NAIA position statement: Animal husbandry practices
Animal husbandry combines the art and science of raising animals by blending time-honored practices and modern scientific knowledge into a system that provides for animal well-being and provides for safe and efficient management and handling of animals. Animal husbandry practices change as scientists, agricultural experts, pet breeders, and others involved with animals learn new techniques or phase out those that are no longer necessary or appropriate.
Animal husbandry practices range from dehorning cattle to prevent injury to herd-mates and farm hands to methods for housing livestock, providing adequate nutrition, devising breeding strategies, and managing pets that live in the household.
Current husbandry practices under assault include ear cropping, tail docking, and debarking of dogs, and removing the claws of cats.
People with little first hand knowledge of these procedures sometimes believe that they are cruel and conduct campaigns to ban them. NAIA believes that owners and their veterinarians are best suited to decide these issues and that government should not base new laws on the values and ethics of uninformed citizens or special interest groups.
Ear cropping
Ear cropping has been a common practice throughout the centuries and developed according to the type of work a breed was expected to do. Guard dogs were cropped to enhance their alertness and make their appearance more threatening to potential criminals. Smaller versions of guard dogs were also cropped to achieve the alert look of their larger cousins. Fighting dogs and dogs that went after quarry were cropped to prevent injury.
Today’s pet owners and breeders like the look that upright ears present and many believe that cropped ears allow their dogs to hear better and prevent or reduce the potential for infections that sometimes plague drop-eared dogs.
In the past, ear cropping was often performed without anesthesia and in unsterile conditions. This perception still lingers. However, anesthetic drugs and techniques are so safe today that veterinarians anesthetize dogs for routine procedures such as teeth cleaning and treating deep ear infections. In addition there are new methods of cropping with lasers that are virtually bloodless and require less aftercare.
Pressure to ban ear cropping today comes mostly from false and outdated beliefs and from a lack of information about modern surgical techniques. Animal rights organizations – which oppose the purposeful breeding of dogs generally and purebred dogs specifically – are also opposed to ear cropping, claiming that it is barbaric and cruel.
NAIA strongly opposes bans on ear cropping because they
- Are based on false and misleading information
- Legitimize activist campaigns to unnecessarily restrict the rights of animal owners
- Inject politics into practices that should remain the right and responsibility of animal owners and the medical professionals they consult.
Those owners and breeders who like the drop-eared look have the option to forego cropping. Those who prefer the look and believe it has benefits should also have the right to choose. Therefore, NAIA supports the right of dog owners and veterinarians to choose ear cropping and to perform the surgery using modern medical techniques.
Tail docking
Like ear cropping, tail docking developed in particular breeds for particular purposes and is facing challenges based on outdated and misleading information.
Tail docking is done when puppies are a few days old, before nerves are fully developed so discomfort is minimal. Many breeds are docked using rubber bands with no surgery involved. Puppies usually return to sleeping or nursing within minutes.
Many hunting breeds had docked tails because they traditionally worked in brambles, briars, and other low cover that could damage long tails. Many terriers had docked tails to aid handlers in removing them from the underground dens of their quarry. Some protection breeds had docked tails to eliminate an appendage for a criminal to grab. Today, these dogs are not as likely to hunt birds or chase vermin or guard tax collectors, but breeders and owners still like the appearance..
Activists opposed to the procedure often claim that docked tails interfere with the dog’s ability to communicate, but dogs make their intentions known through a full range of body language, not simply by wagging or not wagging their tails. No one could mistake the message of the merry tail-wagging Cocker Spaniel, the wiggling happy Boxer, or the alert Miniature Schnauzer that is focused on a squirrel or chipmunk. All of these breeds have docked tails and are perfectly able to convey their message.
NAIA supports the right of breeders and veterinarians to choose tail docking and opposes attempts to ban this practice because they
- Are based on false and misleading information
- Legitimize activist campaigns to restrict the rights of animal owners
- Inject politics into practices that should remain the right and responsibility of animal owners and the medical professionals they consult.
Debarking
“Debarking” is a misleading term. The surgery that reduces the barking noise is more properly called “bark softening.”
Assaults on debarking come from two perspectives – those who believe that bans will stop criminals from using debarked dogs to further their illegal activities and those who claim that debarking is cruel because it robs a dog of his ability to communicate.
Debarking surgery reduces the amount of tissue in the vocal chords and limits the volume of the bark so it doesn't’t carry. Debarked dogs can still broadcast the approach of strangers, express their glee when family members come home, and announce their presence at the local dog park. They also get to stay in their homes even if they are persistent barkers.
NAIA opposes bans on debarking because they
- Are based on the false premise that debarking cruelly removes a dogs ability to communicate.
- Jeopardize an owner’s ability to keep a beloved pet.
- Have the potential to place a burden on local shelters and rescues.
- Legitimize activist campaigns to restrict the rights of animal owners.
- Inject politics into practices that should remain the right and responsibility of animal owners and the medical professionals they consult.
NAIA supports the rights of owners and veterinarians to choose debarking as a management technique that will allow pet dogs to remain in their homes and will give breeders of noisy breeds the flexibility to develop viable breeding programs.
For more information on debarking, see these articles by respected vetreinarian Sharon Vanderlip, D.V.M., and long-time dog enusiast Charlotte McGowan:
"A veterinarian discusses bark-softening"
“Animal rights groups attack life-saving debarking procedure”
Declawing cats
Cats sharpen their claws on furniture, walls, carpets, and sometimes people. They sometimes flex their paws and scratch people without intending to do so. Laws against declawing can put these cats in search of a new home.
Those who want bans on declawing claim that removing cat claws is painful and unnecessary and therefore should be outlawed.
NAIA understands that scratching cats may be a danger to elderly people with thin skin, patients with debilitated immune systems, and babies and believes that owners should retain the right to choose declawing instead of being forced to dispose of the pet.
NAIA opposes laws that ban declawing because they
- Jeopardize an owner’s ability to keep a beloved pet.
- Have the potential to place a burden on local shelters.
- Legitimize activist campaigns to restrict the rights of animal owners
- Inject politics into practices that should remain the right and responsibility of animal owners and the medical professionals they consult.
For more information
Groups that oppose cropping, docking, debarking, and declawing
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
Humane Society of the US
Association of Veterinarians for Animal Rights
In Defense of Animals
