portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting united states

animal rights

PETA going after Westminster

The Westminster Dog SHow is on now. Time for this cruelty to end.
NATURE OF THE COMPLAINT 1. This is a complaint seeking action against the Westminster Kennel Club (?WKC?) for alleged violations of New York law prohibiting cruelty to animals. As sponsor of the Westminster Dog Show, which offers trophies, awards, and other valuable consideration for dogs based on certain physical characteristics?one of which, for certain breeds, is a ?docked? or amputated tail?the WKC is violating state law that prohibits acts that tend to cause animals to be unjustifiably injured, maimed, or mutilated. Tail-docking is a physical mutilation that causes pain, distress, and long-term trauma for dogs, and performing such procedures strictly for cosmetic reasons?as the Westminster Dog Show encourages and facilitates?is a practice denounced by both the American Veterinary Medical Association (?AVMA?) and the American Animal Hospital Association (?AAHA?). As the WKC is engaging in conduct that rewards unjustifiable mutilation of dogs, which thereby tends to further such acts, complainant calls for legal action in accordance with New York law prohibiting such conduct and mandating police action to address it. COSMETIC TAIL-DOCKING CONSTITUTES UNJUSTIFIABLE PHYSICAL MUTILATION AND INJURY 2. Tail-docking, as it is euphemistically called, is a form of physical mutilation that consists of amputating all or portions of the tails of dogs. It causes the animals to suffer pain and trauma and can result in such medical complications as hemorrhaging and infection. Further, most experts acknowledge that dogs utilize their tails for communication (e.g., various forms of wagging for happiness and greetings, straight when pointing at prey, slow wagging as a warning, thumping when in pain, held between the legs when
submissive or afraid, etc.), so amputation also injures dogs by impairing their natural ability to communicate. (Complainant would point out that aside from the ample expert evidence confirming this point, one only needs to return home once to a dog engaged in feverish tail-wagging to be convinced that he or she is using it to communicate.) 3. Tail-docking for strictly cosmetic reasons is not justified. According to the AVMA, ?tail docking in dogs for cosmetic reasons [is] not medically indicated nor of benefit to the [dog].
I hope the disgusting practice of 11.Feb.2004 00:38


ear clipping ends too. How horrible to see dogs with bloodied, damaged, bandaged ears just because some people think pitts and boxers look more menacing or whatever with the pointy ears. Time for humans to stop being vain and selfish.

PETA's Attack at Westminster Misdirected 11.Feb.2004 10:55

Dog Lover

Many years ago, England banned cropping and we could do it here, too, if the breed clubs that weren't invested in it would get their heads straight. Cropping (ear trimming) never made any sense and what is worse, it must be done when the dog's head is fully formed. The dog is an adolescent at that point so there is more trauma involved. Docking is done when puppies are so tiny that - if it is done properly - it's over and forgotten long before the eyes of puppies open. Docking was originally performed on sporting spaniels to avoid damage in the field. A majority of show dogs, however, are not working dogs so the need for docking in show dogs is moot. I never understood the need to dock a Rottweiler, Doberman, or Boxer, anyway.

If PETA is really sincere about attacking docking and cropping, bringing suit against the Westminster Kennel Club is a senseless move. Although it is a highly visible all-breed show, Westminster doesn't control this issue. PETA and others need to bring their suit against the American Kennel Club which sanctions thousands of shows like Westminster every year and approves Breed Standards which accept docking and cropping.

The good news is that Dobermans and Great Danes with natural ears are winning and enjoying life in England and in other countries and uncropped Dobermans are beautiful dogs that are experiencing a surge of interest in this country.

At one time, I owned a member of a breed that used to have its ears cropped from about 1900-1935. The US club finally followed the English club in breeding for naturally erect ears and this is really the way to go. There are no members of this breed that are cropped today. However, many breeds that crop ears have either paid no attention to the size or strength of ears and even breed for a larger ear so that there is more "material" to work with when cropping. It will be a long, hard road for them to breed naturally erect ears but it can be done.

PETA's next suit 11.Feb.2004 11:04

Crusader Rabbit

I look forward to PETA's next suit . . . bringing a case against the American Pediatric Association for performing circumcisions. After all, it's an elective, needless, painful surgical procedure brought against an individual that is not old enough to make an informed decision and at the mercy of its "keepers". And it has been known to "go wrong".

Babies qualify -- we're all animals!.

Likely they're doing it because it is 11.Feb.2004 12:03


highly visible. It's hard for animal issues to get any attention, so going for the most visible is the most effective. I'm certain that PETA is "sincere" about helping animals--not sure what the implication is in the post above. Look, if YOU"RE sincere, then YOU please do something. I see so many people criticizing groups that are actually trying to help, and when it isn't done in exactly the way someone wants, they criticize the group, while doing not a thing about the issue themselves.

PETA has their hands full with the billions upon billions of animals per year that are tortured in the food industries, lab industries, trapping, wildlife, pets etc. etc. Let's have NARAL, Amnesty International and other groups come out and do anything at all for non-human animals (they won't--every group that isn't about animals specifically seems to be made of people who eat them, wear them, profit by animal suffering in ways that would make it difficult for them to want to fight for their liberation). Why the heck would you suggest that PETA should deal with the circumcision issue at this point in their history? Find me a single reference in which just one of the people who are against human circumcision do anything at all for nonhuman animals. Why should the burden be higher for animal groups to spread themselves out and fight for every single issue out there (although frankly, they rise to the challenge--PETA donates the used fur coats to poor areas around the world, and has plenty of resources about healthy human diets).

But, PETA is actually taking a mild stance in this case. Truthfully, the breeding of dogs is disgusting when there are over 7 million killed in shelters per year. First things first. Dog breeders and those who buy the dogs should be ashamed. Look into the eyes of all the unwanted dogs and stop contributing to the problem.

Truth about PETA 11.Feb.2004 19:16

Animal Lover

PETA makes public complaints about actual animal abuse (such as testing and dog tail cropping) to solicit donations which PETA spends to try to outlaw hunting and fishing.

PETA makes a lot of wacko arguments that undermine the credibility of their true statements. It would be good if a credible group went after the AKC for having "breed standards" based on mutiliation.

PETA is a feminist group that takes pleasure in male diseases and injuries (they had a "Got cancer?" parody of a milk ad featuring a celebrity who suffered prostate cancer; you know if some meat or dairy product caused breast or ovarian cancer, they wouldn't make light of the disease), so they wouldn't ever protest against circumcision unless it was a female circumcision. Also, a lot of PETA members are Jewish, so they wouldn't try to end a practice done by their religion.

Back to the Westminster topic. This show and other shows encourage people to have purebreds as pets. This is a terrible attitude. Mutts are superior in health, personality, and other aspects. Purebreds suffer a variety of diseases, live shorter lives, and often require medication. Purebred pets are a product of racist European eugenists.

The typical dog "breeder" forces animals to inbreed in attempts to make them closer to the "breed standard". The animals have no fun, spending all their time in oppressive cages. The animals are thought of as money making machines. "Puppy mills", which almost exclusively breed purebreds, are extremely abusive to the dogs. Even when a puppy mill is raided and the dogs are rescued, every purebred rescued takes a home away from a good shelter mutt.

I'm proud to say I prejudge someone "owning" a mutt as better than someone "owning" a purebred.

Animal Lover, I might agree with you on breeding, but 11.Feb.2004 19:55


try taking a non-biased look at PETA. A Jewish, feminist group? Are you on acid? A feminist group would not have Pamela Anderson as the major spokesperson, and regularly piss off feminist groups with their ads. They're not a Jewish group either, and take no stance on religion or circumcision. I have to say that your post seems whacko. I think you're taking offense at their ads a bit personally. Anti-man because of the prostate cancer ads. That's laughable. I guarantee you they would publicize the breast cancer connection (if they haven't already--I think they have) to milk in much the same way.

PRS 11.Feb.2004 20:22


Umm, penis reduction surgery (aka circumcision) is a barbaric ritual practiced for arcane religious or aesthetic reasons. What other part of a child's body is it okay to cut off ? I wish it were exposed for what it is, child abuse.  http://www.noharmm.org/

PS Most animal lovers who diss PETA love their pets and their dinner but not all animals.

Don't give $ to PETA or HSUS 11.Feb.2004 20:25

Animal Lover

OK, you can forget about the circumcision issue; the poster who brought that up probably wasn't being serious. I found the prostate cancer campaign offensive, as if PETA was saying people who consume dairy products deserve to get cancer as punishment for "sweet cows being embarrassed by being milked".

What we shouldn't want to happen is well-meaning people donating money to groups such as PETA and HSUS (Humane Society of the United States), thinking their donations will go to help homeless animals, when in reality the money goes to outlaw responsible hunting and fishing. HSUS deliberately included "Humane Society" in their name to trick people into giving.

Too bad CBS rejected their "eating meat causes impotence" ad which would have cost PETA millions of dollars, money they still have because they were rejected and they might spend it attacking lawful hunters and anglers.

You can help animals by clicking on the "Animal Rescue Site" linked from rainforestsite.com or by donating to an actual Humane Society shelter.

The only credit I'll give PETA is raising awareness of the actual abuses they publicise, such as the AKC tail cropping "breed standard" rules, the NASA monkey abuse, and the continued use of steel jaw traps by fur traders.

People should go look at what PETA and HSUS 11.Feb.2004 20:41


are doing and decide for themselves. I happen to think that those groups are doing tremendous good for both specific animals and animals in general (shelters, spay/neuter--yes, even PETA helps financially with that, changing abuse laws, raising consciousness about the plight of factory farmed animals, circus animals, lab animals, animals trapped for fur, etc.). Humane Society is not trying to pass major laws to prevent anyone from ever hunting or fishing. Many might prefer that people do not do it, but they have their hands full with the extreme abuse of factory farming, and trying to prevent over 7 million homeless pets from being killed per year. Why don't you actually go to their sites and look at what they're saying--and please have a look at their videos, because the words mean nothing until you see why they are doing this work--rather than believing the hype put out by big business interests.

"Animal Lover" (NOT!) 12.Feb.2004 09:38

Toucan Sam

Wow! You're fruitier than a truckload of Fruit Loops!

I agree with Toucan Sam 14.Feb.2004 11:09


WTF is your malfunction "animal lover(?!)" ? You are just all over the place here, sweetie. By sweetie, I mean dillusional, racist fuck. Not the brighest crayon in the box, are we? So not cute how you call yourself 'animal lover'. What does that mean anyway? Love to eat and use animals for your own selfish reasons like most humans....

By the way, PETA actually does have 15.Feb.2004 20:48


a "Got Osteoporosis" ad--primarily a female disease. They aren't targetting male diseases, fool.


Go ahead and visit Petfinder! 14.Feb.2007 12:26

Peta asks 4 peace!

Adopt a pet plus, nobody should be homless! End Animal poverty! Trust me, I own an Animal rescue AT AGE 16! click on the link button!

If nothing happends visit www.petfinder.com!