PA cropping, docking, c-section (?) bill

Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
2,365
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
High Ridge, MO
#1
I'm a bit confused about the c-sections part, which is why I put a ? in the title. Either way, forwarded from the BSL Updates list:



The Sleazy Side Of New PA Animal Cruelty Legislation


Ear Cropping A Deliberate ‘Catch 22’

by JOHN YATES
American Sporting Dog Alliance
http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org



HARRISBURG, PA – Animal cruelty legislation sponsored by Rep. Thomas Caltagirone (D – Bucks County) attaches bans or partial bans on tail docking, caesarian sections and surgical “debarking†to an existing law about ear cropping. It also would empower dog wardens to enforce those provisions of the law in some places.

When viewed in context, there is nothing accidental about this combination. It is a thinly veiled, unprincipled and dishonest attempt to close down many Pennsylvania kennels and cite many law-abiding dog owners for purely technical “violations†of the animal cruelty law.

It is political sleaze, pure and simple.

Ears traditionally are cropped on dogs of several popular breeds, including boxers, great Danes, doberman pinschers, miniature pinschers, schnauzers, bouviers des Flandres, and American Staffordshire terriers.

The issue of ear cropping is inherently controversial, as is all elective cosmetic surgery on animals or humans.

However, we categorically oppose the way the law is written to create a series of “Catch 22†situations that would expose thousands of Pennsylvanians and visitors to our state to devastating animal cruelty charges even when they follow the law to the letter. Animal cruelty is a very serious criminal offense, and a conviction even for a purely technical violation results in a lifetime prohibition against holding a kennel license.

The way the law is written also is a de facto ban on adopting a dog with cropped ears from an animal shelter or rescue program, as veterinary proof usually cannot be obtained for dogs of unknown origin. Hundreds if not thousands of innocent dogs will face euthanasia if this law is enforced.

Thus, the American Sporting Dog Alliance is calling for the repeal of the section of the animal cruelty law dealing with ear cropping, and the scrapping of the Caltagirone amendments.

Our problem with both the law and the legislation is that anyone who owns or is in possession of a dog with cropped ears has only two ways to be protected against being charged with animal cruelty. He or she must either have a certificate from a veterinarian, or have an official certificate from a county treasurer affirming that the work was done prior to the law’s enactment. The ear cropping amendment was enacted in May, 2001, according to the Humane Society of Lebanon County website.

Thus, for any dog born after May, 2001, a veterinarian’s certificate is the only acceptable defense against animal cruelty.

For many people who own a dog with cropped ears, those requirements represent a “Catch 22†because they have no way to prove that they did not break the law. The burden of proof is on the dog’s owner, and not on the state, which is constitutionally required.

In many cases, a dog’s owner has no idea who cropped the animal’s ears. The fact that the dog’s owner did not do it or authorize someone else to do it is not a defense against animal cruelty in the law. The dog’s owner is required to prove what he or she cannot prove.

This provision will directly affect anyone who acquires an older dog with cropped ears, buys a puppy from an out-of-state kennel, or who obtained a puppy in the past and no longer is able to contact the breeder to provide proof.

This provision also will affect almost every dog with cropped ears that finds an owner through an animal shelter or rescue program, as few if any of these dogs will come with a veterinarian’s certificate or a county treasurer’s affidavit. In fact, the way the law is written makes it illegal for a shelter or rescue group to even possess or take in a dog with cropped ears, in the absence of proof.

The law will make these dogs “unadoptable,†which translates into a death sentence.

The current law actually would require the shelter or rescue group to be cited for animal cruelty for not having these acceptable proofs for dogs in their possession, as these groups are not exempted from the law.

If the law is enforced “by the book,†we can see no alternative for a shelter or rescue group to escape prosecution except to immediately turn away or euthanize any dog with cropped ears, if proof is not available. Humane Society animal cruelty police officers could file animal cruelty charges if they do otherwise.

Even private citizens could file criminal or civil charges against a shelter or rescue group before a magistrate (this is permissible in Pennsylvania).

Also, if the Caltagirone legislation passes, dog wardens could file charges and revoke a shelter or rescue program’s kennel license. Unlike Humane Society police officers, state dog wardens do not need a search warrant to inspect a kennel or a privately owned dog.

If enforcement is not done “by the book,†or if the law is applied unequally to different parties, the result would be a mockery of justice and the destruction of the credibility of Pennsylvania animal cruelty laws.

The Caltagirone legislation would expose every licensed kennel owner - and also every dog owner – who raises, owns, breeds, trains or boards dogs that have cropped ears to prosecution by dog wardens during kennel inspections or routine spot checks to see if privately owned dogs are licensed and vaccinated against rabies. Wardens do thousands of these spot checks every year.

If the current law is enforced as it is written, it also would mean that people who move here from out of state, people who are passing through Pennsylvania with their dogs, and people who come to Pennsylvania to compete in dog shows or other events would be subject to animal cruelty prosecution.

These people cannot comply with the law, and many of them have no way to even know that the law exists if they are not Pennsylvania residents.

It would have an especially detrimental impact on dog shows, obedience events and other kinds of canine events, which annually draw thousands of nonresidents to Pennsylvania. No one who owns a dog with cropped ears would knowingly attend an event in Pennsylvania if there is a possibility that they would be cited for animal cruelty for something that is completely legal in their state of residence, or simply because they cannot provide proof of their innocence.

This has the potential to cause many economic losses to Pennsylvanians, as dog events are important to gas stations, restaurants, motels and other businesses in the state.

Please contact Rep. Caltagirone as soon as possible to express your opinion about this legislation. Here is a link for contact information: http://www.pahouse.com/caltagirone .

It is urgent to contact members of the Judiciary Committee, which can block this legislation. Here is a list of committee members and officers (click on their names to locate contact information): http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/member_information/representatives_sc.cfm#24 .

Also, please contact the reported cosponsors of the legislation. They are Reps. Bennington, Biancucci, Buxton, Capelli, Carrol, Cassorio, Conklin, Dally, DiGirolamo, Fabrizio, Frankel, Goodman, Hanna, Harhai, Harkins, Josephs, Kortz, Leech, Lentz, Maher, Mahoney, Marshall, McIlvaine-Smith, Mench, Moyer, Mustio, Nailor, M. O’Brien, Pashinski, Payne, Preston, Rubley, Santoni, Scavello, Shimkus, M. Smith, Solobay, Swanger, True, Watson and Youngblood. This link provides email addresses for each of these legislators: http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/member_information/email_list.cfm?body=H .

The American Sporting Dog Alliance represents owners, hobby breeders and professionals who work with breeds of dogs that are used for hunting. We are a grassroots movement working to protect the rights of dog owners, and to assure that the traditional relationships between dogs and humans maintains its rightful place in American society and life. Please visit us on the web at http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org. We also need your help so that we can continue to work to protect the rights of dog owners. Your membership, participation and support are truly essential to the success of our mission. We are funded solely by the donations of our members, and maintain strict independence.

PLEASE CROSS-POST THIS REPORT AND FORWARD IT TO YOUR FRIENDS
 

Sweet72947

Squishy face
Joined
May 18, 2006
Messages
9,159
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Northern Virginia
#2
Wow this bill is all kinds of crazy. 0_o. And what's that part at the top about a partial ban on ceasarian sections? They want bitches in trouble to die while whelping? :confused:
 

Zoom

Twin 2.0
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
40,739
Likes
3
Points
38
Age
41
Location
Denver, CO
#3
All part of the grand "No Pets For Anyone" scheme...

What's freaking crazy is that these idiotic bills keep getting passed...
 
R

RedyreRottweilers

Guest
#4
They are after eliminating breeds that are routinely sectioned to whelp.

Bulldogs, pugs, etc.

HOW MUCH MORE DOES IT TAKE BEFORE PEOPLE WAKE UP???
 

PWCorgi

Priscilla Winifred Corgi
Joined
Apr 12, 2006
Messages
14,854
Likes
0
Points
36
Age
34
Location
Twin Citay!
#5
I hate this. I learned about the bill months ago and have written my representatives multiple times as well as getting some of my teachers to write as well. Absolutely ridiculous.
 

elegy

overdogged
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
7,720
Likes
1
Points
0
#6
does anybody actually have the written text of this bill, because i am unable to find it? i've read the proposed dog legislation on the govt website and i've searched the AKC website as well as googled, and all i've come up with is this sportingdogalliance post.

i have been working in veterinary hospitals in pa since 2002 and i am unaware of any ban on ear cropping, nor have i heard anything about a ban on tail docking, debarking, or c-sections (??). i have a hard time believing this would not have been a topic of conversation among the pvma.
 

Dizzy

Sit! Good dog.
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
17,761
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Wales
#7
Docking and cropping? Catching up with the rest of the world.

C-sections = huh?
 

bubbatd

Moderator
Joined
Nov 28, 2004
Messages
64,812
Likes
1
Points
0
Age
91
#8
Had AKC accepted only naturally born breeds in showing from the beginning , this would never have been an issue . As for the C sections , to me it's comparing apples to oranges .Same with horses .....( show ring ) ....Special shoes and chains to make them step higher and breaking tails to carry higher .
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
2,365
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
High Ridge, MO
#9
Docking and cropping? Catching up with the rest of the world.
Too right. Soon the dog world can be regulated out the ying-yang just like the UK. Just more damaged tails for the vets to fix, eh? Maybe we can get some of those sweet breed bans to go along with it. :rolleyes:
 

Dizzy

Sit! Good dog.
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
17,761
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Wales
#11
Too right. Soon the dog world can be regulated out the ying-yang just like the UK. Just more damaged tails for the vets to fix, eh? Maybe we can get some of those sweet breed bans to go along with it. :rolleyes:

Oh yeah, we've got just an EPIDEMIC of broken tails... left right and centre.

I mean, we're just INUNDATED with them. :rolleyes:

Errr... no. That's called "propaganda".

I live in an area where ooooh... most of the dogs are hunting dogs - weims, springers, cockers, JRTs... Traditionally docked breeds.

The tail damage idea is a myth. I can assure you of that. If you want docked tails, because you like the look of it - at least have the guts to admit it.

And you don't already have breen bans? Pits are allowed everywhere?

And I never realised the UK was the rest of the world - you know.... there are MORE countries out there don't you??
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
87
Likes
0
Points
0
#12
The tail damage idea is a myth. I can assure you of that. If you want docked tails, because you like the look of it - at least have the guts to admit it.
Wow. Some of your posts remind me of someone else on this board.

I will say that I don't own a docked breed, but I disagree that it is always a myth. My Chinooks are power waggers and will cheerfully and repeatedly crack their tails against door frames and coffee tables which can cause protective hair loss and wounds on the tips. Not only is it a location that is difficult to keep bandaged and heal, the dogs seem totally unaware of the problem and would wag until the living room looked like a crime scene if I let them.

I guess an alternative would be to ban furniture...

Debbie
 
R

RedyreRottweilers

Guest
#14
Statistics are available from some European countries which outlawed docking with regard to tail injuries.

I will see if I can find it, but it is a pretty significant number.

My breed is traditionally docked, and the docked tail is an INTEGRAL part of breed type.

Following the outlawing or restriction of docking ALWAYS COMES BSL.

Look at Germany, Switzerland, etc etc etc.

The outlawing of docking is only their first step in getting rid of dogs.
 

Dizzy

Sit! Good dog.
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
17,761
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Wales
#15
Disagree.

The stats out there are by PRO dockers.. it's biased info.

I don't believe it is the 1st step in getting rid of dogs either. Unfortunatley dog bans were put in WELL before docking became prevelant.

And cropping has been outlawed since before I was a twinkle in my daddys eye.

Like I say - if you want docked dogs - then good for you - but don't give people rubbish about tail injuries.

And FURTHER to that - if you breed dogs specifically to work them in the field, you can dock them. In the UK.

So if you're that desperate to do it, you surely can.
 
Joined
Apr 25, 2006
Messages
2,947
Likes
0
Points
36
#17
I don't own a docked breed, so it doesn't affect me.

However, I am 33 years old. I've worked in vet hospitals and kennels since I was 16. That means 50% of my life. I've seen a lot of tail injuries, so don't tell me they don't happen.

I've seen happy tail injuries, I've seen "out in the field" injuries. I've seen injuries from their kennels, from their crates, etc. I've even seen a tail "desheathed" when a setter at the bird dog kennel I worked for got it caught in old cattle fencing while out in the field.

I've seen full grown dogs have to have their tails amputated because once injured, they are extremely difficult to heal.

I'm not "pro" dock. I'm pro-choice and anti-government telling me what I can/can't do with my pets. I have no bias in this, because as I stated, danes aren't a docked breed and it doesn't affect me. I am, however, all for people having the choice, if they feel it is the right one, to prevent injuries such as these by having a simple procedure done with the pups are itty bitty vs. when the dog has severed it's tail as an adult and it causes TONS of pain.

Dispute that it happens if you will. You seem to go through alot of things believing it doesn't happen. But I will tell you, it does.

I think there are bigger fish to fry than this. What's next? Banning dewclaw removal on puppies? It's rediculous.
 

Dizzy

Sit! Good dog.
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
17,761
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Wales
#18
Like I thought - pro-docking alliance :)

We can all find stats.

There is no scientific evidence to show that undocked working dogs damage their tails
any more than undocked non-working dogs. A seven year study at the University of
Edinburgh Royal (Dick) School of Veterinary Studies showed insufficient evidence of
statistical significance to suggest a positive association between tail injuries and

undocked tails (Darke et al, 1985).




Of the first 1000 consultations at the North West Animal Emergency Clinic in Sydney none involved tail injury
cases. Between December 1991 and September 1992 there were 2350 consultations only 3 of which involved
tail injuries. All three of these cases were related to tail docking, the first case involved 12 three day old

Rottweiler pups which were still haemorrhaging 6 hours after being docked and required suturing. The other
two cases involved single pups one of which was bleeding and the other had become infected (From records of
the North West Animal Emergency Centre, Baulkharn Hills, NSW.)


http://anti-dockingalliance.co.uk/page_4.htm (probably biased, but stats are stats)
 

Dizzy

Sit! Good dog.
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
17,761
Likes
1
Points
38
Location
Wales
#19
However, I am 33 years old. I've worked in vet hospitals and kennels since I was 16. That means 50% of my life. I've seen a lot of tail injuries, so don't tell me they don't happen.

Of course it HAPPENS.

But not in the amounts to warrent docking ALL dogs? I mean, if tail injury ALONE was the reason for docking - they'd ALL be docked. All of em.

There are just as many injuries in poochy who just lags to wag a lot as working dogs. And that number is LOW.

It's an outdated tradition, upheld for aesthetics for the most part.

And as I said before - if you wanted docked dogs, then a least be HONEST about why.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top