Declawing on agenda
- Share via
CITY HALL — After weeks of political wrangling and testimony, the City Council is slated to vote Tuesday on whether to immediately ban pet declawing.
Veterinarians opposed to cities and counties interfering in their practices persuaded state lawmakers to bar local governments from banning the practice beginning next year, prompting a rush of activity to sweep through council chambers across the state.
Supporters of local bans touted a litany of studies showing declawed animals at increased risks for behavior problems, and then abandonment by frustrated owners.
The City Council hearing comes after seven cities across the state banned the practice within their limits. Last month, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, Berkeley and San Francisco approved ordinances banning declawing, with exceptions for therapeutic purposes. Culver City officials this week passed a similar ban effective Dec. 30.
The proposed ban in Burbank, which would take effect immediately, closely mirrors a 2003 West Hollywood ordinance that was ultimately upheld after the California Medical Veterinary Assn. challenged it.
“The declawing of cats is one of the most painful surgeries that is routinely performed in all of veterinary medicine, and yet 30% of [veterinarians], according to the scientific literature, are using no pain medication whatsoever,” said Jennifer Conrad, founder of the Santa Monica-based Paw Project, which rehabilitates declawed lions, tigers, cougars and jaguars. “That’s rather ironic considering that declawing is used as a way of testing pain medications by drug companies because it is so predictably painful.”
In the procedure, veterinarians use a scalpel, clippers or laser to cut off the last bone on each toe of a cat’s feet. “Because each digit is amputated through the joint, this procedure is painful and requires the appropriate treatment of pain before, during and after the procedure,” according to the American College of Veterinary Surgeons’ website.
Drawbacks of the surgery often include behavioral troubles such as biting and not using a litter box, supporters said.
The proposed ordinance does allow veterinarians to determine whether declawing is medically necessary to address illnesses, injuries or abnormalities in the claw.
Los Angeles veterinarian Robert Goldman maintained that the city down the road would not want to be known as one that invites the cruel practice.
“By following the other cities, you will be consistent in providing a clear outline for people to behave appropriately,” Goldman said.
Four of five council members must support the ban in order for it to pass, City Atty. Dennis Barlow said.
“Personally, I think having a city-by-city regulatory framework is a bad thing,” Councilman Dave Golonski said. “And, frankly, I’m disappointed in Sacramento because in some ways Sacramento is forcing us to consider emergency ordinances and things.
“This is not the way we should be doing business . . . . But I also realize that if we choose not to exercise that, then we are foreclosed forever from doing that by the actions of the Legislature.”
Veterinarian Sam Basilious, the lone medical professional to oppose the ban before the City Council the last time it was discussed, pointed to a review of studies showing that persistent lameness was observed in less than 1% of declawed cats, according to the American Veterinary Medical Assn.
“The city of Burbank seems to be jumping toward an action of interfering in our medical profession without any knowledge in the field of veterinary medicine,” Basilious wrote in a Nov. 23 letter to city officials.
The owner of Bastet Cat Hospital in Burbank also pointed to various legitimate reasons for declawing, including when a child is terminally ill with a blood disease, owners with HIV-AIDS, or when the owner has exhausted all remedies and must resort to euthanasia.
“Instead of the city, and the activists and the animal shelter volunteers who put animals to sleep every day — thousands of animals every year — they are worried about doing a declaw,” he said.