German Shepherds Forum banner

1 - 20 of 59 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
877 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
A topic for thought and discussion:
Are we here in the US in danger of following the current trends in the E.U. regarding "animal cruelty" laws?
Will the e-collar be banned?
Will Dobermans look like a coonhound?
Will "stick-hits" be banned from dog-sport?
Etc. Etc.?

So the question is.....Can it happen here? Opinions? Discussion?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,371 Posts
Dobermans look like coonhounds?

I'm looking at one with floppy ears right now. Less intimidating looking? Yes. Coonhound? uhh...no.

What is the purpose for cropping the ears of dobie's and boxers? Is there a practical purpose to it? Or is it just "cool"?

I'm pretty sure it's illegal in PA and I only know of one vet in 60 mile radius that will do it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
877 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
You don't think they look like coonhounds with long, floppy ears and a long tail? I think they bear a resemblance; maybe it is just me.

The practical reason for cropping the ears (and docking the tail for that matter), as I understand it (someone please correct me if I am mistaken) is that when they engage a person the person is less able to grab their ears or tail in an effort to fight back. I am a GSD guy though so if this incorrect please correct me.

I am unsure if cropping ears is illegal in PA. If it is do you see a problem with this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,371 Posts
A little because of the coloring but otherwise no. Their heads are slimmer, bodies sleaker, legs are longer, movement is different.

Boxers are large game hunting dogs so that theory of someone grabbing their ears wouldn't fly. It might be that they didn't want their ears hurt while hunting? I'll have to look up the reasons. I wonder if it's not a German thing. Boxers, Dobies, Rotties....all German.

I had Banshee's ears cropped and swore I'd never do it again. We have no reason to since we don't show.

I think e-collars are misunderstood and have been abused. They should not be outlawed. Maybe they should only be sold by licensed individuals so at least a person gets some input and training?

Cropped ears? If there is no practical purpose then yes it should be illegal. But realistically, until the show people, the AKC, etc say enough is enough...it won't happen here.

I don't think we need more animal cruelty laws. I think there needs to be harsher punishment. In PA, a person can be not allowed to own an animal for a year. So they can starve, beat, burn, torture...and in a year they can do it again. Maybe a higher sentence and a little jail time would deter people a bit more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,371 Posts
Ear Cropping - I can't find a practical purpose for modern day dogs having their ears cropped. If it were a police dog that would be in danger of a criminal grabbing it's ears or if there was a medical benefit for it then I would say yes but I just can't find any justification for it at the moment.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Doberman-Ear-cropping-is-it-necessary
http://dobermanpuppyforsale.com/ears.htm
http://www.helium.com/items/1144967-a-history-of-dog-ear-cropping
http://www.terrificpets.com/articles/dogs/medical/ear-cropping/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
877 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
OK. I am not suggesting that they are coonhounds...let's not get caught up in semantics. Please do look up the reasons for cropping/docking, I am curious to know.

Back to the real issues now.

So you would recommend that e-collars only be sold to "licensed" persons? Who would determine who is qualified to own an e-collar? How much would a "license" cost? I think when you start heading down that road the slope get real slippery really quickly.

I have to also disagree about cropping ears (or docking tails for that matter). While my breed (GSD) does not require either procedure, I believe that when you open that door there is no closing it. Additionally, even if it is "purely cosmetic" what gives a government the ability to legislate this? What is next? Banning breast implants (in people) because it is "purely cosmetic"?

My biggest arguement against what you are saying is that it is a slippery slope. Would I like to see people who starve a dog to death or set a dog on fire sent to prison? The answer is YES! (Actually I would like to see worse than that) But the problem comes when politicians, who know nothing about dogs or training, attempt to make laws about what constitutes abuse. Am I "abusing" my dog when I make forced retrieves? Should I be put in the same catagory as people who set dogs on fire if I use a riding crop to make faster sits?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,371 Posts
Welll...I wasn't caught up in semantics. You asked a question and I answered. I didn't realize it was rhetorical.

No. I do not think it is a slippery slope. I can make a rational decision to have breast implants with all the risks known. dogs can not make that decision. Would you have your ears cropped? Would you crop your child's ears? When there was no practical purpose or medical advantage? Their ears are being amputated and it's painful. That's apples for apples...

In the few minutes I had I could find no valid reason for ear cropping modern day dogs. Working dogs..Yes. Hunting dogs...Yes. It will prevent injury. but the average dog? No.

I don't have the answer on who should sell the electronic collar. There is no short supply of idiots so even with a licensed seller there is no guarantee that it will be used as intended. If that were true then people would not be murdered with guns.

The problem is the politicians making the laws...that is a very, very slippery slope. Not only them but people will never agree on what is abuse and what isn't. I had a man attack me at 7am in the morning because my dog was in my car when I ran in to get dog food. It was NOT hot out but he scared the [heck] out of me enough that I was getting ready to let him meet my dog who was not fond of yelling men. There will always be sicko's, radical's and morons...not much you can do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,451 Posts
Not sure how I feel on cropping/docking, so I stick to breeds where it's not an issue. I prefer prick ears and natural tails. I like Rotts with tails. Anyway....I agree with Art, slippery slope. I've seen flat collars and regular harnesses misused for cruel purposes or neglectfully embedded into the dog's tissue. Do we ban those too? Does it really matter how *I* feel? Many people spay/neuter their pets for reasons no better or more solid than those that crop or dock, and yet we have people pushing laws to make these procedures mandatory.

Not to mention all of the people that are cruel to animals on a daily basis that go unregulated and unpunished because the laws we already have that make sense are not enforced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,371 Posts
I saw that. And that makes sense. It also makes sense that a Boxer's ears were cropped to prevent injury when hunting. They hunted large game such as deer and, I believe, boars. if they are being used for that purpose then I think there would be a valid reason to crop to prevent a more severe injury.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,451 Posts
Originally Posted By: Jax08 I can make a rational decision to have breast implants with all the risks known. dogs can not make that decision. Would you have your ears cropped? Would you crop your child's ears? When there was no practical purpose or medical advantage? Their ears are being amputated and it's painful. That's apples for apples...
I think male and female circumcision would be more "apples for apples". But, there again we see one very common, completely legal, unchallenged....and the other only recently setting precedent in court.

However, a dog is not afforded the same rights and considerations under the law as a human, so no comparisons will really carry any weight. Harsh as it sounds, a dog is more like a possession than it is a person.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,710 Posts
so do you believe humans can improve an animal (not only dog )by a SURGICAL intervention?worst case in my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,371 Posts
I think spay/neuter is a whole different subject and I would absolutely fight against mandatory spay/neuter. The facts are just not there for health benefits vs risks. I really want to research tubals vs spay to see what the difference in healthy are.

But ppl also do what is easy for them. That's why we have so many kids on drugs for ADD. It's easier to drug them than work with them.

True on the collars also. I didn't think of that. and even so...as Art asked...who is qualified to sell them?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30,371 Posts
Originally Posted By: ttalldogso do you believe humans can improve an animal (not only dog )by a SURGICAL intervention?worst case in my opinion.
In what context? Humans bred the Doberman. He could have bred in a different dog to have a natural lift like the German Shepherd. Ear cropping and tail docking isn't "improving" on the breed. It's a matter of what the dogs are used for and the danger we are putting them in.

If there were a medical benefit, such as reducing ear infections as they once thought, then I would have to rethink my answer of No.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,571 Posts
I've read the EU statutes, and frankly, I can't find much to complain about.

Is this your concern?

Quote:
Article 7 - Training
No pet animal shall be trained in a way that is detrimental to its health and welfare, especially by forcing it to exceed its natural capacities or strength or by employing artificial aids which cause injury or unnecessary pain, suffering or distress
Emphasis mine.

http://www.animallaw.info/treaties/itceceets125.htm


Really? Do we really want to justify injury or unnecessary pain? If so, by whom? Under what conditions? Why? I can't imagine any conditions under which domestic pet animals need to be treated this way.

Newer developments have diluted the overall quality of the anti cruelty law somewhat:

Quote:
Millions of laboratory animals will suffer because of a new EU-driven law for the testing of chemicals, the RSPCA has claimed.

REACH, which stands for 'Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation of Chemicals will require up to 30,000 chemicals manufactured or imported into the EU to be tested for safety.

Before 1981 chemicals did not have to be tested before being put on the market.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3295934/EU-law-could-mean-30000-animal-tests.html

In fact, the Brits are up in arms about how much latitude is allowed:

Quote:
From The Sunday Times October 4, 2009

Cruelty row over EU animal test rules


BRITISH civil servants have been shocked by the degree of suffering permitted by proposed European Union rules on animal experiments.

The draft EU directive “on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes” would allow monkeys, dogs, cats and foals to be used for experiments leading to severe and lasting pain.

Animals’ bones could be broken, they could undergo paralysing electric shocks, they could suffer trauma leading to multiple organ failure, they could be confined to restrict movement and they could be kept in isolation for prolonged periods.

The standards would also allow organs to be transplanted between species even if this led to “severe distress”.

The rules make clear that experiments would not be confined to small breeds such as beagles but include large dogs such as St Bernards. Horses and ponies bred in family stables could be used by laboratories in Europe.

The directive would permit practices banned in Britain, which can continue to impose its own rules. The Home Office said it did not want to see British standards weakened.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6860177.ece


How different European municipalities implement laws is up to them, of course. But to blame EU laws for any changes over here is absurd.

Americans have been moving progressively toward animal welfare and then toward animal rights for decades. Generally, the USA does not look toward international sources when writing up legislation nor when interpreting it. (Occassionally, members of the Supreme Court may use international precedent if there is little of our own, but it's quite rare)

Whatever is done here will be done because it is the will of the American people and their representatives. The American people love their pets. For example, the Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act of 2006’ (the post Hurricane Katrina act that was dubbed "Leave No Pet Behind) passed the House with 349 Ayes, 24 Nays, 60 Present/Not Voting and passed the Senate unanimously.

We don't need to worry that Europe will dictate to us what to do. Europe doesn't really seem inclined to do so, and we will do what we feel is appropriate to take care of our animals.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,884 Posts
A friend of mine has had "real" dobbies for years. No cropped ears for her dogs. I think that cropping is no longer required for the show ring.
Can we ban it? I'd like to think so. But I doubt it based on pretty pressing issues that aren't getting through congress now. I'll stop now but it's going to be hard to keep this thread from getting political. After all it's about legislation which is about politics....
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
411 Posts
Originally Posted By: Jax08I think e-collars are misunderstood and have been abused. They should not be outlawed. Maybe they should only be sold by licensed individuals so at least a person gets some input and training?
I have never seen someone using an E-collar in a manner that I would consider abusive. However there was a sadistic sociopathic junior high school boy at the dog park that wanted to shock my dog just to see what it was like. He said he wanted to look at my remote but I refused. I could tell by his line of questioning that he intended to do more than just look at the remote; he wanted to shock my dog, he later admitted it in front of people. To me it's scary that he had a dog and a younger sister.

I think it would be wrong to require licensing and training for E-collars. As poor as I am I spent a small fortune (about $600) on my E-collars. I am disabled and I think it would be unfair to tag even more money, time and bureaucracy to get something that has helped me so much. As it is now I would really like to have a certified helper dog or to have my dog certified and trained to be a helper dog; but since I'm poor and disabled I can't afford it. It seems almost like a Catch-22 situation. I know other people that are disabled and would like to have helper dogs or seeing eye dogs but most of them are too poor to be able to afford it. It seems that for the most part only the rich can afford official helper dogs or seeing eye dogs.

Instead of punishing and obstructing reasonably law-abiding citizens; why not target criminals that really are abusive?

Some of the worst (most incompetent, ignorant and cruel) usage of E-collars have been by so-called "experts" that take money to train people how to use E-collars.
*edited as firearms has NOTHING to do with this topic and removed the picture as it 1) had nothing to do with this topic and 2) was polical in nature

Originally Posted By: Jax08Cropped ears?
I typically don't care for cropped ears or cropped tails; however I don't think it should be illegal if it's done humanely. I don't care for people that crop just for show; but I don't think that that should even be illegal. Some dogs have delicate tails so from what I understand it is safer for the dog and the owners to have some tails cropped. From what I understand some hunting dogs should have their ears cropped to make them less vulnerable to getting their ears and possibly their tail from being targets from game animals and from getting caught in fences (particularly barbed wire). I would prefer that people only cropped tails and ears when there was a valid medical reason; however like they say "you can't legislate common sense".

I like the Dobermans that don't have their ears cropped; but they do look kind of strange until you get used to it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,710 Posts
I agree.But are humans thinking they are SOO aware that the normal evolution of a species can be 'improved'by human deciding ( tail- or cropped ear-bigger size)actually improves a breed?
 
1 - 20 of 59 Posts
Top