When is ear cropping animal cruelty?

[rmoore920]

I could not find a good section for this, so I thought I would post it here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ani ... 6d839eb7a9" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Is there interest from the schnauzer community to end the convention of cropping of the ears and tails in the US?

I would be interested in hearing all points of view, including the viewpoint of those that believe the practice should be continued.

At the moment, I believe it is driven mostly by dog show requirements, and I am unaware of any other requirements, given that very few, if any schnauzers are used for ratting in the US (where natural ears could be a prone to bites and infection, and cropping may be helpful).

[Dawnspell]

Ear cropping has been illegal in UK since early 1900s on any breed. Cant say that I've read of incidents of ear damage due to acting like a normal dog.

My personal opinion is it is purely cosmetic for human purposes and serves no benefit to the dog and shouldn't be done. Not only that, it is a very long recovery period after the op with the ears having to be bound up for several weeks so the cartilage sets. As well as putting a young puppy under anaesthetic purely for cosmetic reasons.

In US show people want it to continue because their dogs haven't been bred to have good natural ears. Cropping sorts out the defect for them, which is really a way of cheating. The responsible breeders have been breeding for good ears but the older judging fraternity favour cropped ears in the show ring

Tail cropping is also banded in UK unless its going to be a working dog where damage can occur. This isn't as traumatic for the pup as its done at a few days old but not necessary on a pet. Its taken a while to get used to seeing boxers, Dobermans etc with tails but now it seems strange to see a docked dog. Certainly wouldn't want Barney to be without his tail.

[zeta1454]

As Dawnspell says ear cropping is illegal in the whole of the UK and no dog with cropped ears may be shown. It is hard to make a case really for any but cosmetic reasons for the practice. From the UK Kennel Club website:

"No dog with cropped ears is eligible to compete at any Kennel Club licensed event."

The tail docking issue is more complicated as different countries in the UK have slightly different rules/laws as regards showing a dog with a docked tail although the practice is legally limited to proven working dogs:

https://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/activi ... in-the-uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As this Forum is UK based, there may not be many US schnauzer owners here to answer your question. The article you link to is an interesting one and does cover a range of contentious issues aside from ear cropping and highlights the way some issues in dog breeding / showing can be used politically to demonise all those involved in either breeding / showing or both with "animal welfare " as their slogan.

Breeders such as the one mentioned in the article have come from a very different era than currently and, in the US, it would seem there is no consistency between states either as to the acceptability of ear cropping or how it should be carried out. Personally, I do think the practice is unnecessary, can be dangerous to the life of the puppy, and, if not carried out by a professional vet, will constitute animal cruelty in terms of pain and stress inflicted. As Dawnspell says, resistance from the show community may be due to the fact that dogs are being bred with no need for regard to good ear size / shape or good tail carriage both of which can be hidden if they are removed or adjusted surgically. However, there are also pet owners who may favour the look including those who think the cropped ears give a more threatening appearance in a guard dog, for example. I also know a number of pet owners here in England who said that after the tail docking ban came into effect they would not get another schnauzer. I think this is probably due to people having become accustomed to a particular look finding it hard to adjust to a changed appearance rather than a belief that tail docking is justified or essential.

I am sure you are right that, in the USA, the promotion of ear cropping is primarily driven by the longstanding tradition of the AKC and the show ring and, hopefully, can be changed by legislation and winning the support of the AKC and breed clubs as it has in many other parts of the world. The sad thing is, as the newspaper article touches on, that what should be an animal welfare issue embraced by all dog lovers, is being taken over by an extremist movement which has a more sinister agenda in terms of their attitude towards dog breeding and showing. I would think it vital that responsible caring breeders do face the challenge of change in breed standards which will only benefit the health of their dogs and not allow resistance from the "old school" breeders to undermine their credibility where animal welfare is concerned.

[Robin black mini]

Since 1987. The European convention said no to crops and docks..
Since 2011, Italy has pronounced it is illegal to crop,dock and remove vocal cords and dewclaws.
Thank goodness!!!!
I've had uk dogs come docked( my silky terrier,my first st poodle)even my German rottie was docked.
I've had several Italian dogs entire..my last two st poodles.my ddbmastiff,my mini schnauzer...
So my opinions are from my experience..
The dogs are much happier to be able to wagtheir tails,use their dew claws to grab a bone or toy.. I doubt it is in their comfort zone to have their tails or ears cut off..
Ear cropping is purely aesthetic..it bears no good for the dog..nowadays even dog fighting is illegal so no reason to crop ears..
Tail docking is also a " look" although the hunting community will argue the value of docking a dog to avoid wear and tear damage in the bush....

In the article,the old school ,eighty year old breeder should be brought to justice...she is riding on the coat tails of ancient history.. 3 500 dollars for on of her pups is beyond ridiculous.she justifies cropping because her husband was a vet and he did it,so she carried on the practice...some common sense please!

Going off topic a little,but relevant I feel...
I recently tackled my Swedish breeder...I had my world ch parent( both sides) st poodle boy ( pet dog,not going to breed)tested for degenerative myelopathy..he was a carrier,as was his uk brother who is a stud dog and has already fathered several litters...oh dear...
I immediatelycontacted the breeder who said "its not in her lines."....I replied.." Excuse me,two of this last litter have been tested by uk genetics lab as carriers.".??? No ,it's not in her lines..
Then the breeder died,and her son refused to answer my mail..
The breeding line was passed on to another Swedish breeder who also said its not in the lines...meanwhile she was planning to breed my dogs litter sister to a grandson of their sire..( the world ch dog)..just imagine to bottleneck effect of these Dm recessive genes here....!!!
This breeder also refused to accept that Dm was in poodle breed,because our dogs breeder had said so and the Swedish kennel club doesn't include Dm in the required health testing of the breed.....and thus didn't need to be tested for..despite two of the litter testing as carriers for Dm
So I tackled the Swedish poodle kennel club who make the rules and state which genetic illnesses are carried by the breed and should be tested for...
So far no reply?....so,also relating back to the ops post...
The whole changing of old established concepts within a breed is like changing history...
Fossilized mentality needs a big hammer to break established concepts,but you need to tap the hammer gently and consistently ,not smash ,or you won't be listened to,
...I am not giving up on this but the old breeders are like ancient foundations that you feel you have no right to chip at,despite being convinced that certain practices re health issues are vital to be tackled for the good of the breeds future.

[rmoore920]

As this Forum is UK based, there may not be many US schnauzer owners here to answer your question.

Since this is a UK forum, does anyone know what generated the cropping/docking change in the UK? Was the pressure from animal rights groups or from dog owners? And what was the effective reasoning they used that changed the tradition?

[Dawnspell]

Quite a bit of info in these links.
I thought this part about preventing rabies "interesting" from the first link
III. History

Tail docking and ear cropping date to the early Romans, who believed that the practices prevented rabies. 11 During the European Middle Ages, through the end of the 18th century, Lamarck's theory of acquired characteristics 12 was widely accepted. As such, people believed that by docking the tails of the parents, "the new born puppies would look like their parents" and also exhibit short tails. 13 In addition, long-tailed or floppy-eared dogs used for hunting, fighting, or watching flocks were at a greater risk of injury associated with those activities. As such, tails were docked and ears cropped to reduce the number of places another dog or other animal could grab. The owners of working dogs often believed that tail docking reduced a dog's maneuverability, thereby discouraging the dog from chasing game, 14 while the other dog owners often believed that tail docking resulted in a stronger back and increased speed. 15

Finally, various tax schemes may have accounted for the proliferation of tail docking. In some areas, dogs used for work were not taxed, so the owners of such dogs would dock the tails to indicate that the dog was used for work and not subject to tax. 16 In other areas, farmers were taxed according to the length of their dogs' tails, so docking was used to reduce the tax liability. 17 Moreover, sport hunting was considered to be reserved for the wealthy nobility, and it was believed that only long-tailed dogs were suitable for hunting. As such, the owners of long-tailed dogs were required to pay a high tax and tail docking became a practice of the commoners. 18

https://www.animallaw.info/article/crop ... y-cosmetic" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Docking_(dog" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cropping_(animal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

[zeta1454]

As this Forum is UK based, there may not be many US schnauzer owners here to answer your question.

Since this is a UK forum, does anyone know what generated the cropping/docking change in the UK? Was the pressure from animal rights groups or from dog owners? And what was the effective reasoning they used that changed the tradition?

This is an interesting question and probably not easy to give a simple answer.
Re ear cropping in the UK, the ban on this came in 1899 and I have read that it was triggered by a letter to the Kennel Club from Edward VII when he was Prince of Wales as he found the practice abhorrent. Whether or not this is the case, I think it shows that changes can come about in a variety of ways and some may not be publicly known - an influential individual or group may put pressure on a Kennel Club or on the legislature or government to introduce or ban all sorts of things.

Regarding tail docking of dogs in the UK, this is much more recent of course and, was banned as part of Animal Welfare Acts that became law in the different countries of the UK at different times and with some variation in the detail. The legislation covered a range of issues in relation to dogs (and other animals) and included sections on Unnecessary Suffering; Mutilation; Tail Docking and using animals for fighting.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/20 ... on-of-harm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

From memory of when we got our first miniature schnauzers in the 1990s I don't recall tail docking being a huge issue among pet owners who, if they were concerned about the practice, may have chosen a traditionally undocked breed or possibly requested the breeder not to have the puppy's tail docked. At that time, it would have been unusual to see schnauzers and certain other breeds with a tail and, even at Crufts at that time, there were few dogs entered from overseas where tails may have been left unaltered. I know that Crufts exhibition hall was decorated with huge posters of traditionally docked breeds with tails around the time the legislation came in and it was then strange to see pictures of Rottweiler, Boxer and Schnauzer dogs among others sporting long tails whereas nowadays it would be strange to see them without!

I would think that the legislation was brought in during the early years of this century in the UK due to pressure from a range of people and groups. It is not really possible to neatly divide people into animal rights activists/ breeders / show enthusiasts/ pet dog owners or more as some individuals may fall into all categories. Concern for animal welfare and a desire to avoid any unnecessary suffering or needless mutilation /alteration of an animal's natural appearance is shared by many breeders and those who show their dogs and who also may have numerous pet animals, as well as those who are just families with a pet dog .

The reasoning behind changing the traditions was, I am sure, part of a growing public awareness of sentient animals being deserving of care and respect. This attitude includes concern for the wellbeing of dogs and puppies and the fact that (aside from certain people who 'work' their dogs ) no justification could be given for continuing the tradition of docking other than a cosmetic one. The animal rights 'movement' certainly may have played a part in publicising practices regarded now as cruel and inhumane but I think it was a more widespread public awareness and demand for change that drove this particular legislative ban.

[MNMinis]

I am in the U.S. and have had 3 Minis--all with cropped ears. We would have been fine with natural ears, but all three were potential ring dogs for the breeder and uncropped ears were not quite as accepted in the U.S. when we got them. Our first Mini died of cancer at almost age 11, our other two are ages almost 12 and 4 1/2. They were cropped at about 8 weeks as I recall, by a vet who was a credible vet used by many breeders (those reputable vets who can do ears are few and far between). Puppies are under anesthesia and stitched, and ears are well cared for by the breeder for the next couple of weeks before going to their new forever home. I can't say that is the case for all breeders. Sorry to have made a short story long, but what I wanted to say is that I believe the cropping was done as humanely as possible and we have never had an ear infection in any of our minis. I know others with natural ears seem to get infections regularly. Probably not reason enough to crop--but that has been a good outcome for us given the situation.

[Dawnspell]

but what I wanted to say is that I believe the cropping was done as humanely as possible

But is it humane to put a pup through the trauma for cosmetic reasons purely to please a humans sense of aesthetics ?

Not having a go at you, just making a point

I don't really think cropping has much to do with reducing ear infections some dogs are just more susceptible same as humans and they don't get ear cropped.

[Oscar 12345]

It is not humane it is a very cruel unnecessary cosmetic procedure just like tail docking is. In addition, unnecessary anaesthesia at such a young age I really can't understand why it has not been banned in a civilised dog loving culture. Utter nonsense but very convenient to say that it is healthier for the ears. What about the well being of the dog? The sooner people get wise and follow their instincts to it being cruel the sooner it will banned and the sooner people will look at old photos (like I do with docked schnauzers) and think thank goodness we don't do that any more. Never ceases to amaze me that breed standards require everything left in tact on the dog but cosmetic surgery to alter ears and tails absolutely allowable. Rant over, just saying it as I see it.

[Frederickdawg]

Ear cropping is cruel straight after it is done and the pup has to spend weeks months with its after care, Stiches coming out bleeding possible infection etc. I’ve done this once. Never again. Those months of setting the cropped ears and going back to the vets for aftercare take away from the pups important stages in life.
My view of the tail being docked is different however.

[HugoBrum]

Personally I never understood why both practices are carried out regardless of country although it seems to mostly done in the US. It seems to be done in the interest of the owner rather than the interest of the dog, in fact it is cruel! I am glad it does not happen in this country.

Our 'Hugo' was simply our Hugo because of his lovely floppy ears along with bushy tail too. In fact we only got Hugo's coat cut when it was really necessary as we loved him with his longer hair, although we always made sure he had his long eyebrows and his beard too. To me that what a Giant Schnauzer was all about.

[Frederickdawg]

Personally I never understood why both practices are carried out regardless of country although it seems to mostly done in the US. It seems to be done in the interest of the owner rather than the interest of the dog, in fact it is cruel! I am glad it does not happen in this country.

Our 'Hugo' was simply our Hugo because of his lovely floppy ears along with bushy tail too. In fact we only got Hugo's coat cut when it was really necessary as we loved him with his longer hair, although we always made sure he had his long eyebrows and his beard too. To me that what a Giant Schnauzer was all about.

I agree. Everything is about looks here. Whether it be dogs or humans.