Cropping and docking illegal in New York
- Thread starter YodelDogs
- Start date
So we took the puppies to have their dews and tails done today..
You should see the traumatized pups we have now..
Pups day 3, Day 3 for Katarra. Wash, and Solo. They had their tails and dews done today.. no worse for wear. on USTREAM. Dogs
Dekklet Puppy Cam (Jack Russell) on USTREAM: The first pup was born on Sat night at 8pm. He was a good sized boy of 6.5oz. After hours of unproductive labo
10 seconds after they were done they settled, no issues. Wash screamed as loudly for being held as he did having his tail and dews done. Never had been there to see it before. Can't say I'm any worse for wear after this. Stance hasn't changed.
You should see the traumatized pups we have now..
Pups day 3, Day 3 for Katarra. Wash, and Solo. They had their tails and dews done today.. no worse for wear. on USTREAM. Dogs
Dekklet Puppy Cam (Jack Russell) on USTREAM: The first pup was born on Sat night at 8pm. He was a good sized boy of 6.5oz. After hours of unproductive labo
10 seconds after they were done they settled, no issues. Wash screamed as loudly for being held as he did having his tail and dews done. Never had been there to see it before. Can't say I'm any worse for wear after this. Stance hasn't changed.
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2009
- Messages
- 22
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 0
Cropping and docking is illegal in the uk. I know i am going to get some flak for this, but seriously, how vain are you that you would put your dog through any amount of pain and potential complications just to have them appear physically different? As far as slamming the HSUS, I guess most of you with your "purebred" dogs could care less about all they have done reducing the 15 million dog euthanasias that had been carried out in this country every year. Not to mention their work in toughening animal cruelty laws. I think it is sad that so many of you are lumping all animal rescue groups together without even distinguishing the very real differences in their philosophies and missions. If the humane society does not want people to have animals as pet then WHY ARE THEY RUNNING SHELTERS WHOSE SOLE GOAL IS TO ADOPT OUT PETS? What gives you the right to treat a living creature as if it was nothing but mere property for you to manipulate and do with as you please? I am glad I live in a country where people are beginning to care about the rights of animals. It is not hurting anyone to make cropping and docking illegal and it is sad that so many consider it one of their inalienable human rights to mutilate animals for the sake of appearance. Many people work for rescue groups dedicating their lives to helping homeless pets because they have a true ability to feel empathy and compassion towards animals. The only difference I see between opponents and proponents of this argument is that some view their pets as esteemed companions while others view them as mere property.
Last edited:
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) does NOT have, or run, any of their own shelters. They gather donations to fund political aims. They do very little actually help real shelters.
And though it's been said before and hashed to death, if the sole argument is "it's painful for convenience" then I humbly submit the "Do you spay or neuter your pets, because that's even more painful and is just as much about convenience as anything else" argument.
And though it's been said before and hashed to death, if the sole argument is "it's painful for convenience" then I humbly submit the "Do you spay or neuter your pets, because that's even more painful and is just as much about convenience as anything else" argument.
Its not flimsy. It may seem to.. but a dog with a full length tail is at much more at risk of serious injury even death. And at 3 days when pups need to be done (any later and its cruel) I can't tell you what pup will end up in a home where he could work vs an agility home.
The HSUS runs NO shelters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! None.. they don't give money to shelters either. They have billions of dollars... you should go look them up and see what it is they do support (things like BSL...)
I do work for rescue. I have one foster right now and another one arriving any day now. Many of us here DO work with rescues and shelters. Wanting a pup from known healthy and good tempermented lines does not make us dismissive of dogs in shelters. Sport, our BC, came from BC rescue of Ontario. He is fantastic, and I hope he stays healthy and has a long life.
Your attitude is very hostile. I suggest you read some of this forum and see that you, for the most part, are preaching to the crowd.
The HSUS runs NO shelters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! None.. they don't give money to shelters either. They have billions of dollars... you should go look them up and see what it is they do support (things like BSL...)
I do work for rescue. I have one foster right now and another one arriving any day now. Many of us here DO work with rescues and shelters. Wanting a pup from known healthy and good tempermented lines does not make us dismissive of dogs in shelters. Sport, our BC, came from BC rescue of Ontario. He is fantastic, and I hope he stays healthy and has a long life.
Your attitude is very hostile. I suggest you read some of this forum and see that you, for the most part, are preaching to the crowd.
First the humane society here is a political thing more than actually being out there in the trenches helping animals.
Our local HS(they are not all affiliated by the way and the HSUS doesn't fund them) is a joke. They only take certain dogs and ship off anything thats not very adoptable to the pound.
I foster animals both for a rescue and out of my own pocket. I put a lot of my own hard earned money into it. Even though I spend thousands a year on other peoples screw ups I should feel bad getting a crop done? Hmmmmm. Not feeling a bit bad. I am sure the many many puppies,kittens,dogs and cats I have had in my home over the years are very glad I was here to help. An ear crop certainly isn't breaking the bank for me and not allowing me to help an animal out if I have the room.
Loving and caring for our animals is great. But when it gets to the point the government needs to tell you how to care for your dog its to much. No cropping/docling,mandatory altering,no chaining,no off leash,no certain breeds,its all ridiculous. I read an article once about -maybe greece(can't remember)- where if you owned a dog you could not crate it or tie it up and it had to be walked every so many hours for so long
It might have been soemthing they were trying to pass but good lord. I couldn't have any dogs if that was the case here.
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2009
- Messages
- 22
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 0
ugh, I don't mean to be hostile. I am just frustrated with it all. There are so many awesome things that people can fight for and do for animals I am constantly amazed that they are so often more concerned with their own rights than what is best for their pet or animals in general. I will not apologize for this. I am jaded. I am deeply impressed with the social conscience other countries have concerning this issue and I welcome it here. I am sure this argument has been hashed out a million times on this forum, and it will not get resolved here. I looked up the HSUS website and you are correct about the shelters. Thank you for enlightening me on this point. However here is the HSUS official stance on BSL HSUS Statement on Dangerous Dogs and Breed-Specific Legislation | The Humane Society of the United States.
If I offended anyone, I am not sorry, but I do apologize if my tone was hostile. It wasn't meant to be.
If I offended anyone, I am not sorry, but I do apologize if my tone was hostile. It wasn't meant to be.
You need to dig deeper... of course they aren't going to come out and say the 'bad' stuff. They talk about helping animals during Hurricane Katrina (and raising millions) But very little of that money went to helping animals.. other organizations did way more with much much less. Talking to volunteers there the HSUS people were in the way constantly.
The HSUS is in league with PETA and the one of the leaders (can't remember at the top of my head) doesn't have pets nor claims to like animals. (Peta is against all pets and animals other than in the wild)
The HSUS is in league with PETA and the one of the leaders (can't remember at the top of my head) doesn't have pets nor claims to like animals. (Peta is against all pets and animals other than in the wild)
The HSUS is a lying useless organization... PETA linked and BSL supporting. Please watch what you push as a good organization. Many of the head people of the HSUS don't even own pets. They spent more time at Katrina getting in the way and arguing with people rather than helping. They don't run any shelters.. they have 113 million in the bank they could be using but aren't. "HSUS doesn’t save flesh-and-blood animals the way local “humane societies†do, but it does lobby heavily to change the laws of communities across the country." Humane Society of the United States
What HSUS really is:
The Inhumane Society of the United States
From the DC Dog Coalition mailing list
For further information on HSUS fraud:
Louisiana attorney general launches HSUS investigation - June 1, 2006
http://www.topix.com/forum/football-players/michael-vick/TK6KDR94N3Q60H1CQ
2nd article down freespiritseeker's Journal: The Real Humane Society of the United States | Find more Journals on Quizilla
What HSUS really is:
The Inhumane Society of the United States
From the DC Dog Coalition mailing list
For further information on HSUS fraud:
Louisiana attorney general launches HSUS investigation - June 1, 2006
http://www.topix.com/forum/football-players/michael-vick/TK6KDR94N3Q60H1CQ
2nd article down freespiritseeker's Journal: The Real Humane Society of the United States | Find more Journals on Quizilla
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2009
- Messages
- 22
- Likes
- 0
- Points
- 0
Proposition
"Civil laws aim at peace and self-preservation—it is easy but also dangerous to break them.
But as men, for the attaining of peace and conservation of themselves thereby, have made an artificial man, which we call a Commonwealth; so also have they made artificial chains, called civil laws, which they themselves, by mutual covenants, have fastened at one end to the lips of that man, or assembly, to whom they have given the sovereign power, and at the other to their own ears. These bonds, in their own nature but weak, may nevertheless be made to hold, by the danger, though not by the difficulty of breaking them."
Hobbes, Lev XXI 5
For everyone who feels that it is their explicit right to breed dogs, I would like to say that I feel that I should have a right to live in a society where dogs are not euthanized. It is society that shoulders the financial and emotional burden of unwanted dogs, and as a result it is fair game for the legislative process. Irresponsible breeders and owners create a problem that must be dealt with. If these issues did not affect others then it is unlikely that they would ever be up for debate in the general public. I am shocked at the venom with which people are attacked only for their desire to live in a society which is resourceful enough to at least examine solutions other than euthanasia for the surplus of unwanted pets. It seems as if many feel as this is an all or nothing debate, which is a fallacy of hasty generalization resulting from weak deduction. Just because some laws are passed which address animal welfare or restrict breeding it does not logically follow that all breeding will be outlawed and purebred dogs will cease to exist.
"Civil laws aim at peace and self-preservation—it is easy but also dangerous to break them.
But as men, for the attaining of peace and conservation of themselves thereby, have made an artificial man, which we call a Commonwealth; so also have they made artificial chains, called civil laws, which they themselves, by mutual covenants, have fastened at one end to the lips of that man, or assembly, to whom they have given the sovereign power, and at the other to their own ears. These bonds, in their own nature but weak, may nevertheless be made to hold, by the danger, though not by the difficulty of breaking them."
Hobbes, Lev XXI 5
For everyone who feels that it is their explicit right to breed dogs, I would like to say that I feel that I should have a right to live in a society where dogs are not euthanized. It is society that shoulders the financial and emotional burden of unwanted dogs, and as a result it is fair game for the legislative process. Irresponsible breeders and owners create a problem that must be dealt with. If these issues did not affect others then it is unlikely that they would ever be up for debate in the general public. I am shocked at the venom with which people are attacked only for their desire to live in a society which is resourceful enough to at least examine solutions other than euthanasia for the surplus of unwanted pets. It seems as if many feel as this is an all or nothing debate, which is a fallacy of hasty generalization resulting from weak deduction. Just because some laws are passed which address animal welfare or restrict breeding it does not logically follow that all breeding will be outlawed and purebred dogs will cease to exist.
Last edited: