Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Dogs, Cats & Other Pets
Ear cropping
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="CG1" data-source="post: 1642656" data-attributes="member: 38577"><p>If the Veterinary association decides that a practice is considered cruel and unnecessary than its safe to assume it is in fact cruel and unnecessary. </p><p></p><p>I hate to break it to you but a good dog owner and a good home would be defined by not being cruel. Ear cropping in terms of medical practice has been deemed cruel. They set those standards, not us. </p><p></p><p>https://www.canadianveterinarians.net/documents/cosmetic-alteration - quoted below </p><p></p><p>4. There is no scientific evidence that cosmetic surgeries provide any welfare or medical benefit to animals (8-10). There is evidence to suggest that some cosmetic procedures cause acute and chronic pain (9-12), as well as behavioural evidence that cosmetic alteration may be detrimental to canine behavior (10,13). In one study using a small dataset from Great Britain, it was found that there was a decrease in risk of tail injuries for docked dogs (0.03%) compared with non-docked dogs (0.23%). The very low incidence of tail injuries in all groups, however, shows that tail docking does not provide sufficient protection against injury to justify tail docking of all animals (according to this study, it would require 500 tail-dockings to prevent 1 injury) (9).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="CG1, post: 1642656, member: 38577"] If the Veterinary association decides that a practice is considered cruel and unnecessary than its safe to assume it is in fact cruel and unnecessary. I hate to break it to you but a good dog owner and a good home would be defined by not being cruel. Ear cropping in terms of medical practice has been deemed cruel. They set those standards, not us. https://www.canadianveterinarians.net/documents/cosmetic-alteration - quoted below 4. There is no scientific evidence that cosmetic surgeries provide any welfare or medical benefit to animals (8-10). There is evidence to suggest that some cosmetic procedures cause acute and chronic pain (9-12), as well as behavioural evidence that cosmetic alteration may be detrimental to canine behavior (10,13). In one study using a small dataset from Great Britain, it was found that there was a decrease in risk of tail injuries for docked dogs (0.03%) compared with non-docked dogs (0.23%). The very low incidence of tail injuries in all groups, however, shows that tail docking does not provide sufficient protection against injury to justify tail docking of all animals (according to this study, it would require 500 tail-dockings to prevent 1 injury) (9). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Non-Cattle Specific Topics
Dogs, Cats & Other Pets
Ear cropping
Top