Declawing Cats: The New Frontier in Animal Rights Whackjobbery

[roo_ster]

Was reading the local alternative news rag and saw this article:
http://www.dallasobserver.com/2013-09-12/news/a-cat-fight-over-declawing/full/
A Cat Fight Over Declawing



Same shinola, different day: Some folks want gov't to enforce their preferences with violence rather than do the hard work of persuasion.  In this case, they want to use gov't to keep cat owners from altering their property.  Pathetic.

Of course, these are likely the same folks who want everyone to spay and neuter their pets.  These folks are all about force, force, force.

I have never had a cat of my very own, but I have been lucky enough to have room mates or family who had some really neat cats.  Some were declawed, some not so much. 

I will say that after reading this article's CATalog of declawing horrors, I doubt I'll ever declaw a cat. Because the ultimate horror was the COST: $400-$800 bucks for the love of Bastet! If a cat of mine can't keep its claws off the furniture after reasonable efforts on my part, say cat is going to its reward PDQ.

[Hawkmoon]

Cats NEED to claw ... something. Cats who can go outdoors can sharpen their claws on trees and such. cats who can't go outdoors have to find alternatives.

I'm a cat person. My family always had both cats and dogs when I was growing up and I like both, but none of the dogs ever just knew when I was sick, or feeling blue, and just jumped up on my bed and cuddled. My cat did. One of the saddest days of my life was the day he went out, and never came back.

Living in a house that I own, where a cat is allowed outdoors, I would not declaw. They need their claws for both defense and for climbing trees to escape and evade. But ... when I was married to ex-wife, we lived in a condominium. Pets were allowed in the units, but not outdoors. We were adopted by three adorable, all-black kittens that we later concluded were probably Burmese. They were house cats -- they were declawed.

FWIW -- we moved into the condo in 1979 and we were adopted by the cats in either 1980 or 1981. The battle over declawing was raging then just as it is now. It'll never be settled.

[BlueStarLizzard]

The only reason to declaw a cat is if the animal is too agressive to be kept alive otherwise.

By declawing a cat, you remove a signifigent means of survival.
Which may be no big deal, if your cat is an indoor cat, but really sucks for the cat if it escapes the house.

I generally don't approve of declawing cats, as the only reasons to do so for most cats is petty crap like it occasionally shredding furniture or whatnot.

In 8 years, working at a shop which both boards and GROOMS cats(i.e. I get to meet these cats when they are PO'd and eager to show you how much), I've met very few cats I wish had been declawed. Most of the rest just arn't dangorous enough to justify the removal of their primary weapons.

[BobR]

I had a small female Maine Coon (about 14lbs in her prime) that had a very impressive set of claws. Usually when we roughhoused she would just smack me with her paw, no claws. We trained her early to only scratch on the scratching posts we had places out for her. She was also trained to a harness and leash and to come into the house when called.

The most proud she ever made me was in Montana, we dropped her off at the vet for some dental cleaning and annual shots. When we came back to pick her up, they asked me to come into the back and get her out of her holding cell. I picked her up in typical PO'd cat fashion, from behind and around her body under her front legs. When I spun with her out in front of me, both vet techs took a step back. I don't know what she did to them, but she sure made me proud!  

ETA: I will not declaw any cats I own, after a few years of adult supervision in the back yard, they then get to come and go for a few hours every night. I have been looking at rescue sites for Ragdolls, Maine Coons and Norwegian Forest cats, and I am surprised at the number of cats that have been declawed, and not just the front, but the back also. 

bob

[Perd Hapley]

Which may be no big deal, if your cat is an indoor cat, but really sucks for the cat if it escapes the house.

Guess the stupid cat should have stayed in the house. 

[dogmush]

I have not yet declawed a cat I own,although My wife and I seriously discussed it with one of our current indoor cats. So far other forms of behavior modification have worked.  So far.

I would submit to BSL that several thousand dollars worth of damage to my house and furniture is not "petty crap".

IMNSHO,  declawing a cat should be a last resort before getting rid of it, and should only be done to a cat that is kept indoors and protected from danger it would need it's claws to defend against, but remains a valid choice to adapt the cat to a living arrangement. I don't see how it's inherently more cruel then any other surgical alterations that people routinely due to their pets.

[Levant]

The only reason to declaw a cat is if the animal is too agressive to be kept alive otherwise.

But the question I think the OP was raising was whether government should tell you whether or not you can declaw your cat. 

[Pharmacology]

Personally, I never would.
It's easy to think it's just a declawing,  but you're actually knocking off everything in front of the first knuckle.


It's even easier to teach a cat who is boss (grab them firmly at the nape of their neck like a mother would and say "NOOOOOOO"  loudly)   
My cat will not bite me and only smacks me playfully with furry paws, no claws.

If I know my mom's gonna visit with her Pekingese,  I'll just clip the cat's nails with a nail clipper.  Easy as pie.

[Jamisjockey]

Guess the stupid cat should have stayed in the house. 

This.  Stray and loose cats are a nuisance, and damage the local ecosystem by preying on song birds.

[Northwoods]

I wouldn't declaw a cat.  Though that might have more to do with the fact I'd never own one in the first place that any ideas about the propriety of such a procedure.

[White Horseradish]

So how is a law against this any different than a law against any sort of animal cruelty? What people can and can't do with their living property is already regulated. Why is this change in regulation suddenly a big deal?

[dogmush]

So how is a law against this any different than a law against any sort of animal cruelty? What people can and can't do with their living property is already regulated. Why is this change in regulation suddenly a big deal?

Generally speaking the existing regulation doesn't extend to medical procedure performed by licensed vets. This would. 

The implication being that the vet would perform the procedure in a fashion that isn't cruel.

[French G.]

I had a 3 month Gf, 10 years later my mom still has her cat, was mine for 4 years until I deployed. Only declawed cat I've ever had. Makes up for lack of claws with just plain mean. Quick to go to the rear claws and the teeth. If she can collar your hand with her front soft paws while spurring you and biting at the same time, so much the better. But lovable once you get to know her. unless she sees a cat carrier...

[BlueStarLizzard]

   I would submit to BSL that several thousand dollars worth of damage to my house and furniture is not "petty crap".

Which is why you could save the money for declawing the cat, buy a new chair and solve the issue with some diluted lemon water in a spray bottle and vigilance.

Levent, I didn't say the gov should have any say in the matter what so ever. I'm saying that, in my professional opinion, I do not belive declawing cats should be a routine surgery.
It's not just cosmetic, nor does it remove a body part that's simply should not be used and can cause health problems if it remains (spay/neuters on pet)

FWIW, I dislike most legislation involving the care and upkeep of domestic animals, because the vast majority of it is wrong to the point of stupid.

[dogmush]

Which is why you could save the money for declawing the cat, buy a new chair and solve the issue with some diluted lemon water in a spray bottle and vigilance.

Not so much.

I get that you have a lot of experience with animals. So do I.  And I did manage to [mostly] train this cat out of it with a lot of time, effort and, frankly, skill. But there are cats, and situations, where the choices are declaw, or cat leaves the house.  Many times that would mean the cat's death.  To sit back and give a blanket "just train the cat out of it" is both condescending and likely to result in more cats being put down.



ETA: Connected question. As my moniker indicates I have experience with working dogs.  It is routine, and unremarked, to remove a pup's dew claws to make them more suitable to the life they are going to live (dew claws on a sled dog are often the cause of bad injuries later in life.  I shudder to think what the hive mind thinks of that practice.

[cambeul41]

I am in favor of cats keeping their claws, but our present cat was rescued already declawed front and rear when we got her.  When I mentioned my displeasure with declawing to a cat specialist vet, she said that she would only declaw with a laser.  When she did, the cats evidenced no discomfort but started pawing at things such as cages immediately upon awakening.

She escaped for about a week.  We got her back with a live trap.  She was in good condition with no apparent weight lose — she had not only come home for food left out for her but had also stolen food from a neighbors cat who was fed outside.

[HankB]

This.  Stray and loose cats are a nuisance, and damage the local ecosystem by preying on song birds.

You have a cat, fine - keep it in your own house. It's irresponsible and inconsiderate to inflict your animal's nuisance behavior on neighbors, and if you let it run aournd loose, it's YOUR fault if it doesn't come back someday.

[White Horseradish]

Generally speaking the existing regulation doesn't extend to medical procedure performed by licensed vets. This would. 

The implication being that the vet would perform the procedure in a fashion that isn't cruel.

I don't think it's so much the fashion of the procedure, as the result. Hypothetically speaking, would pulling all the teeth of a healthy dog be an OK thing to do, so long as it was under anesthesia?

[Sergeant Bob]

You have a cat, fine - keep it in your own house. It's irresponsible and inconsiderate to inflict your animal's nuisance behavior on neighbors, and if you let it run aournd loose, it's YOUR fault if it doesn't come back someday.

Works for me.

[Jamisjockey]

I don't think it's so much the fashion of the procedure, as the result. Hypothetically speaking, would pulling all the teeth of a healthy dog be an OK thing to do, so long as it was under anesthesia?

Hypothetically speaking, would it be okay in a suburban or semi-rural setting to turn your dogs loose to roam the neighborhood, *expletive deleted*it in people's flowerbeds, harass the wildlife and spread fleas?
Unless you live in a very rural setting where barn cats are part of farm life, this shouldn't even be a question. Cats are house pets the same as dogs and hamsters and goldfish.  A cat doesn't need its front claws to eat from a bowl.

[BryanP]

While I personally think it's cruel and unnecessary (the same as I think about docking tails and pinning ears), I don't see making it illegal.  You convince people to change behavior like that, you don't prohibit it.

[White Horseradish]

Hypothetically speaking, would it be okay in a suburban or semi-rural setting to turn your dogs loose to roam the neighborhood, *expletive deleted* in people's flowerbeds, harass the wildlife and spread fleas?

Unless you live in a very rural setting where barn cats are part of farm life, this shouldn't even be a question. Cats are house pets the same as dogs and hamsters and goldfish. 

Neither dogs, nor hamsters, nor goldfish have surgery that is this invasive done to them. At any rate, this isn't relevant to what I was asking.

A cat doesn't need its front claws to eat from a bowl.

Well, for that it doesn't need legs at all. Doesn't need teeth, either, if you feed them soft food. So, how about we just cut off whatever protrudes (surgically and under anesthesia) and just have these fluffy balls?  They will be like big tribbles.


By the same token, perhaps people who have expensive furniture and can't handle claws don't need cats?

[Jamisjockey]

Legless tribble cats? Sign me up. 

[roo_ster]

So how is a law against this any different than a law against any sort of animal cruelty? What people can and can't do with their living property is already regulated. Why is this change in regulation suddenly a big deal?

Not a big fan of animal cruelty laws in the first place.  Your property is your property.  I may mightily disapprove of the way you treat your critters, but unless the noise/smell is irksome or you are piping blood & offal on to my property, I am at a loss to wonder where I get the authority to make you stop by means of applied force.  

Besides, folk get who worked up over declawing a a small number of cats (or other low-frequency, retail-level cruelty) when they eat meat that did not spontaneously commit suicide in the wild are hard to take seriously.

And from my experience, the declawed cats I have known lived in the lap of luxury.

Guess the stupid cat should have stayed in the house.  

Indeed.  Inflicting my pets on my neighbors is not, uh, neighborly.  Unless you are living a ways from folk and don;t mind if Fluffy gets eaten by coyotes, keep the pets contained: dogs behind fences, cats indoors.

While I personally think it's cruel and unnecessary (the same as I think about docking tails and pinning ears), I don't see making it illegal.  You convince people to change behavior like that, you don't prohibit it.

This.  

The cost alone convinced me.  For that kind of $$$, I can cycle through a dozen or more until I find a decent cat that responds to love, kindness, and firm training in the manner it ought.  Kittens are cheap or free and shelters kill them by the millions(1).  No need to make a project out of one and carve it up beyond spay/neuter.  [Edit: Heck, the stats say only 2-3% of pet cats are reclaimed from shelters.  No need to even train up a kitten, you can browse and hang out with full-grown already-trained cats at the shelter to see if they are angels or demons.]





(1) Bright spot: ~3million dogs & cats are euthanized annually, down from ~20million/year in the 1970s.  Largely due to folks getting their pets spayed & neutered.  Almost entirely voluntarily, without the need for gov't intervention. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2012/0210/Behind-the-big-drop-in-euthanasia-for-America-s-dogs-and-cats

Neither dogs, nor hamsters, nor goldfish have surgery that is this invasive done to them. At any rate, this isn't relevant to what I was asking.

Spaying & neutering is more invasive.  Dewclaw removal is just as invasive, as is docking of tails.  Ear clipping, not so much.  Scent gland removal from ferrets is likely as invasive.

Legless tribble cats? Sign me up.  

Seen lotsa tripod cats around here.  Not sure why, perhaps they nearly became a coyote snack.

[41magsnub]

While I personally think it's cruel and unnecessary (the same as I think about docking tails and pinning ears), I don't see making it illegal.  You convince people to change behavior like that, you don't prohibit it.

Agreed.  while I wish my dog hadn't had her tail docked, I don't support what the did in the EU to ban the practice.