Declaw Debate 3 (Hot & Heavy !!!)

Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:55:54 -0500 Subject: Re: FEL-L: declaw

Sean, We could haggle back and forth about declawing forever, and I doubt either would convince the other. I'm going to say this about that, then leave it with you, and whoever, for your replies.

It seems to me that those who declaw are using any reason/excuse/logic for doing it. It doesn't hurt the cats, a good vet can do it properly, it causes no repercussions, it is for the safety of the public.

The fact remains that the majority of experienced exotic animal veterinarians in this country and around the world are against declawing because of the short- and long-term derogatory effects on the animal.

You suggest that there are other causes of the problems in our cats, and yes, they are rescues. That is what Tiger Haven does. The animal medical profession has the ability to determine the causation of these effects in our cats as to bad nutrition, genetic deformity, etc. The cause is declawing. Simply that.

Some say that the cats are declawed "only for the safety of the public". Are you aware that there are far more injuries to the public from private facility cats than all the AZA zoos. And the AZA zoos do not declaw their cats, but in general they do not handle the cats. So, if it is done for the safety of the public, how does this figure?

Sean, you say that you are skeptical because you have not heard a hint of the problems related to declawing, and suggest the stories are anecdotes. I can assure you that the stories you hear from Tiger Haven are true, and so can our veterinarians. Please, before you dismiss the truth, visit some facilities who have had these problems.

On another note, you say "If these cats wanted to interact with people in the wild outside of meal time they would have done so a long time ago on their own".

This tells me that you are, indeed, worried about handling the cats. You should know that man is not the natural prey of the big cats. Several people have been injured or killed in the US, but how many have been eaten? A statement such as that, outside of this list, could do us all needless damage. For the record, there are several instances of tigers "interacting" with people in the wild, in India, in the forest villages. (We have communication with people in India regarding the tiger.)

You say "You are already altering the cat by removing it from the wild, by feeding it a diet of your choice, and by teaching him to work past the limits of his instincts and learn how to interact with you on reasoning level".

Be reasonable. We did not remove any cats from the wild. We do not have our cats work at all, much less past any limits they may have. If that is something you or your facility does, it is on your conscience.

The cats are here. We did not breed them. The choice we made was to save their life, or to make their life better. The alternative is to kill them. While they are here, and if they choose to enjoy our company, we will give it to them. We will "alter" them, when absolutely necessary, to prevent more from being homeless. Again, if you have a problem with that, it is your problem, not mine.

I guess it all comes down to whether or not you are doing what is in the cat's best interest. And I fail to see how removing their claws are in their best interest. If you are declawing for your own interest, whether it be to sell the cats, or make money by allowing the public to come in contact with them, OK. But as someone said, it may have been you, let's call a spade a spade.

That said, I will do my best to refrain from adding further comments on this subject. You know what you know, and I know what I know. Implications and insinuations are simply that, and do not change truth or experiences, and I really don't appreciate them.

Final note: I did not realize just how many cat facilities declaw their cats until this started here on this list. I am shocked. I do intend to work toward legislation that would ban declawing or defanging all exotic cats. Anyone care to join me?

Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:03:27 -0600 Subject: RE: FEL-L: more info.

I am not a contentious man, and I am not putting this out as more than a clarification of my earlier letter.

Like it or not, declawing does involve removing the end of the digit. That is because most of the claw is non living tissue, and the end of the toe contains living tissue similar to the hair follicle from whence the hair "grows." Hair does not actually grow--it is extruded from the hair follicle by the soft living tissues in which it is rooted. Neither do claws grow--they too are keritinous material produced by the tissues in which they are rooted. It is not possible to prevent claws from regrowing—naturally or unnaturally--by leaving the mechanism intact and simply removing the claw material itself.

In this case I speak from the medical/scientific side of the fence, and with all due respect for your (in southern, "Yall's"--I speak of felines-l) experience with animal husbandry, to me it is an open and shut case what constitutes removal of a claw.

As for dogs versus cats, folks, there is a difference how they respond to anaestetics. It is amazing how differently cats and dogs react to many different drugs--cats and dogs have to rid themselves of injectable agents through the kidneys and since cats drink less, they stay hung over longer. Yes, it is chancier when working with cats to put them under deeply and most vets want to use as little as possible in injectable agents. Yes, that little cone strapped on the nose helps, but it is the initial injections that cause sleep, not as much the gas.

What people do not realize is that during surgery, a combination of drugs is actually injected. Curare is needed to paralyze the muscles--that's why you have to bag them. If your training is scientific, not animal husbandry, (and I'm not trying to act like some overbearing S.O.B. so bear with me) you would have done the galvani experiment--touching the frog leg with two different metals. When different metals with different conductivity are connected by a conducting liquid, current flows. That's the principle behind a battery, and it also makes the frog's leg CONTRACT. YES, that current you induce when you touch a cat's muscle with a metal scalpel AND retractors is enough to make the tissues tighten, causing tissue damage around the edges of the cut. Anaestesia is an art--in fact in many cases it is the most dangerous single procedure carried out in surgery. Because they want to limit the use of curare, they also limit the use of other injectable agents. And they do not put the cat under as deeply or for as long as they do dogs. Please do not dispute this--I am not relying on the comforting platitudes vets often give to their patrons to calm their nerves but on hard fact.

If you support declawing, please do not try to represent the facts different than they are. The procedure is what it is, and yes it can cause problems if improperly done. The closed wounds heal in much the same way a "stump" forms on an amputated limb. Circulation of blood and movement of tissue is not the same. The exposed bone end is not a natural configuration. In short, the cat's limb was not designed to facilitate declawing. This is an artificial act much like nose piercing, tattoing, and breast augmentation, and the body reacts to it in ways that are less than ideal.

With that being said, I acknowledge that both the declawers and those rabidly against it both love their cats. I think that is not the point. However I want to see truth prevail--those who declaw should be informed of exactly what is happening and know the possible ramifications. And folks, remember how many nerve endings go to that area.....

Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 19:39:31 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: FEL-L: more info.

I agree here. I worked as an assistant for nearly 5 years. My vet did 3-4 declaws daily on average and I only saw two cats try to wake up before the procedure was finished. Both of these cats were given isoflourine gas for the remainder of the surgery. Incidentally this same vet declawed Osiris and within a few hours he was his usual tear the house down self! He couldn't understand why I wouldn't let him bounce off the walls. He wasn't even aware he had undergone such a terrible ordeal.

Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:04:25 -0800 Subject: Re: FEL-L: more info.

I think you did not read my post or I explained myself wrong. I am fully aware that to properly do a declaw the first digit must be removed. No arguement about that at all. Under bad advice and insistance of a owner who wanted to place cats with me I watched an animal declaw with the removing the nail bed method. And as I said in my earlier post I would never ever do that again. Nor would I declaw an adult cat for any reason.

I do still believe if the procedure is done early on in life and properly it is the least traumatic way for this procedure to be done by those who choose to employ it.

> through the kidneys and since cats drink less, they stay hung over longer.

IV fluids as the procedure is being finished up helps with flushing the injectables out of the system. They do stay hung over longer if they do not have a lot of fluids.

> Yes, it is chancier when working with cats to put them under deeply and

When surgery is done on humans with the same type gas we do not use injectable tranquilzers and we do open heart surgery with the gas. Maybe I am missing something here but why would it not work the same with animals. I am not a Vet so I am wondering and trying to learn not trying to be argumentative.

I have not juiced the frog thing so don't quite get it. I don't really support or reject the declaw thing. Just that it is a choice and I don't think that if it is performed properly that it is a choice that people should be able to make without being torn at by those who think otherwise.

> If you support declawing, please do not try to represent the facts different

No arguement on that point either. I just stated that I have older animals that exhibit no ill effects from their declawing. That is just my experience with the animals I have here not an endorsement of anything just what I have personally seen with the few animals I have dealt with.

>declawers and those rabidly against it both love their cats

That was my point exactly. With the 4 big cats I have 3 of the declaws were not my choice. With the 4th one it was my choice and I did it knowing the risks and did it so that she would be able to have the companionship of the other cats that I took responsibility for their life cycles just as I did the 4th one.

Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 17:21:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: FEL-L: declaw

[ I sure hope that someone else is reading this stuff. I've heard a lot of complaints that these discussions aren't in the vein of exotic cat care. I'd just like offer that these discussions are about choices you may have to make as a future exotic cat owner or a current exotic cat owner, and the ideas behind the sides. As always, this leaves you to make up your own mind, hopefully a little more informed. ]

> We could haggle back and forth about declawing forever, and I doubt

And so we have another "Here are my last comments and I'm no longer interested in yours." I wish I were comfortable debating like that. You realize we're almost done anyways. Once things get broken down into their component philisophical beliefes there's not much point in going on. I believe this, you believe that, and that's how we feel.

I've always felt that this list is like getting a roomful of mothers together and asking them, "What is the best way to raise a child?" They certainly aren't all going to agree, and not all of them quietly.

> It seems to me that those who declaw are using any reason/excuse/logic

And those that don't are using any anthropomorphic arguements, butcher stories, and undocumented, long-reaching prognoses on ailments by vets that are outwardly against the procedure in the first place. How convenient that they choose declawing as the source of the problem. When I presented these problems to another vet she said, "Sounds nutritional or environmental, do you know the background on the cat?" Unfortunately I don't, and it doesn't sound like you do either.

> The fact remains that the majority of experienced exotic animal

I'm glad you can speak on behalf of all the 'experienced' exotic animal vets around the world. Pardon me if I take your comment with a grain of quarks.

We've all heard about the horror stories. And these possible and purported deleterous effects. You could recount the number of vets and their number of years of experience and on and on we go. I could do exactly the same and then we would still arrive at different conclusions. Although this doesn't prove anything to either point, that is exactly what I'm trying to 'point' out! But my next point is what's getting missed: Where are the documented cases of this problem?! Why isn't this a banner heading against declawing big cats? Why isn't any other vet on this list jumping in to say "YES! This happens!"

> You suggest that there are other causes of the problems in our cats, and

Oh, they can tell you exactly what this animal has been through in the past? They can tell you what kind of bedding it slept on, if it was cold, wet, hot or dry. If they were ever over-weight or if they sustained injuries in the past from neglect and mistreatment? (Obviously someone couldn't care for them well enough which is the reason you have them.) They can completely rule out all the other problems with these cats even though they have no medical history for them before their reached your facility? Perhaps you need different vets? And why haven't so many other facilities harboring declawed, geriatric big cats reported this problem with their animals. Perhaps it was just conjecture?

> Some say that the cats are declawed "only for the safety of the public".

You just answered your own question: They do not handle the cats. If you never skydive you don't have much of a chance of hitting the ground at terminal velocity. You present an interesting arguement but its application is inherently flawed because we don't know the circumstances under which these people were injured. Were they injured during an out-reach program, which is the reason I've stated in the past that we declaw? Without a context this statistic is useless.

> of the problems related to declawing, and suggest the stories are anecdotes.

How about visiting some facilities that don't, like the ones I know? People here have already posted accounts of their aged cats not having problems. Therefore, this problem obviously doesn't happen in 100% of the cases, which implies there COULD be other causes.

> On another note, you say "If these cats wanted to interact with people

Wow, you really are out to villanize me. I have a healthy respect for the big cats because I work closely with them. However, I don't even feel the need to have to justify this to you in any form as this was a needless attack on my character.

And the 'meal time' thing was a joke. Lighten up.

As for the tiger interaction: Exceptions break the rule, they don't make it. Tell me how many people were kiled by tigers in India vs. the number of people happily interacting with them in the wild. Please tell me when it's safe to run by a mother cougar here in CA. And I'm surprised you didn't quote me some of George Adamson's research and conservation efforts. He would regularly socialize with wild lions. Mark and Delia Owens as well. Exceptions. Not the rule.

> You say "You are already altering the cat by removing it from the wild,

Wow... Each paragraph is just armed with insults.

Read what I'm saying, please. Slow down if you have to. Read it twice if you must. Limits of instincts, as in reactionary, uncontrollable impulses to stimuli. You make a sudden move and the tiger wants to leap on you and catch you like prey. That's not acceptable, I would imagine, at your facility. Using their claws to hold you. That acceptable? It's something they'd do in the wild. How about play biting you as hard as they would a fellow tiger? No? You're teaching them to work past the instincts and impulses, to learn how to reason to a degree that's pleasing to you. But you only do it to the cats that want you to, at least that's what I gathered from what you said. You're still changing the cat. That was the point I was making. It's not 'the real thing.'

And I wasn't implying that you removed your cats from the wild and placed them at your facility. I was stating that the cat is no longer a real wild cat the moment it's removed from the wild and subjected to ANYONE'S confinement.

> The cats are here. We did not breed them. The choice we made was to save

Sheesh... Dismissive now. If that's all it took to solve this debate then I would have said the same a long while back. However, I guess I'm guilty of desiring other people's opinions.

> I guess it all comes down to whether or not you are doing what is in the cat's best interest.

To YOU! This is your personal philosophy and one that you're subjecting me to.

> And I fail to see how removing their claws are in their best interest.

Better check your quotes, it was John VS that said that.

Okay, let's take another look at this:

We do off-site presenstations with our animals, which we choose to declaw for public safety. This has already been hashed over many, many times. Why are we doing this? We are doing this to educate children in the hopes that they will do something for conservation in the future. Why are we doing it? Because we care about the cats and we'd like them to have a place in the wild in the future. So who are we hoping to benifit from this? The cats!

If you're questioning the reasoning behind our declawing and it always boils down to a 'cruel act' for you, then think of it as a small sacrifice in the hopes of a better tomorrow for the cats. If, in this terrible and hideous mitiliation of our once happy cats (insert sarcasm here), we're able to help save many in the wild or even in captivity, then I feel it's worth it. Whether or not it's worth it remains to be seen. Whether or not it's worth it to you, in all respect, isn't important. They are happy, they play, the sleep, they eat, they enjoy company, they like the public--except for my lion. In short, they express all the qualities of well-adjusted cats.

> That said, I will do my best to refrain from adding further comments on

Huh? What? I asked some direct questions and you took offense to them. I gave my opinions on your opionions and that's insinuation and insult?!

Yes, I come across as very self-righteous--or so I've been told by people that don't agree with me--but that insights the self-rightous on the other side. The people that hold strong convictions, borne out of emotion and later moulded into a sound philosophy. These are the people I want to talk with. These are the people that have a lot to add to a discussion and bring out the deep issues that others may never have considered. If it bothers you to have your emotional or moral foundations rocked a little bit then maybe you should question them yourself.

> Final note: I did not realize just how many cat facilities declaw their

Actually, I never want to be called self-righteous again. :)

Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 18:07:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: FEL-L: sean

A paw, when hyperextended causes claws to come out. A cat batting at something, many times has it's claws out. It's bad enough getting slapped by a cat, but getting slapped by a cat who has their claws out... Then lets say your cat puts it's paws on your shoulders, and slips oh well, your dead. I know of someone this happened to. Our skins do not stand up to claws well. Claws are slicing instruments, unlike fangs which solely pucture. Claws are more likely to cause damage an injury. Someone said here they have never in their life been clawed by a tiger and tht they have been with them for many years. I don't believe that, at all, sorry.

I said myself earlier in a post that I personally don't like declawing, however it's sometimes a better alternative for some of us, and unlike defanging, if done propery, has no ill effects. And while I may have only been a big cat owner for a decade, I have a cat from a deceased friend that is almost 20. She's been declawed all her life and is just fine. As are many of my other friend's cats too.

Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 19:33:27 -0600 Subject: FEL-L: ? for Sean

Sean, If you could do everything that you are currently doing with tigers, and it wouldn't cost you more money, time (perhaps save you time & money), and was just as safe or more so for your staff, the public and the cats, would you stop declawing them? Yes or No????? Because that is what the point in this conversation has been all about!

Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 18:48:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: FEL-L: ? for Sean

Actually, I can't make a decision like this in a public forum with regard to the foundation. I could tell you personally my feelings but I'm not speaking on behalf of the foundation. Personally, yes. I don't plan on declawing my cats at my own facility.

Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 20:56:49 -0600 (CST) Subject: FEL-L: ADMIN: declaw exodus

Well, this declaw topic has folks really excited.

I've received a private email whether "person x could be removed from the list" because of the flaming, but the real barometer, in my mind, is that
SIXTEEN - 1 6 - folks have unsubscribed
from the list since Thursday.

That's more carnage than the Cattales discussion.

Everyone is up in arms about this, people have taken sides, no one is going to switch because of arguments on here... so, please try and stay civil, there will always be differing opinions, there are no winners when the debate turns to insults.

Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 19:08:44 -0800 Subject: Re: FEL-L: declaw

First a disclaimer. I do not currently have an exotic cat, but I am planning on getting one. I have not made up my mind on the declawing issue yet.

>They need to run and jump...and above all....they need their claws.

Um, why? Just what do they need their claws for? I have seen declawed cougars climb trees, run, jump, eat, etc... So could you please tell me what they are going to be using their claws for?

So far, I have seen highly emotional appeals from both sides. Both sides have "professional vets" backing their stories. The "against declawing" camp acts like every declawing ever done has resulted in a severely crippled cat that can hardly walk. The "allow declawing" camp says that most work fine, but there are some vets that do a bad job.

So far, the "against" group is coming across as highly emotional people who jump to conclusions and intentionally mis-read posts. The "allow" group seems to have more sensible and calm people among their numbers. (Both groups have exceptions, I'm just talking about apparent majority in this case.)

All that all this has proven to me is that:
a) No real study has been done on the health risks of declawing.
b) There are at least 2 general methods of doing it.
c) Finding a competent vet makes the different between no problems and a crippled cat.
d) I still don't have enough info to make a good decision.

I've met people with declawed cats, and ones with full sets of claws. The declawed cats can kill a person just as quickly as a clawed cat, BUT the declawed ones aren't as likely to accidentally rip you open just by badly aimed swat. (Bruised yes, shredded no.)

Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 19:50:18 -0800 Subject: Re: FEL-L: ADMIN: declaw exodus

> SIXTEEN - 1 6 - folks have unsubscribed

I find it interesting that there are that many people who can't use the delete key to ignore messages in a topic they don't like. I do find it tiresome when various people resort to name calling. It's always MUCH better to just calmly discuss WHY you have a different opinion.