Re: Proposed declaw ban (scheduled for consideration on Nov 2, 2009)

Re: Council File 09-2213 Re: Proposed declaw ban (scheduled for consideration on Nov 2, 2009) We request the attached information be provided to the Councilmembers. Please contact me if you need additional information. Jim Jensvold The Paw Project 818 404 1633

The Paw Project PO Box 445, Santa Monica, CA 90406 info@pawproject.com (877) PAW-PROJECT Partial list of countries with laws against declawing: United Kingdom Click here: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/pdf/ukpga_20060045_en.pdf Section 5: Mutilation (1) A person commits an offence if (a) he carries out a prohibited procedure on a protected animal; (b) he causes such a procedure to be carried out on such an animal. (2) A person commits an offence if (a) he is responsible for an animal, (b) another person carries out a prohibited procedure on the animal, and (c) he permitted that to happen or failed to take such steps (whether by way of supervising the other person or otherwise) as were reasonable in all the circumstances to prevent that happening. (3) References in this section to the carrying out of a prohibited procedure on an animal are to the carrying out of a procedure which involves interference with the sensitive tissues or bone structure of the animal, otherwise than for the purpose of its medical treatment. Switzerland http://www.animallaw.info/nonus/statutes/stchapa1978.htm Section 8: Prohibited Practices Article 22. 2. It is also forbidden: g. to cut off the claws of cats and other felines, to clip or prick the ears of dogs, to remove the vocal organs or employ other methods to prevent animals from giving tongue or reacting to pain in another audible manner; Austria http://www.ris.bka.gv.at/dokumente/erv/erv_2004_1_118/erv_2004_1_118.pdf 7. (1) Interventions carried out for other than therapeutic or diagnostic purposes or for the expert marking of animals in accordance with legal regulations applicable, are prohibited, in particular 5. declawing and defanging, Germany http://www.animallaw.info/nonus/statutes/stdeawa1998.htm Article 6 (1) The amputation of all or part of parts of the body or the removal or destruction of all or parts of organs or tissues of a vertebrate shall be prohibited. This prohibition shall not apply if: 1. the operation in the specific case a) is necessary according to veterinary indication... Sweden http://www.sweden.gov.se/content/1/c6/09/03/10/f07ee736.pdf Surgical procedures etc. Section 10 (1) Animals must not be subjected to surgical procedures or given injections except where they are necessary for veterinary medical reasons.

The Paw Project PO Box 445, Santa Monica, CA 90406 info@pawproject.com (877) PAW-PROJECT Croatia http://www.prijatelji-zivotinja.hr/index.en.php?id=470 Procedures prohibited for the purpose of protecting animals Article 4 (2) It is prohibited to: 17. cut off sensitive parts of the body of live animals, Interventions on animals Article 8 (1) The partial or total amputation of a sensitive part of the body of an animal shall be prohibited, including: 1. the marking of animals contrary to the provisions of special regulations, 2. ear cropping and tail docking in dogs, declawing of cats, devocalisation and other interventions aimed at changing the phenotypic appearance of the animal. (2) By way of derogation from the provision of paragraph 1 of this Article, the partial or total amputation or removal of a sensitive part of the body of an animal shall be permitted if performed with prior anaesthesia and post-operative analgesia and if an intervention: 1. is justified for animal health reasons Malta http://www.commonlii.org/mt/legis/consol_act/awa128.pdf Part V - Surgical Operations on Animals Surgical operations. 9. (1) Surgical operations for the purpose of modifying the appearance of an animal by which any part of the animal s body is removed or damaged, other than for a curative purpose, shall be illegal. Other localities that ban declawing are: Catalonia, Spain http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0623/p15s02-woeu.html Rome, Italy http://articles.latimes.com/2005/nov/09/world/fg-pets9 Council of Europe http://www.conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/treaties/html/125.htm Article 10 Surgical operations 1. Surgical operations for the purpose of modifying the appearance of a pet animal or for other noncurative purposes shall be prohibited and, in particular: a. the docking of tails; b. the cropping of ears; c. devocalisation; d. declawing and defanging; The signatories to this convention as of 6/16/2009 were: Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Norway, Portugal, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey http://www.conventions.coe.int/treaty/commun/cherchesig.asp?nt=125&cm=8&df=6/16/2009&cl=e NG

The Paw Project PO Box 445, Santa Monica, CA 90406 info@pawproject.com (877) PAW-PROJECT World Small Animal Veterinary Association (WSAVA) There are also a number of national veterinary associations that are signatories to the WSAVA Conventions. In those countries veterinarians find declawing, as it is commonly performed in the US, unethical. http://www.wsava.org/conventi.htm Section 10 Non-therapeutic surgical operations on companion animals i) Surgical operations for the purpose of modifying the appearance of a companion animal for non-therapeutic purposes should be actively discouraged. ii) Where possible legislation should be enacted to prohibit the performance of non-therapeutic surgical procedures for purely cosmetic purposes, in particular; a. Docking of tails; b. Cropping of ears; c. Devocalisation; d. Declawing and defanging. iii) Exceptions to these prohibitions should be permitted only: a. If a veterinarian considers that the particular surgical procedure is necessary, either for veterinary medical reasons or where euthanasia is the only alternative... These are the signatory organizations (note: the AVMA is not a signatory): Argentina - AVEACA Asociación de Veterinarios Especialistas en Animales de Compañía de Argentina Australia - AVA Australian Veterinary Association Austria - VOEK Vereinigung Oesterreichischer Kleintiermadiziner Belgium - SAVAB Small Animal Veterinary Association Belgium Bosnia Herzegovina - BHSAVA Bosnia-Herzegovina Small Animal Veterinary Association British Columbia - BCVMA British Columbia Veterinary Medical Association Columbia - VEPA Columbias Croatia - CSAVS Croatian Small Animal Veterinary Section Czech Republic - CSAVA Czech Small Animal Veterinary Association Denmark - DSAVA Danish Small Animal Veterinary Association Estonia - ESAVA Estonian Small Animal Veterinary Association Finland - FAVP Finnish Association of Veterinary Practitioners Greece - HVMS Hellenic Veterinary Multinational Society Hong Kong - HKVA Hong Kong Veterinary Association Hungary - HSAVA Hungarian Small Animal Veterinary Association Ireland - VICAS Veterinary Ireland Companion Animal Society Israel - ICAVA Israel Companion Animal Veterinary Association Italy - AIVPA Associazione Italiana Veterinari Piccoli Animali Italy - SCIVAC Società Culturale Italiana Veterinari per Animali da Compagnia Japan - JSAVA Japanese Small Animal Veterinary Association Lithhuania - LSAVA Lithuanian Small Animal Veterinary Association Malaysia - Malaysia Small Animal Veterinary Association (MSAVA) Mexico - AMMVEPE Asociación Mexicana de Médicos Veterinarios Especialistas en Pequeñas Especies Netherlands - NACAM Netherlands Association for Companion Animal Medicine New Zealand - NZVA CAS New Zealand Veterinary Association - Companion Animal Society Norway - NSAVA Norwegian Small Animal Veterinary Association Poland - PSAVA Polish Small Animal Veterinary Association South Africa - SAVA South African Veterinary Association Spain - AVEPA Asociación de Veterinarios Españoles Especialistas en Pequeños Animales Taiwan - TVMA Taipei Veterinary Medical Association United Kingdom - BSAVA British Small Animal Veterinary Association Uruguay - SUVEPA La Sociedad Uruguaya de Veterinarios Especialistas en Pequeños Animales IVENTA International Veterinary Ear Nose and Throat Association

The Paw Project PO Box 445, Santa Monica, CA 90406 info@pawproject.com (877) PAW-PROJECT POSITIONS ON DECLAWING Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association (HSVMA) "The Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association is opposed to cosmetic surgeries and to those performed to correct 'vices.' Declawing generally is unacceptable because the suffering and disfigurement it causes is not offset by any benefits to the cat. Declawing is done strictly to provide convenience for people." American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) "Declawing is expensive, painful surgery. Think of it as having the first joint of all your fingers removed. And because their first line of defense has been taken away, declawed cats may resort to biting more often than their intact counterparts. Some veterinarians around the country refuse to perform declawing surgery." Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) "The pain and expense of this surgical procedure are unnecessary. Educated cat owners can easily train their cats to use their claws in a manner that allows cat and owner to happily coexist" San Francisco Animal Care and Control Department "Cats use their claws to exercise, play, stretch, climb, hunt, and mark their territory. Although your cat might use your hands or furniture for these activities, declawing is NOT the answer. Declawing is a painful and difficult operation. It is the same as removing the first joint on all your fingers. It impairs the cat's balance and causes weakness from muscular disuse." In Defense of Animals (IDA) "The operative removal of the claws, as is sometimes practiced to protect furniture and curtains, is an act of abuse and should be forbidden by law in all, not just a few countries" People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) "Declawing is a painful and permanently crippling procedure that should not be practiced." World Small Animal Veterinary Association (WSAVA) From their 2001 Convention for the Protection of Companion Animals: "legislation should be enacted to prohibit the performance of non-therapeutic surgical procedures for purely cosmetic purposes, in particular...declawing" East Bay SPCA, Oakland, CA "Scratching is a normal part of your cat's behavior. They display this behavior to stretch, mark territory, and shed dead layers of nail. We discourage declawing and can offer some alternatives"

The Paw Project PO Box 445, Santa Monica, CA 90406 info@pawproject.com (877) PAW-PROJECT Cat Fancier's Association (CFA) "Because of post operative discomfort or pain, and potential future behavioral or physical effects, CFA disapproves of declawing or tendonectomy surgery" Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) From Report of Working Party Established by RCVS Council to consider the mutilation of animals: "It is not acceptable if carried out for the convenience of the owner. The removal of claw...to preclude damage to furnishings is not acceptable." Animal Protection Institute (API) "Fortunately, most people love their feline companions, and want to do what is best for all concerned. If you are one of these, please make the humane choice -- do not declaw!" European Convention for the Protection of Pet Animals "Recognising that man has a moral obligation to respect all living creatures and bearing in mind that pet animals have a special relationship with man (and) considering the importance of pet animals in contributing to the quality of life and their consequent value to society; surgical operations for the purpose of modifying the appearance of a pet animal or for other non-curative purposes shall be prohibited in particular: the docking of tails; the cropping of ears; devocalisation; declawing and defanging" British Columbia Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals "The SPCA does not condone declawing. It is contrary to our policy. Clipping claws and providing a clawing post is best. Our animal hospital will not declaw cats." American Humane Association "Resist the desire to declaw your cat. Declawed cats are completely defenseless if they get outside, as they can have difficulty defending themselves or climbing out of harm's way. Indoor cats can even have difficulty playing normally with other cats because their natural abilities and characteristics have been altered. Cats can be "trained" to scratch only certain areas, without requiring this unnecessary and potentially harmful surgery." Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals "The Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals encourages pet owners to seek alternatives to the declawing of cats -- and the MSPCA s hospitals do not perform declawing operations for non-medical reasons. It is a painful procedure that can have serious consequences for your pet." Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Los Angeles "Declawing is not a simple removal of the claws. It is a surgical amputation. In addition, a declawed cat suffers both physical and psychological repercussions as a result of such amputations. Removing the claws causes pain, as well as a distrust of humans and a tendency to bite. Patience and consistency, not a surgical procedure, are the keys for a well-trained cat."

The Paw Project Review of the Scientific Literature on Cat Declawing Behavior Problems Caused by Declawing A report in the January 1, 2001 issue of the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (JAVMA) by Yeon, et al., states that 33% of cats suffer at least one behavioral problem after declaw or tendonectomy surgery. The study showed that 17.9% had an increase in biting frequency or intensity and that 15.4% would not use a litter box. Since 1966 there have been only six articles in the US veterinary literature (including one by a Canadian veterinarian) that examined the behavioral effects of declawing. The first (Bennett, et al.), looked at only 25 declawed cats, but reported that declawed cats were 18.5% more likely than nondeclawed cat to bite and 15.6% more likely to avoid the litter box. Morgan and Houpt found that the 24 declawed cats in their internet survey had a 40% higher incidence of house soiling than non-declawed cats. Borchelt and Voith, looking only at aggressive behavior in a retrospective survey of pet owners, found declawed cats bit family members more often than did non-declawed cats. In a retrospective phone survey, Patronek found that among 218 cats relinquished to a shelter, 52.4% of declawed cats versus 29.1% of nonclawed cats were reported to have inappropriate elimination. The National Council on Pet Population Study & Policy published "The Top Ten Reasons for Pet Relinquishment to Shelters in the United States" in 2000. The report showed house soiling, followed by aggression, as the most common behavioral reasons for pet relinquishment. Destructive scratching did not make the list. It is noteworthy that only 3% of cat owners, according to Scarlett, et al. (JAVMA 2002) claim destruction of furniture as the unwanted behavior that led them to relinquish their pets. Page 1 of 8 www.pawproject.org

The Paw Project Training is the appropriate remedy for behavior problems, not surgery. Janet Scarlett, DVM, of Cornell University, in the article, "The Role of Veterinary Practitioners in Reducing Dog and Cat Relinquishments and Euthanasias (JAVMA, February 1, 2002), states that client counseling is "probably the most effective means by which veterinarians can influence the number of dogs and cats surrendered to animal shelters today." Veterinarians have an opportunity to intervene because people relinquishing pets are veterinary clients. An estimated 50-70% of pets in shelters had visited the veterinarian in the year preceding relinquishment. Yet, Dr. Scarlett reports, "Only 25% of veterinarians routinely actively identify and treat behavioral problems." She writes, "Less than a third felt confident of their ability to treat common behavioral problems. Perhaps even more disturbing, only 11.1% of veterinarians felt it was the veterinarian's responsibility, rather than the client's, to initiate discussion about behavioral problems." In a commentary of the Yeon article, Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine Professor Nicholas Dodman, DVM, MRCVS, DACVB writes, "It is amazing that none of the studies to date on declawing has addressed the right questions to the right persons and drawn the right conclusions. This study is no exception. Owners are an unreliable source of information about their pets, especially months or years after the fact. Almost one-half of the cats in the study required post-operative opioids to control pain following surgery, and the remainder would have probably benefited from it. The owners reported that one-half to two-thirds of the cats in this study showed signs of pain after surgery, likely only the tip of the iceberg. In addition, though the authors were more interested in comparison of the two techniques, it is notable that about 30% of all cats developed a behavior problem after surgery, either house soiling or increased biting. Whatever the owners may have assessed, this was not a good outcome. And, to top it all, 42 of 57 cats (74%) had at least one medical complication following surgery. In light of such findings, it is hard to see why veterinarians don't spend more time and effort recommending alternatives to declawing than these painful and sometimes debilitating procedures. Instead, we seem to Page 2 of 8 www.pawproject.org

The Paw Project keep finding ways of justifying declawing as an essential component of feline practice." In the December 2003 issue of Cat Fancy magazine, Karen Overall, DVM, PhD, DACVB, a board-certified animal behaviorist, writes that scratching is a complex behavior that "behavioral biologists have been almost wholly uninterested in" and that "fewer and fewer people favor declawing." She observes that "cats do not scratch to annoy us; they scratch to communicate something and the cues are physical and olfactory. This is one aspect of declawing that has never been investigated, and until we understand how much these elective surgeries affect normal feline behavior, we could do best to avoid them." Surgical Complications of Declawing Jankowski, in JAVMA (August 1, 1998), reports that acute complications "develop in up to a half of onychectomized cats. Long term complications of the procedure (are) reported for about a fifth of onychectomized cats." Martinez, in Veterinary Medicine (June 1993), reports 11% lameness, 17% wound breakdown, and 10% nail regrowth post-operatively in cats having declaw surgery. In DVM Best Practices, August 2002, veterinarian Kip Lemke illustrates typical levels of post-surgical pain using common surgical procedures. Declawing is associated with "severe pain," compared to spaying ("moderate pain") and neutering ("mild pain"). It appears that under-medicating cats after declawing is the norm. A survey of over 1000 veterinarians by Wagner and Hellyer (JAVMA Dec. 1, 2002) found that 30% administered no pain medication after declaw surgery. "Declawing is very painful -- there's no question about that " says Dr. Katherine Houpt, professor and director of the Animal Behavior Clinic at Cornell University's College of Veterinary Medicine. Page 3 of 8 www.pawproject.org

The Paw Project Carroll points out that "the optimal duration of post-operative analgesic treatment for cats is unknown." A cat's behavior may be misinterpreted since not all cats show outward signs of pain -- crying, whining, or licking at a paw, for example -- after surgery. "What they'll often do is curl up and go to sleep in the back of the cage," says Dr. Karen Tobias, an associate professor in small animal surgery at the University of Tennessee College of Veterinary Medicine, who conducted a study on pain in cats after declawing surgery. "Owners or veterinarians may think they're sleeping comfortably and not in any pain." Declawing is not used as a last resort option Over 25% of all owned cats in the United States and Canada are declawed. A survey of twenty Los Angeles area veterinary clinics, reported in the February-March 2003 issue of The Pet Press, found that 75% agreed to perform declawing without question and without any attempt to establish a medical, behavioral, or any other indication to justify the procedure. Declawing does not save the lives of cats In a 1996 JAVMA article, Gary Patronek, VMD, PhD, using multivariate statistical analysis, found that declawed cats were at an increased risk of relinquishment to animal shelters and that among relinquished cats, 52.4% of declawed cats were reported to exhibit litter box avoidance, compared to 29.1% of non-declawed cats. In a survey of owners of cats that had been declawed and their veterinarians, reported by Dr. Gary Landsberg in Veterinary Forum, September 1994, only 4% of the owners said they would have relinquished their pet had it not been declawed. In contrast, the veterinarians in the survey speculated that 50% of the owners would have relinquished their pets. Page 4 of 8 www.pawproject.org

The Paw Project Declawing does not save the lives of immunocompromised people Richard Meyer, MD, is an Infectious Disease and Internal Medicine specialist who trained at the prestigious Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Dr. Meyer, in 38 years of practice in Northridge, CA, has never recommended declawing the cats of any of his patients, including those that are immunocompromised. He does not believe that declawing the pets of persons with impaired immune systems reduces the overall risk to their health. "Certainly, cat scratches can pose serious health risks (for immunocompromised persons)," says Dr. Meyer, "but cats bites are much, much worse. And declawed cats are more likely to bite. That is not lore." "Cat bites can be very dangerous (and may require) long-term IV antibiotics and surgery," he said. In contrast, Dr. Meyer says that cat scratches are far less likely to require hospitalization or such intensive treatments. The human diseases most associated with cats are Toxoplasmosis and Bartonellosis. The risk of developing these or other opportunistic diseases from cat scratches is exceedingly low. In his book, The Guide to Living with HIV Infection, John G. Bartlett, MD, Professor of Medicine and Infectious Diseases at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, writes that common sense practices to avoid bites or scratches are sufficient and specifically states, "You need not declaw the cat." Dr. Bartlett was the president of the Infectious Diseases Society of America in 1999 and has served as a consultant to the National Institutes of Health and as an editor for the New England Journal of Medicine. Another infectious diseases specialist, Dr. Ralph Hansen, of Pacific Oaks Medical Group in Beverly Hills, says, "The risk of diseases being transmitted from cats comes primarily from the litter box and teeth in that order with claws far down the list. There is no rational medical reason for a physician to recommend declawing a cat." Dr. Hansen's clinic currently treats over 2500 HIV positive individuals. Dr. Hansen said that he has seen only one or two cases of full-blown Bartonellosis in the years since HIV was first recognized. Bartonellosis, also know as cat scratch disease (CSD), Dr. Hansen notes, is current thought to be transmitted by fleas. Infections caused by the bacteria Pasturella, which are transmitted by bites, constitute a "much, much more serious risk," says Dr. Hansen. In a Winn Feline Foundation article, Susan Little, DVM, says, "It is likely that CSD can also be contracted from environmental sources of the bacteria or from other animals. She continues to say, "Onychectomy (declawing) is also not recommended, since Page 5 of 8 www.pawproject.org

The Paw Project infection can occur without a cat scratch. A common sense approach is the best way to safeguard against CSD." To avoid the risk of toxoplasmosis, J. P. Dubey, MVSc, PhD, a microbiologist at the USDA Zoonotic Diseases Laboratory, recommends avoiding cat waste and notes that "the possibility of (disease microorganisms) sticking to cat fur is minimal, as is the possibility of transmission to humans via touching or handling a cat." Michael G. Groves, DVM, MPH, PhD, Professor of Epidemiology at LSU School of Veterinary Medicine, writes, "Veterinarians often are consulted by the public, and occasionally by physicians and other veterinarians, for information regarding zoonoses, diseases that are transmitted to humans from animals." Veterinarians and physicians, "perhaps seeking 'zero risk,' advise patients to dispose of pets to prevent or alleviate a zoonotic illness. HIV-positive people may be told they that should not have animals at all. Although this advice may be well intended, it is often ill informed. Too often, what is missing is some reasonable approximation of the true risk of disease transmission balanced against the benefits of pet ownership." Asked if declawing is an effective means of preventing human infection, Dr. Groves answers, "No, a significant number (of illnesses) are associated with bites, with wounds not inflicted by cats, or with no known site of inoculation. HIV-positive individuals and AIDS patients should be able to have cats if they follow the prevention guidelines. The benefits of a companion animal for some people may outweigh any risks of pet ownership, provided steps are taken to keep the risk at a minimum." Page 6 of 8 www.pawproject.org

The Paw Project REFERENCES 1. AAHA adopts position statement on ear cropping and tail docking of dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1999;214:179. 2. American Pet Products Manufacturers Association Inc. 1999/2000 APPMA national pet owners survey. Greenwich, Conn: American Pet Products Manufacturers Association, 2000. 3. Association of Veterinarians for Animal Rights. Position statement: surgical claw removal...an extreme solution. Available at: http://www.avar.org/cat_declawing.htm. Accessed Mar 26, 2001. 4. AVMA Policy statements and guidelines. Declawing of domestic cats. 2001 American Veterinary Medical Association directory and resource manual. Schaumburg, Ill: American Veterinary Medical Association, 2001;74. 5. AVMA Policy statements and guidelines. Ear cropping and tail docking. In: 2001 American Veterinary Medical Association directory and resource manual. Schaumburg, Ill: American Veterinary Medical Association, 2001:74. 6. Bennett M, Houpt KA, Erb HN. Effects of declawing on feline behavior. Companion Anim Pract 1988;2:7 12. 7. Benson GJ, Wheaton LG, Thurmon JC, et al. Postoperative catecholamine response to onychectomy in isoflurane-anesthetized cats. Effect of analgesics. Vet Surg 1991;20:222 225. 8. Borchelt PL, Voith VL. Aggressive behavior in cats. Compend Contin Educ Pract Vet 1987;9:49 57. 9. Cambridge AJ, Tobias KM, Newberry RC et al. Subjective and objective measurements of postoperative pain in cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:685-690. 10. Canadian Veterinary Medical Association. Animal welfare position statement on onychectomy of the domestic feline. Available at http://www.cvma-acmv.org/doc9.html. Accessed Mar 26, 2001. 11. Carroll GL, Howe LB, Slater MR, et al. Evaluation of analgesia provided by postoperative administration of butorphanol to cats undergoing onychectomy. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1998;213:246-250. 12. Center for Information Management. US pet owners and demographic sourcebook. Schaumburg, Ill: American Veterinary Medical Association, 1997. 13. Dohoo SE, Dohoo IR. Factors influencing the postoperative use of analgesics in dogs and cats by Canadian veterinarians. Can Vet J 1996;37:552 556. 14. Dohoo SE, Dohoo IR. Postoperative use of analgesics in dogs and cats by Canadian veterinarians. Can Vet J 1996;37:546 551. 15. Feaga WP. Consider age, pain before onychectomy (lett). Vet Med 1998;May/Jun:417 16. Franks JN, Boothe HW, Taylor L, et al. Evaluation of transdermal fentanyl patches for analgesia in cats undergoing onychectomy. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:1013-1020. 17. Hansen B, Hardie E. Prescription and use of analgesics in dogs and cats in a veterinary teaching hospital: 258 cases (1983 1989). J Am Vet Med Assoc 1993;202:1485 1494. 18. Humane Society of the United States. Position statement on declawing cats. Available at: http://www.hsus.org/programs/companion/pet_care/declawing.html. Accessed Mar 26, 2001. 19. Jankowski AJ, Brown DC, Duval J, et al. Comparison of effects of elective tenectomy or onychectomy in cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1998;213:370-373. 20. Landsberg GM. Cat owners' attitudes toward declawing. Anthrozoos 1991;4:192 197. 21. Landsberg GM. Declawing is controversial but still saves pets. A veterinarian survey. Vet Forum 1991;8:66 67. 22. Landsberg GM. Feline scratching and destruction and the effects of declawing. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1991;21:265 279. Page 7 of 8 www.pawproject.org

The Paw Project 23. Levy J, Lapham B, Hardie E, et al. Evaluation of laser onychectomy in the cat. (Abstract) Proc 19th Annu Meet Soc Laser Med 1999;73. 24. Lin HC, Benson GJ, Thurmon JC, et al. Influence of anesthetic regimens on the perioperative catecholamine response associated with onychectomy in cats. Am J Vet Res 1993; 54:1721-1724. 25. Martinez SA, Hauptmann J, Walshaw R. Comparing two techniques for onychectomy in cats and two adhesives for wound closure. Vet Med 1993; 88:516-525. 26. Max's House/START II. The facts about declawing. Available at: http://maxshouse.com/truth%20about%20declawing.htm. Accessed Jul 18, 2001. 27. Miller RM. The declawing controversy: stepping into the ring. Vet Med 1998;12:1043 1045. 28. Miller DD, Staats SR, Partlo C, Rada K. Factors associated with the decision to surrender a pet to an animal shelter. J Am Vet Med Assoc, 209, 4, 738-742, 1996 29. Morgan M, Houpt KA. Feline behavior problems: the influence of declawing. Anthrozoos 1989;3:50 53. 30. Patronek GJ, Beck AM, Glickman LT. Dynamics of the dog and cat populations in a community. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1997;210:637 642. 31. Patronek GJ, Glickman LT, Beck AM, et al. Risk factors for relinquishment of cats to an animal shelter. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1996;209:582 588. 32. Patronek, G. J., Glickman, L.T., Beck, AM, McCabe, GP, and C. Ecker. Risk factors for relinquishment of dogs to an animal shelter. 1996. J Am Vet Med. Assoc.; 209: 572-581. 33. Patronek, G. J., Glickman, L. T., and M. Moyer. Population dynamics and risk of euthanasia for dogs in an animal shelter. 1995. Anthrozoös 8(1): 31-43. 34. Pollari FL, Bonnett BN, Bamsey SC, et al. Postoperative complications of elective surgeries in dogs and cats determined by examining electronic and paper medical records. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1996;208:1882 1886. 35. Pollari FL, Bonnett BN. Evaluation of postoperative complications following elective surgeries of dogs and cats at private practices using computer records. Can Vet J 1996;37:672 678. 36. Ralston Purina. The state of the American pet. A study among pet owners. Available at: http://www.purina.com/institute/survey.asp. Accessed Mar 26, 2001. 37. Salman MD, Hutchison J, Ruch-Gallie R, et al. Behavioral reasons for relinquishment of dogs and cats to 12 shelters. J Appl Anim Welfare Sci 2000;3:93 106. 38. Salman, M.D. Human and animal factors related to the relinquishment of dogs and cats in 12 selected animal shelters in the United States. J Appl Anim Welfare Sci 1998;v.1(3):207-226. 39. Scarlett, JM Reasons for relinquishment of companion animals in U.S. animal shelters: selected health and personal issues. J Appl Anim Welfare Sci 1999; v.2(1):41-57 40. The Cat Fanciers' Association. Position statement on cat declawing. Available at: http://www.cfainc.org/health/declawing.html. Accessed Mar 26, 2001. 41. Tobias KS. Feline onychectomy at a teaching institution: a retrospective study of 163 cases. Vet Surg 1994; 23:274-280. 42. Wagner AE, Hellyer PW. Survey of anesthesia techniques and concerns in private veterinary practice. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000;217:1652 1657. 43. Winkler KP, Greenfield CL, Benson GJ. The effect of wound irrigation with bupivicaine on postoperative analgesia of the feline onychectomy patient. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1997;33:346 352. 44. Yeon SC, Flanders JA, Scarlett JM, et al. Attitudes of owners regarding tendonectomy and onychectomy in cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001;218:43 47. 45. Zawistowski S, Morris J, Salman MD, et al. Population dynamics, overpopulation, and the welfare of companion animals: new insights on old and new data. J Appl Anim Welfare Sci 1998;1:193 206. Page 8 of 8 www.pawproject.org

ROYAL COLLEGE OF VETERINARY SURGEONS COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THE MUTILATION OF ANIMALS (abridged) 1. BACKGROUND (i) The establishment of the Working Party resulted from the Royal College Council's involvement in the controversial issue of the docking of dogs' tails. Council recognised that this was a procedure which could be dealt with satisfactorily only by legislation, but appreciated also that it was unlikely that Parliamentary time would be found to deal with a single procedure. It seemed more reasonable to hope that Government would be prepared to make time available for a Bill seeking to ban or control a number of undesirable procedures if these could be identified and accordingly it would be wise to consider the field of animal mutilations as a whole. 2. TERMS OF REFERENCE The reconvened Working Party adopted the following fresh terms of reference: "To consider animal mutilations in general with a view to pressing for the banning of a number of mutilations by statute or other appropriate means." 3. WHAT IS A MUTILATION? The reconvened Working Party confirmed that, although the term mutilation was an emotive one, carrying with it, in common usage, implications of maiming and disfigurement, there was no satisfactory alternative term which would suffice for its purposes. Accordingly it was agreed to continue to make reference to mutilations on the understanding that the term should be understood as covering all procedures, carried out with or without instruments which involve interference with the sensitive tissues or the bone structure of an animal, and are carried out for non - therapeutic reasons. 4. CONSIDERATIONS INVOLVED The Working Party confirmed that procedures which were carried out solely for therapeutic purposes were normally acceptable. 5. PROCEDURES CONSIDERED A list of the procedures considered by the Working Party is set out in alphabetical order in Appendix A. It will be appreciated that, for the sake of completeness, several procedures were looked at although they are already covered by legislation. In each case the Working Party considered that the legislative provisions were satisfactory. The remaining procedures were assessed for acceptability and it was considered possible to categorise all the procedures considered under the following headings; A: Procedures already satisfactorily covered by legislation and requiring no further action. B: Procedures which are acceptable C. Procedures which are unacceptable APPENDIX A PROCEDURE PRIMARY CONSIDERATIONS PROPOSED CATEGORY Claws, removal Practical C(i) APPENDIX B Reasons for assignment of particular categories to individual procedure Claws, removal of This procedure is only acceptable where, in the opinion of the veterinary surgeon, injury to the animal is likely to occur during normal activity. It is not acceptable if carried out for the convenience of the owner. Thus the removal of dew claws in certain breeds of dog where they protrude from the limb and are likely to become caught and torn is justifiable and even advisable. On the other hand, the removal of claws, particularly those which are weight-bearing, to preclude damage to furnishings is not acceptable.