Buzz
While many of the procedures we carry out on animals are intended for their health, there are times when we remove body parts simply for cosmetic reasons. (Or at least that's what we like to believe!)
Introducing or removing things from animals can sometimes make them easier to control. Or even turn a significant profit. However, even when performed with the animal's best interest in mind, some of our actions are astonishing.
10. The Bile Bears
Bear bile has been a part of traditional Chinese medicine for centuries, with proponents claiming it can treat various ailments. (This is not true.) Even if it offers limited benefits, there are far better options available.
Still, bile bear farms thrive in countries where the practice has not been banned. There are numerous methods for extracting bile from a bear’s gallbladder, but none of them are humane or comfortable for the animals.
Some bears are subjected to routine bile extractions. This involves restraining them, often physically, and then performing a procedure to remove the bile (though the term “procedure” is used very loosely here).
Other bile farmers eliminate the need for repeated “procedures” by leaving a catheter permanently in the bear’s gallbladder. Some even put the bears in “torture vests,” as rescuers have described them, that continuously drain the bile into a container for easy collection. Other farms use “crush cages” where the bears are confined their entire lives with no freedom to move.
While bile farming is outlawed in some countries, it remains widespread in many Southeast Asian nations. As bears are captured from the wild, poaching and habitat loss contribute to the rapid decline of wild bear populations, a trend experts fear will only worsen.
9. Cows with Holes
In an effort to study the cow's digestive process and improve herd health, some researchers and farmers create permanent openings in cows' sides, allowing direct access to their stomachs. This procedure is performed under anesthesia, so it's believed the cows experience no pain.
A rubber plug is placed in the hole, which can be removed to examine the cow’s digestive system (the hole is large enough for a human hand to fit). As for infection control, farmers claim that the cow’s natural gut bacteria protect the area by preventing harmful microbes from taking hold.
Animal rights groups decry this procedure, known as cannulating, as a form of cruelty. However, farmers argue that it benefits not only the individual cow but the entire herd. By directly observing the cow’s stomach and studying its digestive contents, researchers can develop more nutritious diets for the cows.
The health of a cow is closely linked to the material found in its digestive microbiome. When a cow falls ill, its digestive system is often the last to recover. However, by transferring material from a healthy cannulated cow’s gut to a sick one, farmers can significantly accelerate the recovery process.
8. The Practice of Ear Cropping
Many dog enthusiasts might be surprised to learn that the upright ears of certain breeds, such as the Doberman pinscher, are not naturally shaped this way. These dogs don’t naturally have small, erect ears but undergo a procedure known as “ear cropping.” This surgery is done for aesthetic purposes—to appeal to humans. (The dogs themselves don't seem to have any preference either way.)
Ear cropping has become a controversial issue among veterinarians and animal rights groups who argue that it serves no purpose other than cosmetic enhancement (again, from a human perspective) and that the dogs must endure pain, as well as the risk of complications from the removal of large sections of their ears.
The American Veterinary Medical Association states that there is no medical evidence to support the claims of proponents who argue that ear cropping reduces the likelihood of ear infections in dogs. The idea that it improves hearing or prevents future ear injuries is equally unsubstantiated.
One of the significant issues with this procedure is that a dog’s ears are prone to infection as a postoperative complication. To keep the ears upright in the desired position, they must be taped, and retaping can cause discomfort for the dogs. If the ears don’t stay upright, additional cropping may be required, which increases the risk of infection and causes more pain for the dog.
7. The Practice of Removing Sheep’s Butt Skin
Flystrike is one of the most dangerous conditions a sheep can experience. Due to the thick wool covering the sheep’s body, including around its anus, feces can accumulate in the area. This attracts flies, and the flies find it such an ideal spot to lay eggs that maggots end up feeding on the sheep’s skin.
A sheep suffering from flystrike can perish in a matter of days. To prevent this, farmers developed a procedure called mulesing (named after its inventor, John Mules), in which the skin around the sheep’s anus is cut away. This prevents the buildup of feces and urine in the area.
Animal rights groups strongly oppose this procedure, as it involves cutting away the animal’s butt skin, often without anesthesia or proper postoperative care. The practice gained more attention when PETA started releasing videos and images showing a sheep undergoing mulesing.
The sheep doesn’t appear to show any signs of pain, but the blood loss from mulesing, along with subsequent tests revealing a dramatic rise in the animal’s stress hormones, tells a different story. (As prey animals, sheep are thought to hide pain.) To protest the practice, PETA initiated a boycott of Australian wool.
6. The Practice of Tail Docking
Many dog breeds that are known for their short tails actually don’t inherit them naturally but instead undergo a procedure called tail docking, which is essentially a partial amputation of the tail. Similar to ear cropping, this procedure is mainly done for cosmetic reasons, such as meeting a breed standard that calls for a short, stubby tail.
Tail docking has been proven to offer some benefits in certain rare cases. For working dogs like guard dogs and hunting dogs, it can reduce the risk of injury when navigating through dense brush that could harm the tail. For guard dogs, tail docking can also prevent their tails from being grabbed by an intruder.
The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) emphasizes that tail docking rarely offers valid benefits, even for working dogs. The AVMA does not endorse the practice, not because the procedure is necessarily harmful (beyond the pain it causes), but because there is typically no advantage to the animal itself. As a result, the AVMA believes it is unnecessary, and in countries like the UK, it is illegal.
However, tail docking is not limited to dogs. In the US dairy industry, tail docking cows was once common, but it has been shown to provide no benefits for the cows or workers. Instead, it causes more discomfort during fly season, as cows cannot use their tails to swat away the flies, which increases the number of insects they have to deal with.
Because of this, dairy industry manuals in the US now advise against the practice. Young lambs and some horses also have their tails docked, primarily to prevent conditions like flystrike or the risk of getting tangled in equipment. In these cases, tail docking has been proven to offer some benefits to the lambs and horses.
5. The Practice of Inserting Ginger into Horse Butts
Different types of show horses are held to specific standards. In certain categories, a “lively” tail is considered an essential trait for competition. To meet the breed’s ideal, the horse must maintain its tail raised and alert to be regarded as being in top condition.
However, not every horse shares the same enthusiasm for keeping their tail raised as their owners would prefer. As a result, some owners take matters into their own hands—by inserting ginger into their horses’ rear ends.
Ginger acts as an irritant, prompting the horse to lift its tail. This practice, known as “gingering,” was originally performed by packing raw ginger into the horse’s anus, though other substances such as cayenne pepper or even kerosene have also been used to provoke the desired effect.
Unsurprisingly, gingering has been banned in horse shows. It is harmful to the animal and fails to provide a true representation of the breed’s natural behavior. To detect gingering and other irritants, officials may swab for substances or, to avoid direct contact with the horse’s rear, employ thermal imaging.
In addition to gingering, some people in the horseshow industry have resorted to cheating by using a technique known as “nicking.” This involves cutting specific ligaments in the horse’s tail and repositioning them to create a higher-tail appearance, all in pursuit of a victory.
4. Reaching Elevated Steps
Horses face more challenges than just their owners using chemicals on their rear ends. The Tennessee Walking Horse, renowned for its distinctive leg movements, has been subject to manipulation by some unethical breeders in competition, who artificially induce these movements by applying chemicals to their legs.
The practice known as “soring” involves inflicting harm on a horse’s legs, often by applying chemicals to its hooves or legs to make walking painful. The chemicals cause the horse to flinch or recoil with pain as it walks, resulting in a higher step that appears attractive to onlookers.
Officials have heavily criticized Tennessee Walking Horse shows for their use of soring. They have taken measures to clamp down on these practices through the Horse Protection Act of 1970, but another challenge arose. After a horse is sored, additional chemicals can be applied to numb the pain, hiding the evidence until the horse is showcased.
At the 2013 Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration, 67% of the horses tested positive for chemicals that may have masked the signs of soring. A representative from the Performance Show Horse Association disputed the results, claiming the information didn’t come from USDA veterinary inspectors but from independent organizations.
A veterinarian representing the organization stated that there was no scientific evidence supporting the findings and that it was unreasonable to expect that a horse's legs wouldn’t have trace amounts of the substances. Their stated goal is to ensure full compliance and protect the “Big Lick” competition from being tainted by dishonest practices.
3. Removing the Eyes of Prawns
Female prawns are picky when it comes to reproduction, only willing to mate under ideal conditions. They prefer everything to be perfect when it’s time to lay their eggs. However, their natural tendency to wait for ideal circumstances presents a major problem for most farmers.
Farmed prawns often experience more stress than those in the wild, which prevents their sexual maturity. To resolve this, farmers need the prawns to reproduce, and one way to stimulate them is by creating conditions that make the female prawns feel secure enough to mature their ovaries. In some cases, the solution is to remove or damage their eyes (or even cut them open).
Female prawns possess a gland located in their eyestalks that regulates the maturation of their ovaries. If these females are reluctant to reproduce, farmers simply remove the gland. Without it, the prawns' ovaries start to mature.
Since the gland resides in the prawn's eyestalk, removal is typically carried out in one of two methods. The first involves fully amputating the eyestalk, which also removes the gland, leading the prawn to begin reproducing.
However, blinding the prawn isn’t necessary for the procedure known as eyestalk ablation. Farmers can simply cut the eye open and press the eyestalk to extract the gland. While the eye may heal, the effect on the prawn’s vision is unknown. Science suggests that the process is painful, too.
2. Chickens with Rose-Colored Glasses or Blinders
While chicken is a popular and delicious meal for humans, the birds themselves aren't exempt from this sentiment. In fact, chickens are known to be cannibals. Each year, chicken farmers can lose up to 25 percent of their flock due to chickens killing one another.
When a chicken is injured and starts to bleed, the sight of the blood attracts other chickens, who then begin to attack the wounded bird. As a result, a bleeding chicken often succumbs quickly to the attacks of its fellow flock members.
To reduce these losses, chicken farmers employ various strategies, including providing their birds with spectacles. These rose-colored glasses make it harder for the chickens to see blood, thereby preventing them from mobbing and attacking a solitary bird.
Some of these glasses were designed to automatically swing open when the chicken was eating, allowing the bird to see its food normally. Once the chicken lifted its head, the spectacles would close again.
Other variations, known as blinders, are opaque and prevent the chickens from seeing in front of them. This prevents the chickens from seeing and attacking each other, thereby reducing fatalities. There were even attempts to fit chickens with permanent red-colored contact lenses, but these only caused harm and even blindness in some birds.
While some blinders and spectacles can be temporarily clipped onto chickens, others are permanently affixed. These permanent ones are inserted into the birds' nasal cavities and are considered ‘mutilations’ by the UK government. Due to their detrimental impact on the animals' welfare, this practice is illegal in the UK.
1. Nose Rings Inflict Pain (And That’s The Purpose)
Nose rings are placed in the nostrils of various animals for a number of purposes. Regardless of the intended result, the common thread is that these rings are designed to cause discomfort. For example, cows may have nose rings to control their behavior when they are in close proximity to humans.
By attaching a rope to the nose ring, farmers can lead the cow, or they can pull on the ring to inflict pain and stop the animal from engaging in unwanted behavior. Calves are also sometimes fitted with temporary nose rings as a way to wean them, preventing them from nursing while still allowing them to eat adult food.
Nose rings in pigs are commonly associated with controlling their behavior, yet they are among the most criticized practices. While these rings can be used to guide a pig’s movements, their primary function is to prevent pigs from rooting, which can be damaging to the surrounding environment.
Rooting is a natural behavior for pigs, and many animal welfare experts argue that stopping this instinctual activity is harmful to the animals. While a group of pigs rooting through the soil can lead to significant damage, other techniques to curb rooting are preferred. In fact, in several countries, nose rings for pigs are either discouraged or outright banned.
