The Wildlife Penning Prohibition Act of 2008 in the US

Although nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to what humans will do to non-human animals to amuse themselves (e.g. bull-fighting, canned hunting, trophy hunting, et al.), the practice of wildlife penning is something with which I was unfamiliar up until this morning. I read about how Congress in the US is presently considering amending the Lacey Act to prohibit the interstate travel of wild animals used in penning.

So what's involved in wildlife penning? Basically, animals (generally foxes or coyotes) are caught -- usually in steel leg traps where they're seriously injured -- and then thrown into cages together and transported to these events where they're penned and packs of dogs are set loose on them to rip them apart. The dogs are numbered and judged on how quickly they attack and eviscerate the trapped animals. HSUS is encouraging people to contact their representatives to urge them to pass this legislation.

Response from the NBSPCA

I just received a response from Glen McGuire, Executive Director of the NBSPCA, concerning the New Brunswick Veterinary Medical Association (NBVMA)'s members' recent decision to ban their performing of ear cropping, tail docking and dew claw removals on dogs in New Brunswick. I'd written out of concern over responses to this decision from people who make a living off of the breeding of purebreds, and who've seemed to be asserting that breeders and show dog owners will likely resort to going out of province or to getting someone else to butcher his or her way through the procedures and then see the vets (legitimately) to heal the damage that's been done. I asked him what the NBSPCA's response would be to someone's docking or cropping dogs' tails or ears -- what the legal repercussions would be.

Note: By CC of C Section 446, Mr. McGuire means the Criminal Code of Canada, Section 446 concerning cruelty to animals.

He wrote:

Hi M,

Thank you for your letter re: Our position on the NBVMA resolution adopted last week. As you can imagine, we are never in agreement with any unnecessary pain and suffering inflicted upon animals. Many of the veterinarians in the Province have refused to do this type of cosmetic alteration as a matter of principle. With the adoption of last week's resolution, it will now be a prohibited procedure.

This then goes to your question as to what we would do in the event that people decide to perform surgical alterations without the benefit of a veterinarian. According to our Chief Inspector, we would have to charge people under CC of C Section 446. Causing undue pain and suffering. To do this we would need witnesses and confirmation that this had been done. We would also need to have the Crown seize and prosecute the case.

We will of course be raising this issue in our ongoing talks with the Government with the view, if necessary to adding or amending regulations to address this potential problem. Thank you for your concern.

Sincerely,

Glen McGuire
NBSPCA

No more cosmetic surgery for dogs in NB

According to the CBC, tail docking and ear cropping are cosmetic procedures that will soon no longer be performed by veterinarians in the Canadian province of New Brunswick. The New Brunswick Veterinary Medical Association (NBVMA) reached this decision recently, prompted in part by the recommendations of Canada's national body of veterinarians. According to one vet who

cringes whenever dogs come in for these procedures because she believes they are painful [:]

"Usually, when it's done, it's done between three and five days old. It's done without the benefit of anesthesia. People say it doesn't really hurt them, but they scream when you do it," she said.

So far, the only folks who seem to be complaining are the breeders and kennel clubs -- people who raise animals expected to fit into a certain aesthetically acceptable image. And they're responding with fearmongering:

Judy Burn from the Saint John area, a judge at Canadian Kennel Club competitions, said the province-wide policy is unfair to breeders, and may even put dogs at risk if owners try to do the procedures themselves.

"They may attempt it themselves and probably end up a mess on their hands that the vet will end up seeing anyway. Then you get breeders, or someone that knows someone that can do it, and infections set in. To me, the dog ends up suffering," Burns said.

It seems to me that if the vets in the province have deemed these procedures cruel and unnecessary that people attempting to submit the dogs in the care to them through other means should be punished under current animal cruelty legislation. I decided to send an email to the NB SPCA to inquire about this -- to ask whether current legislation would prohibit breeders from doing this themselves, and if not, what could be done to alter current animal cruelty legislation so that breeders could be prohibited from mutilating their dogs themselves (or have them mutilated by others). I encourage interested readers to do the same. The NB SPCA's contact form is available here. I'll post an update with any response I received from them as soon as I do.