Tattooing your pets?

[crazeeacd]

I think the shelter I work with found an older dog with a number tattoo and could not trace it. The numbers were clear, yes, but I believe it wasn't registered with any major dog tattoo companies. I don't really see the point, then?

[yoko]

Originally Posted by Lyzelle

Small can be a double edged sword, since they can often blur and become less readable as the tattoo ages. Simple is relative to the person. I never said I wanted to "show off" tattoos on Zander. I said it would be specifically for ID purposes, but there's no reason why he should have crappy vet handwriting scrawled across his stomach or in his ear.

If I can think of something easy, decent, that can be ID'd and easily so, I'll do that instead.

If its not to show off why worry about how it looks?

I just think ok-ing stuff like tattoos for appearance seems kind of wrong. I don't know any dog that would willingly just sit there for that. It's loud and uncomfortable.

Are we going to let people get their dogs piercings? What about other traditionally human body modifications under the guise of 'IDing' them?

There is already issues with people treating their pets as accessories why support something that is just going to reinforce those views?

[Toller_08]

My dogs all have CKC breeder ID tattoos that they all got before leaving their breeders' homes. Those kinds of tattoos I don't have a problem with, and I also don't have a problem with somebody getting a small design or something tattooed on their pet while they are also have an ID tattoo done while put under. The dog is already being tattooed anyway, so why not get a little something extra if you wanted. Not that I would do it, but I know people who have, and don't see anything wrong with it. It might even be a good way to prove that the dog is undoubtedly yours.

But, I do not believe in tattooing a pet to the extent that some of those pictures show. And I also don't believe in putting an animal under just for a tattoo... or tattooing them wide awake and feeling everything, because that would be totally unfair to a dog/cat. I don't know what getting a tattoo feels like, as I don't have one, but I can't imagine it's the most comfortable thing in the world to have to sit through.

[LostAndConfused]

I don't know if people do this with dogs, but I know horse people will do 'eyeliner' tattoos on their paint horses. The idea is that it's suppose to help protect the sensitive skin next to the eye from the sun. I don't personally know anyone that has had it done so I don't know if it actually works.


The point is that while I would not tattoo an animal for my own amusement, I would consider doing it for identification or medical reasons.

[Lyzelle]

Originally Posted by yoko

If its not to show off why worry about how it looks?

I just think ok-ing stuff like tattoos for appearance seems kind of wrong.

Someone already brought up the spaying, neutering, and docking of tails and cropping of ears. If it's necessary, why does it have to be pretty? Just wack the ears and be done with it.

I'm just of the opinion that if it's going to be done, better make the best of it. You can say that for anything we already do for our dogs. Collars, tags, various remedies to get rid of speuter scars, paying a lot of money for a good, nicer crop than any vet who can wack ears, grooming, heat panties, etc, etc.

Some of them are temporary, some aren't. Some are more important than others. But everything we do for our pets, we take to some "pretty" extreme or another, not "just" out of necessity. But if a simple tattoo can be used to ID a pet, doesn't interfere with health, and could be a lower risk than some spay surgeries...what's the problem, really? There's far more important things to get hung up about.

[Xandra]

Tattooing as a means of identification, go for it. I can't imagine being opposed to that. My dog is tattooed and I had my rabbits tattooed.

As far as tattooing designs on your animal for aesthetic reasons, I don't like it. I dont' like the way it looks and I don't think it's particularly nice to poke a hairless cat with a needle over its entire body. But, to each his own. I wouldn't want it to be illegal.

[yoko]

Originally Posted by Lyzelle

Someone already brought up the spaying, neutering, and docking of tails and cropping of ears. If it's necessary, why does it have to be pretty? Just wack the ears and be done with it.

I'm just of the opinion that if it's going to be done, better make the best of it. You can say that for anything we already do for our dogs. Collars, tags, various remedies to get rid of speuter scars, paying a lot of money for a good, nicer crop than any vet who can wack ears, grooming, heat panties, etc, etc.

Some of them are temporary, some aren't. But if they can be used to ID a pet, doesn't interfere with health, and could be a lower risk than some spay surgeries...what's the problem, really? There's far more important things to get hung up about.

There are reasons to spay and neuter. And as for the ears and tail I don't see them as something that needs to be done either but that's a different argument.

I am just against using your dog as a fashion accessory. Not against tattoos in general but if you want a nice looking one get it for yourself not your dog.

[AllisonPitbullLvr]

Tattooing for ID purposes isn't really effective either. One of my dogs and both of my cats had ear tattoos done by the HS when they were speutered. At 5-6 years old, they're hardly legible and they aren't in any database. As such, they're also microchipped.

Once we had a Samoyed show up as a stray. She was old and was tattooed but not chipped. We never found her owner or breeder because the tattoo was illegible.

OT but thought I should bring up that point.

[Greenmagick]

Originally Posted by yoko

There are reasons to spay and neuter. And as for the ears and tail I don't see them as something that needs to be done either but that's a different argument.

I am just against using your dog as a fashion accessory. Not against tattoos in general but if you want a nice looking one get it for yourself not your dog.

I really am having a hard time figuring out why docking or cropping are different. I mean a full body tattoo probably does involve a nice amount of pain and is extreme, but a smallish tattoo, probably less healing time and soreness that a crop or dock.

Honestly, I do not like any alteration done surgically for looks but I dont know how unethical it is either

[Danefied]

Originally Posted by yoko

And as for the ears and tail I don't see them as something that needs to be done either but that's a different argument.

I don’t see it as a different argument.
A show crop on a dane or dobe is 100% owner aesthetics. Does nothing for the dog.
Both require general anesthesia.

How is tattooing your dog any different than cropping?

Not that it should matter, but FTR, none of my danes are cropped, and none of my dogs are tattooed.