by Michael (London, UK)
Mr Boks supported this great campaign on his blog.
Shelter manager, Ed Boks has 30 years experience in animal welfare and control and he argued against the Santa Monica ban on declawing. In the event he lost his argument and a ban was granted. Please see: Declawing banned in Santa Monica. But the sickening thing is that this person is a gamekeeper turned poacher in my opinion. He says he abhors declawing. Yet he finds time to support it with a hopelessly weak argument, which I discuss below.
So what arguments did Mr Boks use? Remember his arguments are supposed to be about the best there is for pro-declawers.
He says that a ban will result in more cats being relinquished and abandoned and killed in shelters. He says that the people who criticize declawing because it is a mutilation of the cat are people who embrace other forms of mutilation such as cutting the tip off the ear of a feral cat and neutering and spaying. He says that the latter two mutilations are acceptable because it saves lives.
He says that declawing as a last resort is saving a life. If declawing is banned he says that it will force the cat keeper to relinquish the cat. Declawing is life saving when performed as a last resort. He also says that 55% of people would relinquish their cats to shelters if declawing was not open to them.
He was questioned by the council members. This is the summary:
QUESTION “Did the ban on declawing cause a rise in abandonments in West Hollywood?
ANSWER: I don’t know (these are not his words but they amount to what he said in response). He says that there are no studies on how many declawed cats are relinquished. He did not track that as a shelter manager. In fact he agreed that the reasons for relinquishment was not tracked.
Note: no other relevant question is asked in this video on Ed Books speaks for declawing cats
Ed Books speaks for declawing cats in the above video.
His argument is incredibly weak. He undermines it totally himself. His argument turns on the so called fact that declawing says lives by preventing abandonments yet he openly admits that he has no data to support that proposition. His argument must be ignored.
He also likens ear clipping of feral cats and neutering to declawing when they are completely different both in how they affect the cat and the reasons for doing the procedures. Declawing is done for the benefit of the human while the other two procedures are done to improve the lives of cats generally. Declawing causes massive pain and can have substantial secondary detrimental effects.
Vets almost never declaw as a last resort so that totally undermines his argument also.
Mr Boks also fails to address the most profound issue namely that people who actually, in truth, don’t want to keep a cat, as a whole and complete cat, then decide to keep one. It is these people who would abandon them if declawing was banned. The answer it not to perpetuate another wrong (declawing) to rectify an earlier wrong (the keeping of cats by unsuitable people) but to ensure that only the right people keep cats or people with the right mentality keep cats. The vets are responsible in peddling the idea that modifying cats is normal, encouraging the wrong people to keep cats or teaching people the wrong attitude towards cats.
This bloke is talking, nay reading from a script, pure unadulterated tripe… auntykill ------------------------------------------------- He does NOT know what he is talking about. 9 times out of 10…. Dan5819 ------------------------------------------------
This bloke is talking, nay reading from a script, pure unadulterated tripe…
auntykill
-------------------------------------------------
He does NOT know what he is talking about. 9 times out of 10….
Dan5819
------------------------------------------------
I guess the legislators saw through Ed Bok’s extremely poor and ill conceived arguments. The veterinarians must be getting worried about legislation that usurps their powers of decision making. They should be. What they have done in declawing cats so wantonly and callously for so long has shown the people that they cannot be trusted to make correct decisions based solely on the cat’s health and welfare and so the public is justified in taking decision making from them through their city councils.
Ed Books speaks for declawing cats to Declawing Cats
http://www.pictures-of-cats.org/ed-boks-speaks-for-declawing-cats.html#comments
*This article was re-printed with consent from Michael.
Format: ???Duration: --:--
Here's the youtube link if it doesn't work in the article:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np0DUXLHC_A
Thankfully the council members saw right through Mr Bok's weak arguments ! He tried to make out that people are eager to adopt declawed cats from Rescue Shelters, of course he had no statistics of how many were adopted out. Nor did he give the reasons why the declawed cats were in the Rescue Shelters in the first place.Surely if declawed cats were so desirable and sought after, there would be NONE needing homes.The horrible truth is that declawed cats are often in Rescue Shelters because of behavioural problems resulting from declawing ! Why are no records kept of these cats ? How many are destroyed because they can't be adopted out ? Come to that, why are there no records kept by vets of the physical and mental problems of declawed cats ? It's all conveniently swept under the carpet !!!! Out of sight , out of mind, what the eye doesn't see and so forth. These innocent mutilated creatures are looked upon as 'cats' But they are INDIVIDUAL cats,each one a living, breathing , feeling creature, just like people are !Yes, Mr Boks also tried to say that ear clipping of feral cats after neutering is akin to declawing.What rubbish !!! A cat doesn't need the tip of its ear, to walk, to groom, to exercise and to defend itself with ! Ear clipping is for the good of the cat, it's plain to see which cats have been neutered by that and therefore save them the trauma of another trip to the vets.He talks about vets only declawing as a last resort ! So what about kittens being declawed ? What about people getting a kitten knowing full well they don't have to bother to teach it to use a scratching post, they can just go to a pro declaw vet and have the kittens toe ends removed, no questions asked. In fact, they can even sometimes get a neuter/declaw package or a discount coupon to encourage them to have a kitten declawed and some vets receptionists even offer declawing with neutering, without being asked about it by the client. The people who are of this mind simply wouldn't get a kitten if they couldn't have it declawed and that would be a very good thing. They don't want a cat, they want an adapted creature. Only people who truly love cats as they come, claws and all,would have cats if declawing was banned.Anyone who would only have an adapted cat is NOT a fit person to have a cat.In our country no one goes out and brings a kitten home and goes into shock because it has claws !! No one expects those very essential claws to be taken away. No one with babies, children, frail or elderly people thinks a cat should be mutilated for their sake and especially not for the sake of replaceable furniture.USA pro declaw vets are running scared now that more people are finding out the truth about declawing, they've got away with this cruelty long enough, it has filled up their coffers nicely.But now it's time to catch up with other countries where declawing is banned as animal abuse.Will Mr Bok change sides AGAIN now he has been uncovered and defeated in Santa Monica ? Whoever's pocket he was in must be bitterly disappointed in him !!!!
Claws are the essence of the cat