Comments on: Monday: A veterinarian addresses canine devocalization http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2010/02/08/monday-a-veterinarian-addresses-canine-devocalization/ Blogging by a team of pet-care experts. Tue, 07 Feb 2012 07:26:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Gina Spadafori http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2010/02/08/monday-a-veterinarian-addresses-canine-devocalization/comment-page-1/#comment-483895 Gina Spadafori Mon, 01 Mar 2010 22:57:25 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/?p=12291#comment-483895 "Debarked" dogs aren't usually silent. They just bark with a quieter rasp. Is this dog trying to bark and nothing's coming out? “Debarked” dogs aren’t usually silent. They just bark with a quieter rasp. Is this dog trying to bark and nothing’s coming out?

]]> By: Brenda Cox http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2010/02/08/monday-a-veterinarian-addresses-canine-devocalization/comment-page-1/#comment-483894 Brenda Cox Mon, 01 Mar 2010 22:31:48 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/?p=12291#comment-483894 My husband and I just adopted a Rat Terrier on Saturday, 3 days ago. Our dog has not made a sound and we are very worried. I never heard of debarking before. How do we know if this dog has been debarked? Your help is greatly appreciated. Brenda Cox brenken@grandecom.net My husband and I just adopted a Rat Terrier on Saturday, 3 days ago. Our dog has not made a sound and we are very worried. I never heard of debarking before. How do we know if this dog has been debarked?

Your help is greatly appreciated.

Brenda Cox
brenken@grandecom.net

]]> By: Gina Spadafori http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2010/02/08/monday-a-veterinarian-addresses-canine-devocalization/comment-page-1/#comment-483248 Gina Spadafori Thu, 11 Feb 2010 15:02:16 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/?p=12291#comment-483248 I guess peer-reviewed studies are only necessary for views you disagree with, and anything else should be considered factual because you claim to be a doctor on Teh Interwebs or saw so-called "climategate" bloviated over on Faux News. Which just goes to show ya there's plenty of BS to go around. We are not anyone's echo chamber here. Just sayin'. "The bark only means get away predator thats all." The ignorance in this statement is truly remarkable in light of, you know, peer-reviewed research. I guess peer-reviewed studies are only necessary for views you disagree with, and anything else should be considered factual because you claim to be a doctor on Teh Interwebs or saw so-called “climategate” bloviated over on Faux News. Which just goes to show ya there’s plenty of BS to go around.

We are not anyone’s echo chamber here. Just sayin’.

“The bark only means get away predator thats all.” The ignorance in this statement is truly remarkable in light of, you know, peer-reviewed research.

]]> By: Dr Rosset http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2010/02/08/monday-a-veterinarian-addresses-canine-devocalization/comment-page-1/#comment-483246 Dr Rosset Thu, 11 Feb 2010 14:44:54 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/?p=12291#comment-483246 Bark softening is the correct name for the surgery. Studies show that it does not bother the dog nor make them unhappy. They continue to bark just not as loud. It is apparent that many of you know nothing about dogs or how dogs think.  You put too much human perception upon these animals. As for the carbon footprint of a pet that is bunk and was a made up study to support the animal rights zealots. What people forget is that water vapor is the largest greenhouse effect by far. Methane has a life span of 7 years and his produce by every plant on this earth. In fact 89% of the methane gas comes from rice paddies, termites, soybean production, wetlands and tropical rain forests. Methane gas from domestic animals and humans is less than 18% of the 7.9% total of all methane gas in the atmosphere. For some insane reason people who want to get rid of all domesticated animals have been propagandizing this lie for some time to support their viewpoint against animals. Next they will do it against humans.  Already the Indian scientist who convinced Al Gore to make his so called documentary has said his studies that showed the snow would be gone from the Himalayans by 2030 is now "incorrect" and unprovable. His data was wrong. He's so sorry.  The Hockey stick data put out by the now debunked climategate scientists is also wrong.  In fact we are in a global cooling period. This is what you get when you don't allow peer review and you block opposing theories.  Why did they do this you ask? Its quite clear that they were being funded by a governments that wanted to use cap and trade to make money.  Cap and trade does nothing for the earth as the rich can continue to pollute and pay for the privilege. Cap and trade does nothing to lower pollution.  It is a scam to make money off the richer countries of the world.  In fact pollution has been reduced substantially since the 1960s. This is just fear that is being promoted for some people to make great sums of money. All you have to do is follow the money. As for Bark softening it is insane to say its cruel because it cuts off the dogs communication abilities. What this says is that the person who says this does not know how dogs communicate at all. The bark only means get away predator thats all. Its a warning not a greeting. Dogs communicate by licking, lowering their head, and butt sniffing things many humans can't do to communicate so they think barking is talking. Well it isn't. Bark softening actually also allows the dog to breathe better by enlarging the tiny opening in the vocal chords so more air can pass through more easily. Raspy barks come from dogs who continue to bark non-stop and like any being who shouts all day long they become hoarse. But if you are cutting the vocal chords you are doing the procedure all wrong. Bark softening is the correct name for the surgery. Studies show that it does not bother the dog nor make them unhappy. They continue to bark just not as loud. It is apparent that many of you know nothing about dogs or how dogs think.  You put too much human perception upon these animals. As for the carbon footprint of a pet that is bunk and was a made up study to support the animal rights zealots. What people forget is that water vapor is the largest greenhouse effect by far. Methane has a life span of 7 years and his produce by every plant on this earth. In fact 89% of the methane gas comes from rice paddies, termites, soybean production, wetlands and tropical rain forests. Methane gas from domestic animals and humans is less than 18% of the 7.9% total of all methane gas in the atmosphere. For some insane reason people who want to get rid of all domesticated animals have been propagandizing this lie for some time to support their viewpoint against animals. Next they will do it against humans.  Already the Indian scientist who convinced Al Gore to make his so called documentary has said his studies that showed the snow would be gone from the Himalayans by 2030 is now “incorrect” and unprovable. His data was wrong. He’s so sorry.  The Hockey stick data put out by the now debunked climategate scientists is also wrong.  In fact we are in a global cooling period. This is what you get when you don’t allow peer review and you block opposing theories.  Why did they do this you ask? Its quite clear that they were being funded by a governments that wanted to use cap and trade to make money.  Cap and trade does nothing for the earth as the rich can continue to pollute and pay for the privilege. Cap and trade does nothing to lower pollution.  It is a scam to make money off the richer countries of the world.  In fact pollution has been reduced substantially since the 1960s. This is just fear that is being promoted for some people to make great sums of money. All you have to do is follow the money. As for Bark softening it is insane to say its cruel because it cuts off the dogs communication abilities. What this says is that the person who says this does not know how dogs communicate at all. The bark only means get away predator thats all. Its a warning not a greeting. Dogs communicate by licking, lowering their head, and butt sniffing things many humans can’t do to communicate so they think barking is talking. Well it isn’t. Bark softening actually also allows the dog to breathe better by enlarging the tiny opening in the vocal chords so more air can pass through more easily. Raspy barks come from dogs who continue to bark non-stop and like any being who shouts all day long they become hoarse. But if you are cutting the vocal chords you are doing the procedure all wrong.

]]> By: Gina Spadafori http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2010/02/08/monday-a-veterinarian-addresses-canine-devocalization/comment-page-1/#comment-483229 Gina Spadafori Thu, 11 Feb 2010 02:09:17 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/?p=12291#comment-483229 That person with a devocalized dog you met was most likely a breeder. Comment by George — February 10, 2010 I call utter BS. You don't "meet" puppy-milling scum and their dogs, because their dogs never leave their cages. And the population of non-milling breeders isn't that large as to be common. I did breed rescue for Shelties, and I took in, fostered and rehomed a LOT of debarked dogs. Heck, I own one, who was debarked before I got him. Wouldn't have had it done to him, but it doesn't bother him a bit that it was. When I was doing Sheltie rescue, about a third to a half of the dogs we got had been debarked. They were being rehomed for all the usual, non-barking reasons: moving, divorce, death of owner, etc. Many if not most were given up by people who needed our help, and they were not "bad owners" who didn't care about the dogs. Every dog we took in was from a pet home, not a breeder home. None of the debarked ones seemed bothered by the fact that their voices hadn't any normal volume. As for the coughing, gagging, etc., I would suggest that's more a problem with surgical technique than the procedure itself. As usual, I'm utterly fascinated at the disconnect between calling debarking, declawing, tail-dogs, ear-crops "cruelty" on one hand while promoting efforts to get the reproductive systems of every dog and cat sliced out in as cheap and production-line a way as possible on the other hand. That so many animal advocates can hold these clearly contradictory views shows they haven't thought about them much, or certainly looked at the science. I personally like my animals intact as much as possible. And I'm consistent in my view: Oviohysterectomies, castration, declaw, debark, tail docks and ear crops -- I recognize that they are ALL done for human choice and convenience. And they are ALL surgeries. (And by the way: I don't have a problem with unplanned pregnancies with the one intact male I have. Leash, fence, training. Amazing how it works when a responsible pet-owner uses them.) Likely no pet would choose any of these surgeries. I have chosen a couple of them, however. While I do not personally choose tail docks, ear crops, declaws or debarks, I have chosen spaying and neutering for almost all of my pets, with the best boarded surgeon I could find, all anesthetic precautions and full-on pain control. I think spaying and neutering is the right choice after consideration for most pets in most homes, but it should be considered, not mandated, because there ARE counter-indications in terms of health and behavior. I don't pretend spay-neuter is accomplished by a sprinkling of fairy dust, or has no negative ramifications for the health of an individual pet. I'm waiting for those who call "cruelty" on everyone else to catch up with the facts. I'll be completely delighted to see tail docks and ear crops fall completely out of fashion, but I do not support making them illegal. And while I do not and will not personally choose debarking or declawing, I know for an absolute FACT that these procedures have kept pets in homes where they are loved and well-cared-for. Saying otherwise is holier-than-thou nonsense. As Christie suggests, cough up some facts in support of your assertions. The talking points you've spewed are an utter fail here. That person with a devocalized dog you met was most likely a breeder.

Comment by George — February 10, 2010

I call utter BS. You don’t “meet” puppy-milling scum and their dogs, because their dogs never leave their cages. And the population of non-milling breeders isn’t that large as to be common. I did breed rescue for Shelties, and I took in, fostered and rehomed a LOT of debarked dogs. Heck, I own one, who was debarked before I got him. Wouldn’t have had it done to him, but it doesn’t bother him a bit that it was.

When I was doing Sheltie rescue, about a third to a half of the dogs we got had been debarked. They were being rehomed for all the usual, non-barking reasons: moving, divorce, death of owner, etc. Many if not most were given up by people who needed our help, and they were not “bad owners” who didn’t care about the dogs. Every dog we took in was from a pet home, not a breeder home. None of the debarked ones seemed bothered by the fact that their voices hadn’t any normal volume. As for the coughing, gagging, etc., I would suggest that’s more a problem with surgical technique than the procedure itself.

As usual, I’m utterly fascinated at the disconnect between calling debarking, declawing, tail-dogs, ear-crops “cruelty” on one hand while promoting efforts to get the reproductive systems of every dog and cat sliced out in as cheap and production-line a way as possible on the other hand. That so many animal advocates can hold these clearly contradictory views shows they haven’t thought about them much, or certainly looked at the science.

I personally like my animals intact as much as possible. And I’m consistent in my view: Oviohysterectomies, castration, declaw, debark, tail docks and ear crops — I recognize that they are ALL done for human choice and convenience. And they are ALL surgeries. (And by the way: I don’t have a problem with unplanned pregnancies with the one intact male I have. Leash, fence, training. Amazing how it works when a responsible pet-owner uses them.)

Likely no pet would choose any of these surgeries. I have chosen a couple of them, however. While I do not personally choose tail docks, ear crops, declaws or debarks, I have chosen spaying and neutering for almost all of my pets, with the best boarded surgeon I could find, all anesthetic precautions and full-on pain control. I think spaying and neutering is the right choice after consideration for most pets in most homes, but it should be considered, not mandated, because there ARE counter-indications in terms of health and behavior.

I don’t pretend spay-neuter is accomplished by a sprinkling of fairy dust, or has no negative ramifications for the health of an individual pet. I’m waiting for those who call “cruelty” on everyone else to catch up with the facts.

I’ll be completely delighted to see tail docks and ear crops fall completely out of fashion, but I do not support making them illegal. And while I do not and will not personally choose debarking or declawing, I know for an absolute FACT that these procedures have kept pets in homes where they are loved and well-cared-for. Saying otherwise is holier-than-thou nonsense.

As Christie suggests, cough up some facts in support of your assertions. The talking points you’ve spewed are an utter fail here.

]]> By: Christie Keith http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2010/02/08/monday-a-veterinarian-addresses-canine-devocalization/comment-page-1/#comment-483227 Christie Keith Thu, 11 Feb 2010 00:45:34 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/?p=12291#comment-483227 <i>Surrendering a dog to a shelter is more humane than devocalization.</i> Well, I guess that depends on the shelter, really, doesn't it? Some shelters kill every animal they get. Others, many others, kill any animal with a behavior problem. Mind explaining your thinking here, or do you think debarking is literally worse than DEATH? I'm not defending or recommending debarking, but please offer us your citations for the following: "Devocalized animals are abandoned like any other." "a dog who barks alot with no other behavioral issues will most likely not be put down just for barking." Also, can you quantify this risk, and perhaps compare it to the risk of death in the shelter you'd like to see them surrendered to? "Devocalized animals face serious risks such as chronic coughing and gagging for the rest of their lives, airway obstruction, and even death." Surrendering a dog to a shelter is more humane than devocalization.

Well, I guess that depends on the shelter, really, doesn’t it? Some shelters kill every animal they get. Others, many others, kill any animal with a behavior problem. Mind explaining your thinking here, or do you think debarking is literally worse than DEATH?

I’m not defending or recommending debarking, but please offer us your citations for the following:

“Devocalized animals are abandoned like any other.”

“a dog who barks alot with no other behavioral issues will most likely not be put down just for barking.”

Also, can you quantify this risk, and perhaps compare it to the risk of death in the shelter you’d like to see them surrendered to?

“Devocalized animals face serious risks such as chronic coughing and gagging for the rest of their lives, airway obstruction, and even death.”

]]> By: George http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2010/02/08/monday-a-veterinarian-addresses-canine-devocalization/comment-page-1/#comment-483226 George Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:58:49 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/?p=12291#comment-483226 Judith. That person with a devocalized dog you met was most likely a breeder. Some breeders use the term "bark-softening" to hide what devocalization actually is, cutting vocal cords just to stifle voices. Bark softening doesn't exist in the veterinary literature (source: HSVMA) Devocalization does not save a dog or cat's life. Devocalized animals are abandoned like any other. And a dog who barks alot with no other behavioral issues will most likely not be put down just for barking. Surrendering a dog to a shelter is more humane than devocalization. Devocalized animals face serious risks such as chronic coughing and gagging for the rest of their lives, airway obstruction, and even death. Animal cruelty is everyone's business. Judith. That person with a devocalized dog you met was most likely a breeder. Some breeders use the term “bark-softening” to hide what devocalization actually is, cutting vocal cords just to stifle voices. Bark softening doesn’t exist in the veterinary literature (source: HSVMA)
Devocalization does not save a dog or cat’s life. Devocalized animals are abandoned like any other. And a dog who barks alot with no other behavioral issues will most likely not be put down just for barking.
Surrendering a dog to a shelter is more humane than devocalization. Devocalized animals face serious risks such as chronic coughing and gagging for the rest of their lives, airway obstruction, and even death.

Animal cruelty is everyone’s business.

]]> By: Judith Erlanger http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2010/02/08/monday-a-veterinarian-addresses-canine-devocalization/comment-page-1/#comment-483220 Judith Erlanger Wed, 10 Feb 2010 22:23:18 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/?p=12291#comment-483220 I have retrievers, so I am accustomed to quiet dogs. They are bred to be quiet since a barking dog scares away game. The first time I heard a bark-softened dog I was shocked. Then the owner explained to me that she had to bark-soften her dog or euthanize it. De-barking might not be the choice I'd make for my dog, but I am unwilling to take that option away from another owner. Is it better to kill a dog rather than bark-soften it? I think not. More people need to mind their own business. Those who want to define bark softening as cruelty should be forced to deal with a screaming dog and complaints by neighbors before they are allowed to define it as cruelty I have retrievers, so I am accustomed to quiet dogs. They are bred to be quiet since a barking dog scares away game. The first time I heard a bark-softened dog I was shocked. Then the owner explained to me that she had to bark-soften her dog or euthanize it.

De-barking might not be the choice I’d make for my dog, but I am unwilling to take that option away from another owner. Is it better to kill a dog rather than bark-soften it? I think not.

More people need to mind their own business. Those who want to define bark softening as cruelty should be forced to deal with a screaming dog and complaints by neighbors before they are allowed to define it as cruelty

]]> By: Valerie http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2010/02/08/monday-a-veterinarian-addresses-canine-devocalization/comment-page-1/#comment-483171 Valerie Tue, 09 Feb 2010 06:04:19 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/?p=12291#comment-483171 Thanks for the mention. I am actually serious about PETA using robotic pets. I wasn't joking. Thanks for the mention. I am actually serious about PETA using robotic pets. I wasn’t joking.

]]> By: David S. Greene http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2010/02/08/monday-a-veterinarian-addresses-canine-devocalization/comment-page-1/#comment-483139 David S. Greene Mon, 08 Feb 2010 16:47:59 +0000 http://www.petconnection.com/blog/?p=12291#comment-483139 Cait, if you can find a photo credit, I'd appreciate it. Cait, if you can find a photo credit, I’d appreciate it.

]]>