I normally like what I read at Dog Press, though it’s far more Page Six than it is anything else, but this one actually made me laugh out loud more than once:
http://www.thedogpress.com/Columns/Editorials/09052-Crop-Dock_bj.asp
Read and enjoy, and I’ll be back later today to comment.
By the way, the NY bill did NOT pass (more’s the pity, honestly) and almost certainly will be abandoned for this session. So ignore any mention of the bill actually passing.
Ruffly Speaking: Railing against idiocy since 2004 
That is just one big bowl of crazy. Loved, loved, loved the reference to the long lasting pain and emotional distress of colonoscopy and mammography. Ditto for the sidebar ad “young doggy woman needs a job”.
I’m LOLing along with you, Joanna, particularly at these two gems:
1. “In docked breeds, long tails will change the identifiable profile of the breed, the SET of the tail and consequently, the croup will drop and that will affect movement”
and
2. “In cropped breeds, long ears will not change the structure but will make a softer expression acceptable and consequently softer temperaments will become the norm.”
Um, what in the what now?! Leaving a tail THAT THE DOG WAS BORN WOTH is going to change the SET of the tail THAT HE WAS BORN WITH? And somehow throw off the ability to move THAT HE WAS BORN WITH? By that logic, I could weight my Cardi puppy’s tail down for a few months and lower her somewhat high tail-set. Hey! Maybe I should try that! Come here, Elli, let me tie a dumbbell to your tail!
And somehow I’m also supposed to believe that leaving the dog’s natural ears will, by changing OUR PERCEPTION of his expression, change THE DOG’S innate temperament? I can buy that only insofar as the changed PERCEPTION might change the way we treat and train the dog and the qualities we choose to include in our breeding programs, but it’s not going to alter the genetic components of temperament in the DOG HIMSELF.
I’m no scientist, nor am I a geneticist, but at first glance this reasoning doesn’t even pass the straight-face test.
Oh, my.
“It is hypocritical to make an issue of cropping and docking pain unless one is equally as soft-hearted about human dental work, mammograms and colonoscopies, all of which invoke long lasting pain and emotional stress.”
I mean, it’s just–well, that makes no sense. How could that be written with an ounce of seriousness?
Aagh, teh craxy!
Like Claire and Rinalia said, the part that got me was the line about mammograms causing long-lasting pain and emotional distress – I just don’t think I’ll be able to cope with getting a baseline mammogram done this year! It must be truly unbearable, to be worse than having a body part lopped off, sans anesthesia.
I also loved the part Dawn mentioned, where breeders face changing the whole temperament of the dog, simply by allowing it to keep its ears.
I can only imagine what this person is like in real life. Yikes.
That post illustrates a completely science-free belief system about dog breeding and structure. It’s quite gobsmacking.
Joanna, that’s not a certain poster from the galaxy far far away is it? Though I thought she said she started out in GSDs and was on to Fox Terriers now…so maybe not.
Maybe it was meant as a joke??? Hopefully!!!
People are nuttier every day.
“Consciously or not, favor the Animal Rights Agenda and are out to prove a point. And that is something every dedicated breeder should loudly and publicly condemn!”
Whoa, hold on a minute! Someone can dislike the cosmetic altering of an animal, and still be VERY anti-animal rights. WTH?
I’m not so much apposed to docking (I prefer many breeds docked), but cropping, I’ve always thought looked silly, and unnatural. I’ve always preferred the look of natural-eared dogs. It’s called “personal preference”. Doesn’t mean someone’s in bed with, or dreaming of sleeping with the AR wackos! Me personally, I opted to get into a natural breed, and in the future, will likely stick with natural breeds. All personal preference, and has nothing to do with a conscious, or unconscious animal rights agenda.