Debarking

[Crisovar]

My step grandmother in law is a registered breeder and she has de-barked some of her dogs. It is a much safer operation that I think it use to be. The dogs that have been de-barked still make a noise, but it is more like a small cough more than anything. I find it sad that they can't bark though.

The dogs are still barking they are just quieter, why is that sad? They still yap their heads off.

Sad is having an irate neighbour on your doorstep or the local law officers insisting you dispose of your dogs.

[persephone]

The dogs are still barking they are just quieter, why is that sad? They still yap their heads off.">Sad is having an irate neighbour on your doorstep or the local law officers insisting you dispose of your dogs.

I agree with this . If these little dogs are happy and lead a good full life , then a reduction in bark volume is not going to impact on them at all :)

Edited May 23, 2012 by persephone

[Crisovar]

Never underestimate what cheesed off neighbours will do and how the stress can affect the family of the nuisance barker. If the end result of surgically altering the bark is a happy dog a happy family and happy neighbours what is wrong with that.

[minxy]

Never underestimate what cheesed off neighbours will do and how the stress can affect the family of the nuisance barker. If the end result of surgically altering the bark is a happy dog a happy family and happy neighbours what is wrong with that.

I completely agree. We have a dog right behind us that barks literally for hours every single god damn day. I keep getting migraines from listening to him, and that's even with keeping our house shut at all times and cranking the tv to try and drown out the noise. My husband is a shift worker and is being kept awake by him (even with ear plugs) and has even had to call in sick because he's had so little sleep.

We're massive dog lovers, but even our patience is wearing very thin. I've typed up a letter (a very nice one) to our neighbours with some suggestions on what they can do. I'm definitely putting debarking on there because quite frankly, I doubt they'll do anything where real effort on their part is required. I honestly believe the debarking him is the best solution. I have spoken to council about it (but they won't do anything until I sit at home for 7 days and record every single time the dog barks ) but I really don't want to see their dog getting hurt because of this.

[minimax]

Maybe everyone in the retirement home will be deaf, and not able to hear?

(sorry, that's my irrelevant and politically incorrect offer for the day)

;)

[pebbles]

Hehehe Minimax, that sort of applies here - We have a new neighbour over the back lane who is deaf and Mick. my Min Pin, who isn't always as obedient as might be and needs the extra shout. As new neighbour's name is also Mick thankfully he doesn't come running every time I yell. :laugh:

[cowanbree]

Cowanbree, may I ask were the dogs you've had debarked your Shelties? Not that breed matters, just that jeez my Sheltie can bark! I'm working on a citronella collar with him, it definitely stops the barking when it's on him but it also goes off when the other dogs bark and after only a week or so seems to radomly go off by itself sometimes so seems unfair and confusing for him...

I'm nowhere near contemplating debarking but the thing that concerns me most is an annoyed neighbour chucking poison into the yard or harming him in some other way if I can't get it under control, and quite frankly I'd rather he have a quiet raspy bark than be dead.

Sure was. I don't really like the collars esp the electric ones so it was a good solution for me. Now days I am semi rural and haven't done one for many years but it is tempting sometimes - nobody would ever accuse them of being a quiet breed.

[Jade~Harley~Bella]

As I said, some make something similar to a coughing sound and some don't really make a sound at all when they "bark" (mouth moves but no sound comes out). I think its sad because I don't really agree with doing things like that to any animal regardless of the situation. My dogs don't bark, but I have neighbours that do constantly.. mostly through lack of action from the owner.

[wuffles]

As I said, some make something similar to a coughing sound and some don't really make a sound at all when they "bark" (mouth moves but no sound comes out). I think its sad because I don't really agree with doing things like that to any animal regardless of the situation. My dogs don't bark, but I have neighbours that do constantly.. mostly through lack of action from the owner.

Are your dogs desexed? That's quite a big operation to put our dogs through for our own convenience.

Not trying to be controversial, just putting forward some alternate thoughts :)

[Crisovar]

As I said, some make something similar to a coughing sound and some don't really make a sound at all when they "bark" (mouth moves but no sound comes out). I think its sad because I don't really agree with doing things like that to any animal regardless of the situation. My dogs don't bark, but I have neighbours that do constantly.. mostly through lack of action from the owner.

So you would rather them surrendered for Euthanasia or baited or bashed by the irate neighbours.

A quiet bark seems to be a small price to pay to avoid that, and it happens all over the country every day..barking dogs give people the irits and some people will go to great often cruel lengths to shut them up. The actual procedure is very quick, the dogs recover very fast and very well, and they still bark.

[Guest lavendergirl]

I don't think you can compare desexing a dog to debarking. Most people desex because it is supposed to be the responsible thing to do - not just for their convenience. I don't know how it affects the dog psychologically to lose its voice - I only know I would only consider it as the last alternative to PTS.

[wuffles]

I'm not saying we should all go out and debark our dogs for the sake of it, but as a last resort I certainly think it is an acceptable option, with no need to "feel sorry" for the dog (just like I don't "feel sorry" for them when they get the chop!)

[pebbles]

Circumstances must also be taken into consideration - young, fit person can spend the time and energy to try numerous things - older/elderly person who perhaps has to alter accomodation, area, etc. should not have to go through all that stress both for him/her and the neighbours when there is an alternative option. JMHO. Cases on their merit.

[Dame Aussie]

Removing a dogs sexual organs and therefore altering hormones and interfering with natural development is a far more invasive procedure than debarking.

[Steve]

Removing a dogs sexual organs and therefore altering hormones and interfering with natural development is a far more invasive procedure than debarking.

[Steve]

I don't think you can compare desexing a dog to debarking. Most people desex because it is supposed to be the responsible thing to do - not just for their convenience. I don't know how it affects the dog psychologically to lose its voice - I only know I would only consider it as the last alternative to PTS.

People desex their animals because they are their animals and have a choice in how they manage them - no one makes them prove they cant keep them in and prevent a pregnancy or have them wandering looking for a bit and showing what they have done to prevent it before they are able to have a qualified vet do the procedure.

And desexing has numerous potential long term health negatives.

If someone wants to debark their dog and has to go through so much crap and prove its upsetting the neighbours and shwoing what they have done to prevent it in my book there isn't much difference to demanding they show cause as to why they would opt to have a dogs organs cut out over their vocal chords shortened.

The only difference here is that barking is seen by councils as a lesser offence than having an unwanted litter - if councils decided all dogs have to be debarked to prevent barking complaints there would be no difference except that debarking has less risks especially long term than desexing.

Dog ownership has become so over regulated that people are no longer just simply able to discuss with their vets and work out what is best for them and their dogs and that leads to neighbours being upset , owners feeling desperate and like criminals for wanting to have the op done and dogs becoming homeless.

In the main this came about because animal rights decided it was a terrible thing and that breeders where debarking dogs themselves - supposedly by shoving pipes down their necks and hitting it with a hammer- what a bloody crock .No one has ever been able to ever site one single instance of this happening either by the way

Just back off and let owners make the best decisions for their dogs based on their circumstances even if someone else doesn't see it as their last resort.

It shouldn't be any one else's call other than an owner and a vet. Why make it so hard for an owner to simply make a choice for their dog?

[Steve]

And by the way - its all about how you look at things - many might say yanking a dog around the block twice a day by a lead around its neck because they dont take action to live in areas where the dog gets enough exercise without this is pretty shocking too. Yet society says we are bad owners if we dont put this thing around their neck and make em pound the pavement.

Who does what for convenience?

Edited May 24, 2012 by Steve

[persephone]

Dog ownership has become so over regulated that people are no longer just simply able to discuss with their vets and work out what is best for them and their dogs and that leads to neighbours being upset , owners feeling desperate and like criminals for wanting to have the op done and dogs becoming homeless.

[Guest lavendergirl]

I don't think you can compare desexing a dog to debarking. Most people desex because it is supposed to be the responsible thing to do - not just for their convenience. I don't know how it affects the dog psychologically to lose its voice - I only know I would only consider it as the last alternative to PTS.

People desex their animals because they are their animals and have a choice in how they manage them - no one makes them prove they cant keep them in and prevent a pregnancy or have them wandering looking for a bit and showing what they have done to prevent it before they are able to have a qualified vet do the procedure.

And desexing has numerous potential long term health negatives.

If someone wants to debark their dog and has to go through so much crap and prove its upsetting the neighbours and shwoing what they have done to prevent it in my book there isn't much difference to demanding they show cause as to why they would opt to have a dogs organs cut out over their vocal chords shortened.

The only difference here is that barking is seen by councils as a lesser offence than having an unwanted litter - if councils decided all dogs have to be debarked to prevent barking complaints there would be no difference except that debarking has less risks especially long term than desexing.

Dog ownership has become so over regulated that people are no longer just simply able to discuss with their vets and work out what is best for them and their dogs and that leads to neighbours being upset , owners feeling desperate and like criminals for wanting to have the op done and dogs becoming homeless.

In the main this came about because animal rights decided it was a terrible thing and that breeders where debarking dogs themselves - supposedly by shoving pipes down their necks and hitting it with a hammer- what a bloody crock .No one has ever been able to ever site one single instance of this happening either by the way

Just back off and let owners make the best decisions for their dogs based on their circumstances even if someone else doesn't see it as their last resort.

It shouldn't be any one else's call other than an owner and a vet. Why make it so hard for an owner to simply make a choice for their dog?

Wow - is that tirade directed at me? I am hardly abusing the OP :laugh: Just my opinion of what I would do. I am sure I have seen many threads where the long term health benefits of desexing are discussed so I guess everyone else is wrong and we are actually harming our dogs by desexing is that it??

[Steve]

I don't think you can compare desexing a dog to debarking. Most people desex because it is supposed to be the responsible thing to do - not just for their convenience. I don't know how it affects the dog psychologically to lose its voice - I only know I would only consider it as the last alternative to PTS.

People desex their animals because they are their animals and have a choice in how they manage them - no one makes them prove they cant keep them in and prevent a pregnancy or have them wandering looking for a bit and showing what they have done to prevent it before they are able to have a qualified vet do the procedure.

And desexing has numerous potential long term health negatives.

If someone wants to debark their dog and has to go through so much crap and prove its upsetting the neighbours and shwoing what they have done to prevent it in my book there isn't much difference to demanding they show cause as to why they would opt to have a dogs organs cut out over their vocal chords shortened.

The only difference here is that barking is seen by councils as a lesser offence than having an unwanted litter - if councils decided all dogs have to be debarked to prevent barking complaints there would be no difference except that debarking has less risks especially long term than desexing.

Dog ownership has become so over regulated that people are no longer just simply able to discuss with their vets and work out what is best for them and their dogs and that leads to neighbours being upset , owners feeling desperate and like criminals for wanting to have the op done and dogs becoming homeless.

In the main this came about because animal rights decided it was a terrible thing and that breeders where debarking dogs themselves - supposedly by shoving pipes down their necks and hitting it with a hammer- what a bloody crock .No one has ever been able to ever site one single instance of this happening either by the way

Just back off and let owners make the best decisions for their dogs based on their circumstances even if someone else doesn't see it as their last resort.

It shouldn't be any one else's call other than an owner and a vet. Why make it so hard for an owner to simply make a choice for their dog?

Wow - is that tirade directed at me? I am hardly abusing the OP :laugh: Just my opinion of what I would do. I am sure I have seen many threads where the long term health benefits of desexing are discussed so I guess everyone else is wrong and we are actually harming our dogs by desexing is that it??

No it wasnt directed at you personally but there have been many many threads here speaking of the potential adverse affects of desexing and it certainly isnt a situation where there are no issues o consider. it should be a decision we all get to make based on what we believe is best for us and our dogs depending on our circumstances and education.

If someone wants to debark their dog or desex their dog it shouldn't be something they need to discuss with anyone other than their vet.