem. And MANDATING it certainly won't. It will simply create more problems.

33
mutilation of canine body parts
by on 03/29/2010 03:54pm

I've heard people tell "docking and cropping have a long tradition". yeah, and so does slavery.

34
by on 03/29/2010 03:59pm

I don't think anyone has said that spaying and neutering will solve all of the problems. Although it does help. If people wish to leave their pets intact, that is their choice. And while I do question the "dangers" posed by spaying and neutering, my point was that the choice to spay/neuter is not based on laziness alone.

As far as it being a personal choice to whether one crops/docks/pierces/circumcises, it is. You are pretty much allowed to do whatever you want to your pet. Proof of this would be the insane cases I see, that will never be met with any type of punishment, such as the owner who bathed their cat in ajax to get rid of fleas, who after a long and painful treatment did not make it, or dog owners who think it's a good idea to pour burnt motor oil on dogs with mange....or the neglected dogs with chains that have grown into their necks from being tied up outside and untouched for so long. Am I comparing anesthetized ear cropping to any of this mistreatment, no. My point is that you are allowed to do what you want with your pets.

Risks of anesthesia are brought up in this discussion, and the level of "invasive-ness" or ear cropping as compared to spaying/neutering. There are always, always, ALWAYS risks and potential complications with anesthesia, up to and including death. I have on occasion seen pets die under anesthesia. In good hospitals, every precaution is taken, and pets are carefully monitored, but there is always the risk that even pre-op bloodwork may not reveal some underlying disease that may cause the pet to react badly under anesthesia. I have stated my feelings on spaying and neutering. Obviously, I feel that the benefits are high enough to rationalize anesthesia....and I think anesthetized dental cleanings also fit that bill. There are so many dangers associated with letting your pets' teeth rot away in their mouth. However, it is also my opinion that it is simply not worth the risks or the pain to put a pet under anesthesia for a purely cosmetic procedure, where there is absolutely no benefit to the pet.

A large percentage of pet owners care more about their pet's appearance than their health/pain. Just last week, we had a pet in, a maltese, with a mass on her eyelid. It was a small mass, and had been there a while, and even though it was causing corneal ulcerations and would ultimately lead to blindess if not removed, the owner was not really concerned, because it didn't affect the pet's appearance. However, the eye began to drain fluid constantly, and this brought imperfection to the otherwise well-coiffed pet. So we did the mass removal...but the owner would not let us take care of abscessed teeth in her mouth, or even send pain meds home. I am glad that the majority of pet owners are not like this, but I wish that there was more emphasis on pet well being than their use as an accessory.

35
by on 03/29/2010 04:05pm

I always wonder why some vets decry cropping and docking while they promote.. nay.. INSIST on castration.

36
by on 03/29/2010 04:05pm

castration of pets is an "owners choice' too. It is a surgery of convenience only. Females who stay intact have less chance of incontinence later in life. Ask any pet owner why they had their female castrated ( or neutered as another term) most will say.. oh because I could not put up with all of that "mess".. and "blood".. or I don't want her to die of mammary cancer ( small risk..). The ask them if they would like their daughters to have the same surgery to avoid the "mess".. Females can be checked monthly for tumors just like people and if found they can be removed .. usually with no further problem.

37
by on 03/29/2010 04:08pm

Why does every dog need castrating? Ask any vet.. they will say Oh to avoid prostate cancer. ( see above). really?.. a VERY small group of dogs get prostate or testicular cancer and if they do.. then castration is the cure.. ask any man if they prefer to be castrated to "avoid" prostate cancer.. LOL.. not even a question..

38
by on 03/29/2010 04:09pm

If vets were honest they would tell their clients that keeping their pet dogs intact is the very best way for them to live longer and healthier lives and that castration is not necessary is every instance. .. nor is the "routine surgery that has not risks.. and that the benefits do NOT outweigh the risks...
and that there are studies that prove that routine castration of ALL pets is indeed not in their best interest..

39
by on 03/29/2010 04:12pm

many dogs if castrated to early in life develop much more serious cancers than these mentioned.. plus some dogs never develop the necessary bone growth leading to serious injuries.
Most people listen to their vet.. and castrate their pets at an early age.. let's face it.. this procedure is MAJOR surgery on females and just plain surgery on males..
docking a tail takes place when pups are only hours old.. no need for a vet.. although some choose to use one..ear cropping is just a choice.. exactly like castration...

40
by on 03/29/2010 04:13pm

PS.. what 'behavioral benefits?? surely you do not believe the old saw that dogs will "roam" when a female is in season.. LOL.. it is called a FENCE .. or a leash..

41
by on 03/29/2010 04:17pm

why do people think that removing a dogs "private parts off will keep it from bolting out the door? Dogs do not run on their "private parts".

42
by on 03/29/2010 04:18pm

sorry for the multiple posts.. I was "flagged" for inappropriate wording..when I finally go the "private parts.. and used the "t" word I was flagged.. funny thing for a vet list..

43
by on 03/29/2010 04:20pm

should read "private parts".. the "off" referred to the "t' owrd

44
by on 03/29/2010 04:20pm

Oh yes, I forgot. Everyone has a fence...no pet owners live in apartments or condos. And leashes never ever fail. That must be why I see at least one dog per week that has been hit by a car.

You can call what you like an "old saw" that intact males will seek a female in heat. They do, and they can smell her from miles. And you can also believe, if you want, that females in heat, as well as males seeking them, have not jumped fences to mate. I know for a fact that they do. However, neither of these things are the issues, as I did not bring them up. I spoke of the behavior benefits of spaying and neutering, and what procedures I deem worthy of anesthesia risks.

As a side note, the risks of mammary cancer are not small, and castrating does not cure prostate cancer...as once it has gone into the prostate, there is no cure.

45
It's interesting to read this conversation on the spay/neuter th
by on 03/29/2010 04:28pm

...because I've written about this for tomorrow's post.

Now, I haven't addressed all the specific issues Rosebud cites, but let it suffice to say that the question of elective vs, non-elective procedures in canine reproductive medicine is highly complex and almost never one-size-fits-all.

In other words, there are times when the procedure is elective and times when it's not and that'll vary according to the individual, breed, etc. Except in shelter settings where it's understandable that the state might choose to limit reproductive freedoms for companion animals as a matter of course, a spay or a neuter deserves a detailed discussion with an owner. It is certainly not a mandatory foregone conclusion that a dog needs sterilization and nothing I've written in this post on ear procedures should be misconstrued to support that contention.

The only caveat I'll add is this: I can't see any way around sterilization for cats. I just don't see how we can keep cats indoors or out without a spay or neuter––for their benefit. In these cases I could never consider the procedure elective.

46
by on 03/29/2010 05:15pm

Your anti-purebred bias is showing again, Dr. K.

Certainly all of the GSD breeders with whom I am acquainted are very concerned about hip conformation.

47
by on 03/29/2010 06:19pm

Prostate Cancer
Much of the spay/neuter information available to the public asserts that neutering will reduce or eliminate the risk that male dogs develop prostate cancer. This would not be an unreasonable assumption, given that prostate cancer in humans is linked to testosterone. But the evidence in dogs does not support this claim. In fact, the strongest evidence suggests just the opposite.
There have been several conflicting epidemiological studies over the years that found either an increased risk or a decreased risk of prostate cancer in neutered dogs. These studies did not utilize control populations, rendering these results at best difficult to interpret. This may partially explain the conflicting results.
More recently, two retrospective studies were conducted that did utilize control populations. One of these studies involved a dog population in Europe5 and the other involved a dog population in America6. Both studies found that neutered male dogs have a four times higher risk of prostate cancer than intact dogs.

48
by on 03/29/2010 06:24pm

I wish I had written this excellent post above.. but I did not.. please refer to

http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

an excellent article.. and well annotated by Laura Sanborn. There are many pros and cons to castration of pet dogs there

49
TO CROP OR NOT
by on 03/29/2010 06:28pm

I love my dogs for who they are. No, they're not thorougbreds, but rather, humble mixtures of love and compassion with button ears. You know what I love most about their unprofessional ears? How unbelievably soft they are as I absent-mindedly rub them back and forth between my thumb and first two fingers. Not that cropping has anything to do with the above, but why do we have this pre-ordained, irrational need to cut or maim our charges body parts? Does it truly make them look better, 'cause I like my boys' ears just they way they are.

50
Roaming Dogs
by on 03/29/2010 06:33pm

I have had several neutered dogs who remained interested in and would even try to mate with females in heat. So saying neutering a dog will cure all urges to roam is not true.

51
by on 03/29/2010 06:43pm

Lemon:Hmmm do a leash breaking have something to do with castration? Or a fence? Dogs without "t"s get hit by cars just as often as those who have their "t's?.. probably more as the AVMA suggests that over 75% of pet dogs are castrated. and are all dog who are hit by cars male? aren't some castrated females? Gosh I would bet that some even have floppy ears.. and some have cropped ears.
You are correct about the prostate however as cited above neutered dogs are at risk as well as intact dogs. Mammary cancer can be handled with a monthly exam.. just like humans. Some tumors will be malignant.. some will not
as for dogs seeking out "mates" for MILES AND MILES'' yes maybe if they are not contained.. most owned pets ARE contained in some fashion.. so I am not sure of what behavior benefits you are speaking of.


Patty:
If the issue of castration is so complex why do vets send out post cards when the clients dog reaches 6 months with
"Time to neuter your dog" or "Time to spay your dog" These are pre printed postcards. not individual ones..

and YES a HUGE YES to castration of "shelter pets" as long as they are not "owned" and being picked up by their owners..some shelters will not release an owners animal to the RIGHTFUL owner without it being castrated ( at the owners expense).. I do not understand this type of "punishment". Shelters should be there to HELP people recover their lost animals not punish them for losing them..
and YES I am all the way with you on cats.. TRN for "community cats".

Meanwhile.. I believe that any medical procedure elective ( like castration , cropping, docking and BARK SOFTENING ( not DEBARKING) and DECLAWING) should be left to owner and vet.. if the vet does not want to perform whatever it is the client wants.. then they should seek another vet.. that is what I would do...laws against pet owners are never a success...

52
by on 03/29/2010 06:46pm

the owner was not really concerned, because it didn't affect the pet's appearance. However, the eye began to drain fluid constantly, and this brought imperfection to the otherwise well-coiffed pet. So we did the mass removal...but the owner would not let us take care of abscessed teeth in her mouth, or even send pain meds home.
say Lemon.. ever think the owner might not be able to Afford the extra things you mentioned?

53
Ears
by on 03/29/2010 06:54pm

I have a beautiful 14 month old Dobe. He is docked and cropped, like the 5 I've shared my home with before him. If you don't like it, I'd like to say sorry but I'm not. I have an EXCELLANT vet and I was attentive and responsible when it came to his post surgery care. He has full control over whether his ears stand or not, and they are as much a part of his personality expressions as his big dober-grin and eyebrows which widen when you say the "P" word. He healed quickly and has no emotional or physical side effects. As a matter of fact, I clean his ears regularly without incident. Further, if you scratch and rub them, you will have a pal for life. As a responsible dog owner, I took this procedure very seriously. And that is why it was a success. As much as I respect your opinion, please respect my decision and keep it to yourself.

54
Behavioral aspects of spay/neuter
by on 03/29/2010 07:01pm

I think all many of us are trying to say, lemon, is that you have your opinion regarding the importance of spay/neuter...and in your "professional" opinion, it is important to you. And that's fine...and when you open a practice, you will, of course, recommend that your clients spay and neuter. And that's fine as well. But I, as an owner, also should have the ability to NOT spay or neuter my pet, based on my lifestyle, my ability to manage my animals, and what I deem is important to my pet's well-being. I simply believe that there are benefits and risks, and that we all are entitled to be advised of those benefits and risks, honestly, and to make an informed decision. Since this is Dr. Khuly's topic for tomorrow, I will have some of the research ready to share. And understand, I do agree that high volume VOLUNTARY spay and neuter, is an important tool. But it isn't the only tool, and it must be presented in an honest light. And for many owners, it is the right decision...but it must be a decision between owner and veterinarian, and not a mandated one. And with risks the owner has the right to understand. And I do agree with Dr. Khuly that managing cats is much more difficult as queens cycle differently, and have different health concerns. For the vast majority of the pet owning public, a spayed or neutered cat is the wisest and healthiest choice. Which probably explains the APPA survey result of 93% of Americans which admit to "owning" a cat, have them spayed or neutered. But if NO ONE is breeding them, where will the next pets come from?
But I look forward to tomorrow's discussion!

55
by on 03/29/2010 07:41pm

I don't think I said anywhere that "every" pet should be spayed or neutered. This is certainly not the case. And the only reason I mentioned these procedures in the first place was because someone stated that spaying and neutering was solely due to convenience and laziness on the owner's part. I only talked about what I feel are the benefits of these surgeries because the benefits are the reasons that I feel spaying/neutering is worth the risks of anesthesia. It is just my opinion that spaying/neutering is right for the majority of companion animals. Others may not feel that the benefits validate those procedures, and that is their right.

Alice,
my main points about spaying and neutering were not about behavior. They were about what I felt were the health benefits. Of course I am not saying that neutering/spaying pets keeps them from getting hit by cars. I only brought that up because I feel that leashes and fences do fail at times. I've seen it happen. And as far as the owner who "may not have been able to afford" the "extra" stuff, she could. The dog wears a coach collar, travels in a gucci carrier, and the owner makes it well known how much money she has. I am not someone that begrudges someone when they do not have the money to treat their pets. I am a struggling student who put herself through college, and I grew up in a very poor country town. I know what it is like to not be able to do more for your pets, and I would NEVER think less of someone because of it.

In closing, as I stated earlier, yes, everyone does have the right to choose whether to spay/crop/dock/neuter their pets, as well as a multitude of other options. Never once did I say that spaying/neutering should be mandated. I simply think that there are only certain types of pain/risk that I would put my own pets through. This discussion is supposed to be about opinions, so I don't think it's right to say that others should "keep it to yourself".

56
Nip, snip and clip
by on 03/29/2010 08:29pm

Ear cropping has nothing to do with rights, it has everything to do with unnecessary mutilations of the dogs.
"Medical decisions should be based on science, not ideology."

What is the science behind cropping ears again?

57
Nip, Snip and Clip
by on 03/30/2010 12:22am

Elizabeth, ear cropping has EVERYTHING to do with rights. My right to make medical decisions for my pet based upon the dynamics unique to my situation, experience and background. And tons of medical decisions ARE based in ideology, or belief systems, or for that matter, vanity. That does not and should not, make them illegal. And who is going to define "unnecessary mutilation" (which is a rather strong reference) and what definition will they create and under what circumstances, if any, would that mutilation be allowed? Again, I will ask, why do we not rail against circumcision or the piercing of baby's ears? We have no problem with human cosmetic surgery, (or worse yet, tattooing) even when it takes place on minors, with their parent's blessing. And when you come right down to it, spaying and neutering in today's political and legislative environment, IS an ideological point, not a medically necessary one.
To lemon, thank you for your clarifications. I'm relieved to hear you say that you understand financial or other limitations that owners may face, and that the procedures we are discussing "should" remain optional. It IS about discussion regarding opinions, and I apologize if I took your comments to be more than they were. I can certainly understand your viewpoint, and respect it...as long as I am given the same latitude and respect. I'm looking forward to tomorrow's spay/neuter discussion.

58
Nip, Snip and Clip
by on 03/30/2010 07:13am

RoseBud,
I do speak out against circumcision or the piercing of baby's ears as unnecessary mutilations.. The only time I think that circumcision shgould be done is when medically necessary. Babies ears should not be pierced.. no medical reason for it.
I didn't say the medical decision's weren't based on ideology I said the "shouldn't" be.

Ask most Britons how they feel when they see a doberman with cropped ears.. Many now feel horrified and wonder how someone could do that to a dogs ears.

I for one am very happy our province's veterinary Association has finally banned the practice along with a few others. Our vets made their own minds up when they voted on this. Why should any vet have to do procedures that they feel are not medially necessary...

59
Lemon
by on 03/30/2010 08:14am

I never said that spaying and neutering was based on laziness. I said it was based on convenience. To me those are two very different things and I apologize if anyone else felt this was what I meant.

60
ELizabeth
by on 03/30/2010 08:21am

And I feel dogs such as Danes and Boxers and Dobes do not possess the same presence without cropped ears. Erect ears do add to a dogs intimidating presence and some people still want dogs for this reason, as much as you may not like it. A Dobe without a crop may as well be a Black and Tan Coonhound.

61
Complexity of spays and neuters
by on 03/30/2010 08:28am

Alice: I do not deny that my profession is still laboring under the assumption that dog owners should always spay and neuter for reasons of public policy (i.e., pet overpopulation). Moreover, I believe most veterinarians are still underinformed on this issue and are not yet aware of the emerging body of research on the health benefits conferred by an intact designation.

In other words, most vets still stick to the paradigm that sees more overall benefits to sterilization than risks. These recommendations typically come from a good place (I strongly believe), however it's my contention that the balance has shifted sufficiently to make it mandatory to discuss pros and cons with owners. But the preponderance of my colleagues do not yet agree with me. Hence those postcards (which my hospital does NOT send out).

In California, where the issue of mandatory spay/neuter has awakened a lively discussion on the merits and pitfalls of spay and neuter, this conversation has become more interesting and pet owners (and vets) have become more informed. But this has only happened in the past few years. I myself have only recently come to see both sides of the issue more clearly. But then, much of this literature is very recent.

But it's also worth noting that there's still a very good public policy argument in favor of sterilization. Indeed, in places where pet relinquishment rates are high and the effects of overpopulation shockingly palpable (think shelters) it's hard to argue against spaying and neutering all those pets.

62
by on 03/30/2010 08:58am

How about the AKC gives the OPTION for dogs to be showed without crops and docks, even in breeds that are traditionally cropped or docked? Basically saying that a breed standard cannot dictate that owners MUST have these surgeries performed on the pups. The public perception of these breeds is that this is how they "should" be, even though it's not how they were born. The hardest part of this policy shift is that judges would need to really, truly judge the dogs on their quality (something I feel is lacking in a lot of breeds anyway, with standards that encourage low-quality dogs with many health problems) and ignore the presence of natural ears and tails.
Public perception of a breed is based on the dogs they see at shows, on TV, etc. If there were more dogs out there competing and winning without going through surgeries, it may not completely remove the demand for them, but I believe it would drastically reduce it.
Myself? I love tails and big, floppy ears. I would never perform the surgeries myself. The ONLY thing served by the surgeries is the owner's sense of aesthetics and vanity. Say what you will about spays and neuters and how they are for owner convenience and are more dangerous, but they serve a wider purpose than just vanity.

63
Spay Neuter for poplulation control
by on 03/30/2010 09:53am

That's the #1 reason to do it. Now if we can give a dog birth control pills or in some way sterilize the animal, fine. The reason most groups advocate for the sterilization of the animal is to prevent more puppies from being made. We have plenty now, no shortage of animals at the shelters.

I have a friend with an intact dog. She had a dog die from a routine neuter and won't have it done period. However, she also keeps the dog in the house and away from in heat females. If society was perfect and all owners were like my friend, this wouldn't be an issue. Unfortunately, we don't put seatbelts in cars and jails in communities because everyone always does the right thing. Our society is geared more towards preventing the unfortunate and preparing for the worst. That's why we spay and neuter.

Oh, and absolutely agree with Doc for cats. Intact cats are not very good pets in my experience.

64
by on 03/30/2010 01:03pm

Dogs cats and other species owned by "shelters" are their property. They certainly can say what should be done with their own property.. in fact not only do they castrate pets before sale ( their choice) they also choose to KILL them.. something most owned pets do not run up against. Pet limits, lack of space and other non issues keep pets from finding good homes when they are relinquished to shelters. and these factors will continue to kill pets as long as NO KILL is not in place in every shelter in America..

65
by on 03/30/2010 01:10pm

Elizabeth:.. I would guess you are not Jewish.. ..

Wikith: The AKC only requires that your dog be registered with the AKC in able to be able to show it.. the breed standards are set by the breed clubs... if you want to show you dobie with a long tail and floppy ears.. and your dog is duly registered with the AKC.. nothing is stopping you.. Go for it..
By the way mixed breed dogs will be eligible to compete in any classes offered by the AKC except conformation.. so get out there with your "mixed breed" and show up those border collies in Rally and Obedience.. LOL

66
by on 03/30/2010 01:14pm

Of COURSE most of the 'amateur tape jobs' that come into a vet's office for treatment are botch jobs. Because properly taping ears doesn't result in infections/injury, therefore those dogs DON'T END UP in a vet's office.




67
Nip, Snip and clip
by on 03/30/2010 02:28pm

donnadw:
So you think they need erect ears to have an intimidating presence?
I am glad the Rottweiler doesn't have cropped ears...


btlover :
I realize the important of circumcision in the Jewish faith. I however do not make my medical or veterinary decisions based on faith I make them based on medical science.

68
by on 03/30/2010 02:38pm

btlover: I looked into the AKC's Canine Partner's program http://www.akc.org/mixedbreeds/listing_benefits.cfm as a sign that the AKC must be hurting for money. First, they allowed the mutts in and this year they are letting them into the same competitions right beside their purebred counterparts. Amazing how the program opened up just as we're in the middle of the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression. It is 10 bucks off if you register before APR 1 so now it's only 25 bucks a year. For that you get a mazazine subscription, a dog registry, and a few stickers and such; oh, and you get to participate in AKC events, I would guess for an additional fee.

I still don't see it being successful. Many dog groups like TDI and other local dog clubs have let mutts in for years. The AKC struck me as always being reserved for the person that was concerned about the breed itself, kind of a bragging rights sort of thing. I know one thing. If I paid hundreds, perhaps thousands of dollars for my dog I sure wouldn't want that dog to take the field with some junk yard mutt. I wonder how this effort is being sold to the AKC rank and file. My suspicion is it's money, pure and simple.

Sorry for the highjack...back to the subject at hand...

69
Whoa!
by on 03/30/2010 08:34pm

I think ear cropping (along with tail docking) is a senseless, unnecessary procedure, for most of the same reasons that have already been listed. I don't think you went too far in your reply. Yes, perhaps you could have been less forward, but they asked for your opinion and you gave it. Bravo!
And I hate to be one of those people, but I have to do this...
btlover: I urge you to do some volunteer work in a shelter and then give your opinion on why they should all be no kill. That is simply not an option in some areas. I work in a shelter, and have seen it all. Yes, no kill shelters are nice, and of course we all would love to be one. But the reality is that in most cases it's not possible. No kill shelters are able to be no kill because they are selective on who "gets in" not because they care more. Last year we had so many cats up for adoption that we had makeshift cages set up all over our building to house them. We also had 350 cats in foster homes waiting to be adopted. More came through our doors every day. We cannot turn animals away because we are the only shelter in our county, and if we turn them away, people turn them out. Do a little research before stating an incorrect fact please, and do not think that lack of space is a non-issue.
Now back to your regularly scheduled conversation.

70
by on 03/31/2010 02:33am

OH please.. why is it that some people think those who comment on No kill have never worked in a shelter.. and "urge them' to do so..all shelters should be no kill .. every single one.. pet limits should be reversed or eliminated in all areas.. and people should be "urged" to have more than one pet. It is ALWAYS an option.. just not one that people who are so used to killing see as not viable..if we want o save more pets.. what do you suggest?? I know already.. breed LESS animals.. make MANDATORY castration the "law of the land".. since you have "urged" btlover to "work in a shelter" I will "urge" you to read Nathan Winograds book Redemption.. Not all shelters would "love" to be no kill.. they could if they really wanted to.. it takes a complete paradigm shift in your way of thinking.. from KILL to NO Kill.. and
as far as "crop and dock".. it is the OWNERS decision.. not anyone else..
and
I do hope to see Wikith dogs in the show ting.. long tails and floppy ears.. if that is what she /he wants.. the AKC does NOT say you cannot exhibit your dog as long as they are registered.. and why is it that when the AKC makes a change for the better .. it is taken as "they need the money" instead of "GREAT.. another way for lovers of dogs to get together"..it is not about how much you paid for your dog.. it is about what you think your dog is worth.. let's try to see some POSITIVE comments.. the negative stuff just drags us all down..
Choice.. it is the American way..

71
by on 03/31/2010 02:46am

Your comment in your article about the "gene police" was I am sure something that you think is far fetched.. it is NOT.. in some places.. it is afoot to restrict many things that will actually BAN ( boy do I hate that word) you from breeding to the dog of your choice.. if you are a pure bred dog breeder.. however mutts will be able to continue to breed to whatever they can find on the streets.. get taken to shelters.. be "adopted " ( read sold) to the highest bidder.. and be claimed to be "healthier" that any purebred dog..this is just not so.. but public perception sways tells us ( not me) to think that if we 'adopt" a "rescue" dog we will somehow get a healthier animal.. who just maybe has a few "issues".. but heck who can blame the dog.. it was obviously "abused' before it was 'adopted".. just take a quick survey.. ask people who have a shy dog that they got from the shelter.. story will be "he/she was abused".. he/s he came from a "puppy mill".. he /she "doesn't like men/women because he/she was 'abused'
The purebred dog is discounted as "a genetic problem" even though the parents were both health tested ( something you won't find at a shelter) and people want to BAN the genetic pool..

72
by on 03/31/2010 02:49am

Vet Tech:
There are many "Open admission" shelters that are No Kill..

73
by on 03/31/2010 01:34pm

Alice - you can put all your comments into a single reply instead of replying three times every time you respond to something.

As for the AKC, I know it's the breed clubs that set the breed standard, I guess I was having trouble defining my thoughts; I'd like to see the AKC make a stand and say no breed club can mandate cropping or docking by requiring it in order to be a serious competitor. After all, if it's a medical decision between and owner and a vet and the government has no business telling people they can't, how much more intrusive is it for a breed club to tell people they MUST in order to be considered?

74
by on 03/31/2010 06:42pm

Oh my...

A couple of observations. First to EAB on the mixed-breed initiative of the AKC. The AKC DID begin as a pure-bred registry, and you are correct in assuming that some of those in AKC are not happy with the addition of the mixed-breed. However, you would be quite wrong in assuming ALL were. I have been a proponent of allowing mixed-breeds, and indeed alters, into competition for some time, and am thrilled to have lived to see it actually happen.

I have lived with pure-bred, pure-bred rescues, mixed-breeds, and rescued mixed breed dogs, throughout my life. Each brings their own beauty, and indeed, their own challenges, to one's life. I don't see one as being better than any other, but all as being a color in the palette. I show, I perform, and I rescue. I think all are important, and all are intertwined.

Perhaps it does benefit the AKC financially to admit mixed-breeds, but it also benefits mixed breed owners in becoming part of an organization which has had at it's center for over 120 years, the dog and responsible dog ownership. In addition, in today's legislative climate, it's critical that the pet-owning public have an advocate. This legislation, while purporting to ONLY affect breeders, does, in fact, affect pet owners and rescue organizations as well. We have a situation here where a gentleman may not be able to keep a purebred puppy he just purchased, because the intact permit is approved at the discretion of the Animal Services Director, and even though he is a member of the local club, he does NOT have membership in the National parent club. Therefore, he can be denied the ability to own this puppy since it is intact, even though he owns only one other adult. If his application is denied, the puppy will have fifteen days to placed or the city will seize it. Ridiculous. So, I welcome the mixed-breed initiative as an opportunity to educate owners about the reality that will soon engulf them.

As for the "no-kill" topic. There is a proper definition for "no-kill" and it REQUIRES several MANDATED supports to be in place in the community. IF those do NOT exist...you cannot consider the shelter to be "no-kill". By just accepting animals, either open admission, or selectively, and saying you're not going to kill them, does not make you "no-kill". It makes you a warehousing failure. For the definition of true "no-kill" http://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org/nokillequation.html

As you can see, "no-kill" is not an easy solution, but is an attainable, achievable one, IF the community is allowed, even welcomed and invited, to be involved and be a part of solution. However, many shelters will not or cannot, implement all the tools necessary to achieve true "no-kill" status, and in fact, in many cases, actively resist implementing "no-kill".

75
Ear! Ear!
by on 04/01/2010 10:07am

I'm pretty sick and tired of people blaming the ills of every canine on the AKC. To begin with, it displays complete ignorance on the part of the complainers as to how the AKC functions and what it can/cannot do. It has no authority to set or change any breed standards, period.

Also, while everyone is so quick to attack AKC, nobody ever bothers to mention their Canine Health Foundation or the research they sponsor which benefits ALL dogs, not just purebreds.

Further, many individual breed clubs have their own Health Committees which contribute funding towards researching the causes and cures for issues found within their breeds.

To make sweeping statements that all breeders of purebred dogs are only interested in the cosmetic appearance of their animals while they deliberately ignore serious health issues and that AKC is complicit in this behavior is both ignorant and slanderous.

I hope you at least have the ethical honesty to inform your clients who own purebred dogs that you consider them to be the dregs of the earth so you don't have to be tainted by accepting their money in return for your services.

76
seriously??
by on 04/01/2010 11:10am

I read the majority of these comments and must say I was pretty shocked that some people actually compared the unnecessary cosmetic procedures of ear cropping and tail docking to the medically sound recommendation of spaying/neutering.

Really alice in la la land, do you know anything about pyometra, mammary neoplasia, prostatitis, testicular neoplasia, to name just a few of the conditions that 90% of the time occur when animals are left intact?

I work in a very progressive (eco-friendly too I may add) small animal practice where we strongly recommend neutering and spaying your animals. We do not force people, nor insist, simply present our clients with all the facts. And honestly, would you prefer a doberman with perfectly shaped ears that drips blood throughout your house, and has mammary tumors, or a floppy eared healthy companion that will be around for years to come?

I had to 'go off' a bit on this subject...way to go Dr. K for sticking to your guns. Truly dedicated animal lovers and veterinary professionals should be on the same side in this debate I believe!

77
by on 04/01/2010 01:44pm

LOL.. you must be playing an April Fools joke.. 90% of intact animals have pyo, tumors, testicular neoplasia etc?? LOLOLOLOL.. funny thing.. some of those dogs ( actually some who live in my home)actually LIVE.. without any of these things to a ripe old age...
If your clinic is quoting these stats.. you are giving out false information.. and you should stop.. fear mongering to induce people to have major surgery on their pets.. is wrong..

Could you please give me some actual facts.. and published medical studies to back up your 90% statement..

I have seen plenty of Dobermans.. and other breeds who have cropped ears.. NONE of them "drip blood ".. and you cannot certainly tie cropping of ears to mammary tumors can you?

As for being around "for years to come'.. please.. dogs die..it has NOTHING to do with their ears.. uncropped .. and castrated dogs also die.. some early.. some late..
Can you show me a study that proves that animals with docked tails and cropped ears have a shorter life span.. and also please that study that shows that castrated animals live longer lives than intact ones?

Thanks Rosebud and Eden Springs for mentioning the AKC and their tremendous support for canine health of ALL dogs.. Heck the AKC even offers scholarships for VETS..imagine that..

78
by on 04/01/2010 06:08pm

I apologize to the other followers, but I am going to have to get a bit personal on this one...

Alice,
I will gladly quote the research that has statistically shown those percentages (see below) I stated. As for the fear mongering, please don't insult myself or my practice! We are simply informing our clients of the (highly supported) risks to keeping their pets intact, we by no means require them to do these surgeries, they are elective after all.

I agree with Dr. Khuly, some pets do not necessitate sterilization, but a majority of the companion pet population does. Should the OVH/castration be performed by a competent surgeon, be on IVF and have consistent anesthesia monitoring as well as maintainence of a smooth plane of analgesia/anesthesia, pre-operative bloodwork is done to rule out any prospective complications; this 'major' surgery is a very manageable and refined procedure.

As for the "dripping blood", I was referring to the animals having their estrous cycles and vulvar discharge throughout the owner's home due to their intact status. Obviously the ears don't drip blood, and any educated person would have deduced that mammary tumors are of course unrelated to those procedures, I was simply tying my comments together succinctly instead of a drawn out soap-box rant. (whoops, doing one now!)

Obviously all living creatures die, altered cosmetically or otherwise, your request that I "prove" that docked/cropped animals have shorter lives is ludicrous, I never insinuated that, please read things more carefully before you comment in the future.

Our server to VIN/VSPN is down at the moment, but here are some validated sites to give you the statistics that you are requesting.

http://www.sspca.org/NeuterMyths.html
http://www.lgd.org/library/neuter.htm
http://oregonvma.org/care-health/spay-or-neuter-your-pet

"Neutering decreases roaming by 90%." http://www.sniksnak.com/benefits.html

-While experts debate the timing of spay/neuter surgery, they generally agree that the benefits outweigh the risks. “The disadvantages, although real, are not stark,” Hamil says. “It’s not like if you neuter them they’re going to get [bone cancer]. You would have a very slight increase in incidence, and it’s going to be breed-related ... [Whatever the increase is] that’s not a very big reason not to spay or neuter your dog. ”http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24597888/

If you would like your opinions to be respected, then please show that same courtesy to those of us who choose to disagree with you.

Thank you.

79
Cropping and fixing
by on 04/01/2010 07:49pm

Any dog that is not beautiful enough unless they have their ears cropped belongs with a different owner.

And as for spaying and neutering, I'm less concerned about the health issues and far more concerned about the overpopulation issue.
Fix your dogs and cats until every shelter and every rescue organization has closed its doors.

80
seriously
by on 04/01/2010 07:51pm

alice in lala land:
You really need to read people comments more carefully. You are misinterpeting a lot of things that VetTech26 actually said.

81
by on 04/01/2010 11:11pm

hmm let's see .. here is your sentence..

"And honestly, would you prefer a doberman with perfectly shaped ears that drips blood throughout your house and has mammary tumors " "or a floppy eared healthy companion that will be around for years to come?"

so what is a person to think.. what does the perfectly shaped ear have to do with dripping blood? this is (was) a discussion on cropping and docking.. how does a "floppy eared dogs" become a "healthy dog".. you are the one who has made the ear connection to the intact status..

and in fact females in season do not 'drip blood throughout the house" here.. they are contained.. this aversion to a natural process like an estrus cycle is disturbing.. but it does bring up the point the castration of females is very MUCH an issue of owners convenience.. even a vet tech makes a female having a perfectly natural occurrence into something that sounds down right disgusting..and oh my not dripping BLOOD.. how horrible..what do you think of menses in the human female? Dogs is season can be easily managed and have been for YEARS.. that said I do believe that most pets should be castrated..but it should remain the owners choice.. and that owner should be given ALL of the facts about the surgery..and its benefits and risks

i am not sure how a site like "sniksnak" measures a 90% decrease in roaming.. are you?/ I would love to see that study..
if your 90% figure were accurate then almost all intact animals would die due to something related to being intact.. and that just is not so..
meanwhile.. I am not against castration of most pets... and I think that ALL shelter owned animals should be castrated before being sold.
Castration surgery on females IS major surgery especially when compared to docking a tail or cropping an ear. it involves opening a major cavity in the dogs body and removing healthy organs. not diseased organs in most cases.. but healthy ones..same for males only not quite as major..

82
by on 04/05/2010 11:03pm

We have a new puppy. She is a Chiweenie. I am wondering, and can't seem to find an answer, when her ears will stand up as she is totally taking after the chihuahua. I actually hope they stay down as she is so cute! I have always had boxers and never had their ears cropped and loved the cuteness of them.
I have heard of taping them? What is that? Thanks for any comments about ears.

83
docking and Cropping
by on 05/09/2010 10:03pm



THERE IS ALWAYS TWO SIDES TO EVERY STORY !!

The Canadian Veterinarian Medical Association has issued a ban in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and PEI. soon to be in Quebec and Ontario. The ban consists of Docking, Cropping and Dew-claw removal, Deeming them only as cruel and cosmetic. CAT DECLAWING IS STILL ALLOWED.



Keep in mind that this is only legislated through Individual Provincial Veterinarian Medical Associations, and is not a Provincial Law.



What it does mean? It means that, it is not illegal to perform docking, cropping, or dew-claw removal, but it is illegal to have a licensed vet, perform these procedures. If a veterinarian was to choose to continue these practices, they have the threat of having their licence revoked.

Considering the CMVA is a business just like any other large corporations, money is always a key player in many decisions, being the year of recession and all. Many companies are looking at the future development of their companies.(What's going to make them money in the future?, How can we drum up business as well as Make BSL AND PETA GO AWAY).

Here is an example of increasing their cash flow:

#1 It cost only Tens of dollars to dock and remove Dew claws, but it cost hundreds of dollars to repair the damaged done by a snagged dew claw, or a broken tail. CAT DECLAWING IS STILL ALLOWED.

I would also like to state that the VMA’s know that trouble will arise from undocked canines. That is why they have made a special clause stating that tail amputation may be preformed if needed for medical treatment, such as an injury. This is straight from one of their information pamphlet. So as you see this has already been for seen through the veterinarian associations.

#2 It costs hundreds of dollars to crop a canines ears with only one visit hardly ever to have trouble with ears again, but the most common ailment in dogs is ear infection, coming in at nearly 68,000 claims and an average cost of $100 per visit according to DVM NEWSMAGAZINE Feb 11, 2010

So as you see the CMVA will increase its revenue and at the same time will make all the animal activist go away.

How is it possible that CMVA is able to prevent veterinarians from continuing these procedures?

#1 As with all business there is always a head Office, this office consists of broad members that are to represent the interests of the majority of it’s members. This means that the little guys, the people that actually perform these procedures do not get to vote.



#2 They apparently consulted the general public prior to making their decision to ban the procedures. They printed out pamphlets and printouts on how cropping and docking and dewclaw removal are only cruel and cosmetic. I believe that the opinions/information is biased and not the total truth.



Below I will post the Information that the Veterinarian association has used to base their ruling. I will then try to prove that procedures are not just cosmetic but of great importance in both health and function in various breeds. I have also set up a couple of polls in which you can vote as an individual and not a conglomeration.

Please take time to read before you vote,. I in turn hope to use these votes in aid of preventing the ban from taking place in Ontario, and possibly help aid lifting the bans that are already in place in other Provinces.

Below in red is a copied question and answer that the NSVMA is using to basis their decision for the ban. The parts in purple , my rebuttal to their answers.



Nova Scotia Veterinary Medical Association



Cosmetic Surgery Questions and Answers



1Q: Why has the NSVMA made it unprofessional conduct for vets to do cosmetic surgery?



1A: Cosmetic surgery is considered unnecessary. It provides no medical or health benefits for the animal. This it not a true statement there is proof that these surgeries are truly beneficial to many canine breeds. Here is a posting from K9 Alliance, a group totally dedicated to fighting the growing misconception among the general public and veterinarians about the practice of docking, cropping and dew claw removal.

http://k9alliance.com/resources/K9Alliance_Broch_colour.pdf take special notice to page 2



Cosmetic. procedures may result in infection, chronic pain (tails) This I can speak from experience, as I have raised both dropped and cropped Dobermans. I have never experienced any infections or chronic pain. Maybe the reason I have never experienced these terrible infections or chronic pain was because these procedures where always done by a licence veterinarian with in a safe and clinically sound operating room (clinic) . I doubt that any veterinarian performing these procedures has experienced this as a result of their own doing.

I could however see problems arising from a person that was not a licence vet, performing procedures outside a safe and clinically sound operating room (basement). This is what I think started all this ear cropping is wrong and immoral.

The people performing these procedures themselves without the care and well being of the animal in mind. This is cruel and cosmetic. What I also find cruel is that when the evidence has been presented before you and it has proven these surgeries are more than cosmetic, that they apart of so much more like health, function and preservation of our BREEDS history.



and affect behaviour (puppies with ear cropping.) Once again I will speak on my own behalf. I have noticed a difference in puppies that have been cropped, this difference has only been for the better and I have had no bad side affects from cropped ears.



Cosmetic. surgery procedures are normally performed to meet breed standards or because of tradition. The origins for most of these traditions are either unclear, or unknown. Again check out the K9 Alliance brochure. http://k9alliance.com/resources/K9Alliance_Broch_colour.pdf take special notice to page 1.



The breed standards that dictate the necessity of many of these procedures are Canadian and American standards. These standards have been changed in many other countries

where cosmetic surgery is not allowed. It is true that other countries have change their Breed Standards. What you don’t hear about is the result of these bans.

Research from post ban countries have indicated dramatic decreases in births of pups of previously docked and/or cropped breeds.

An Australian study of number of births of docked breeds pre ban and post ban shows a significant decrease in births from 16 normally docked breeds. As of May 2007, the average decrease over the 16 breeds was 42%. The drop in Doberman pinscher births alone was 82%.



Many of these cropped and/or docked breeds are at the risk of extinction

list of the breeds that could become extinct should the ban continue around the globe.



* American Staffordshire Terrier *Affenpincher *Airedale Terrier *American Cocker Spaniel

*Australian Shepherd *Australian Silky *Australian Terrier *Bouvier des Flandres *Boxer

*Boston Terrier *Bracco Italiano *Briard *Brittany *Brussels Griffon *Cane Corsa *Clumber Spaniel *Cocker Spaniel *Doberman Pinscher *English Springer Spaniel *Fell Terrier *Field Spaniel *German short-haired pointer *German wire-haired pointer *Giant Schnauzer *Glen of Imaal Terrier *Great Dane *Griffon Bruxellois *Hungarian vizsla *Irish Terrier *Italian Spinone *Jack Russell Terrier *Kerry Blue Terrier *King Charles Spaniel *Lakeland Terrier *Large Munsterlander *Lucas Terrier *Manchester Terrier *Miniature Pinscher *Miniature Poodle *Miniature Schnauzer *Neopolitan mastiff *Norfolk Terrier *Norwich Terrier *Old English Sheepdog *Parson Jack Russell Terrier *Patterdale Terrier *Pembroke Welsh Corgi *German Pinscher *Polish Lowland Sheepdog *Rottweiler Russian *Black Terrier *Schipperke *Schnauzer *Sealyham Terrier *Smooth Fox Terrier *Soft-coated Wheaten Terrier *Spanish Water Dog *Standard Poodle *Standard Schnauzer *Sussex Spaniel *Swedish vallhund *Toy Poodle *Weimaraner *Welsh Springer Spaniel *Welsh Terrier *Wire-haired Fox Terrier

*Yorkshire Terrier



Now that you have had time to read please participate in my poll. It could possibly save the lives of many future Canine companions.


84
Ear Croppping
by on 02/09/2011 12:02pm

I can see and understand both sides of the issue and why many veterinarians today do not perform the surgery, but there are still many practices being performed by veterinarians that can be seen as needless. Tail docking and dew claw removal are some to point out. Yet most breeders and dog owners perform the dew claw and tail docking when the dogs are born. I can understand that there may be surgeries that go wrong when performing these operations, but whenever anyone or anything goes under the knife, regardless of the reason, anything can go wrong. With today's modern medicine, the dogs are put under general anastesia and provided pain meds before and after the surgery, just like humans. So I don't see what the hype is to go against it. As a reasonable comparison, women today have breast implants. There's no need for it, but it helps some improve their figure or correct saggy breasts. Women have tummy tucks because their bellies are all wrinkled and in terrible shape after multiple births. Not due to their fault but because their skin is not good at contracting and healing after a birth. There's no need for the surgery, but having to look at themselves in the mirror naked and not being able to wear a two piece bathing suit can be detrimental to their self esteem. I don't criticize these women. Baby boys are circumsized at birth and many men have the surgery done in their teens and later on in life because of some pain issues while perfoming intercourse or simply for hygienic purposes. So I don't see what is wrong with this whole ear-cropping procedure. Sure the dog didn't ask for it. Neither did the baby being circumsized. The woman with small or saggy breasts didn't ask for the small or saggy breats. The woman with the disfigurement of her belly didn't ask for that either. Sure they can all live their lives with these issues, but what for when there are surgeries that can fix it and make them look even better? :)

LEAVE COMMENTS

Connect with Facebook or login to leave comments.


About fully vetted

Patty Khuly, VMD, MBA

Photo of Dr Khuly

Dr. Khuly is a former petMD blogger and small animal veterinarian in Miami, Florida, where she practices medicine at Sunset Animal Clinic and serves on the board of the South Florida Veterinary Medical Association. She is a graduate of Wellesley College, the University of Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine, and The Wharton School of Business.

As a significant sideline, she writes...a lot. She authors pet health columns for USA Today, The Miami Herald and Vetstreet. She also writes a popular monthly column for Veterinary Practice News and serves as regular contributor to Veterinary Economics, The Bark, and the Veterinary News Network.

Dr. Khuly lives in South Miami with her brood of hens, goats, dogs, cats...and humans.

Subscribe to Fully Vetted

Most Read Fully Vetted Articles

Check Your Pet Food Bags!
The recall of pet foods manufactured at a Diamond Pet Food plant in Gaston, S.C....
READ MORE
No Excuse for Skipping Rabies Vaccination
The Carlsbad, New Mexico area just suffered through one of the worst rabies outbreaks...
READ MORE
Any Dog Can Bite
May 20-26 is National Dog Bite Prevention Week. Being bitten is just one of the...
READ MORE
A New Link Between Pet and Human Health
A study appearing in the journal Emerging Infectious Diseases points to a new link...
READ MORE

Most Commented Articles

No Excuse for Skipping Rabies Vaccination
The Carlsbad, New Mexico area just suffered through one of the worst rabies outbreaks...
READ MORE
Does Horse Racing Deserve Your Support?
I breathed a big sigh of relief on the evening of Saturday, May 5. The 138th running...
READ MORE
Maggots: Thumbs Up or Down?
The weather is starting to heat up here in Colorado, which means that any day...
READ MORE
Palliative Care ≠ Murder
I talked yesterday about compassion fatigue, which often develops when caregivers...
READ MORE
 
MORE FROM PETMD.COM
©1999-2012 petMD, LLC. All Rights Reserved
x
Stay informed about your pet's health...and more!