Here’s one U S state that has some sensible legislation. Here’s a second, plus some where it’s proposed:
I want to see all 50 plus protectorates ban this barbaric practice. It’s cruel and will leave the animals unable to defend themselves should they accidentally be let out.
I’m sure no one in their right minds would propose removing their dogs’ healthy teeth, but it’s OK to take a cat’s natural defense?! No it isn’t, nor should it be considered OK.
If you don’t want to deal with what goes with owning a cat, you shouldn’t get one in the first place. It’s like getting a dog but you don’t expect it to pee in your yard.
If your state has a law banning declawing (amputation) and you don’t want your furniture scratched, don’t get a cat. Cats scratch. Only an idiot would bring home a cat and then be surprised that it scratches the furniture.
I agree that it could lead to fewer cats being adopted if people know they can’t amputate their toes. But people who already own cats have either already had them declawed or found other ways to prevent furniture scratching.
Have we never heard of such amazing options as cat nip toys and scratching posts?
Or that many shelters are going no kill?
Housing animals temporarily with individuals and families willing to foster them, and sometimes these temporary arrangements become permanent?
It would be wise to watch Maryland and New York to see if banning the cruelty of removing a cat’s natural defense leads to more surrendered animals.
Maybe cat owners there have some semblance of brains in their heads and know to anticipate scratching and prepare for it through everything from squirting the cats with water to posts.