Dog lovers and veterinarians across the country are debating a controversial procedure being offered in animal clinics. The procedure is called devocalization—the removal of either part or all of a dog’s vocal cords.

Also known as “debarking,” this procedure is usually performed on dogs that bark excessively. The procedure consists of either making an incision on the neck or going in through the dog’s mouth and either taking out a section of their vocal cords, or cutting them out altogether.

With the removal of their vocal cords, dogs are no longer able to bark. If only a small amount of tissue is removed the dog can still bark, but at a much lower volume. However, even the removal of the vocal cords does not silence them completely.

Dr. Emily Lawrence is the lead veterinarian at West End Animal Clinic in Radford. Lawrence doubts the usefulness of the procedure, as dogs will still be able to make some type of noise.

“Dogs will still try to communicate without being able to bark,” Lawrence said. “With no vocal cords, it would just sound like a hoarse raspy whisper instead of a bark.”

This procedure has sparked controversy in the veterinary world, and has been considered cruel by a majority of clinics. In the United Kingdom, it is considered a form of mutilation and has been banned completely.

Canine devocalization is still legal in the United States, but recently individual states have been reconsidering whether or not it is a humane procedure.

On April 22, 2010, Massachusetts became the first state to ban devocalization. In what is officially called “Logan’s Law,” which makes the practice illegal to perform throughout the state.

“Logan’s Law” was named after a dog, Logan, who was abandoned by his owner after being devocalized. Logan was a show dog, and when he stopped winning blue ribbons he was left at a pound. Logan suffered from constant retching and gagging due to the surgery.

Devocalization is a popular practice for show dogs and dogs used for breeding purposes. It is considered a “convenience” surgery, meaning something that only benefits the owner— not the dog.

Dog breeders often have dozens of dogs in their households at one time, which naturally means a lot of barking. For dog breeders living in residential areas, this can pose a problem with neighbors. Instead of relocating their home or spending time training the dogs not to bark, this surgery offers a quick way to get a quieter environment.

Unfortunately, the surgery can be detrimental to the dog’s health. Cutting out animals’ vocal cords can cause difficulty breathing, chronic gagging, pneumonia, and possible infection.

Doctors have also said that this surgery is very painful for the dog, and takes a long time to heal. In some cases, the tissue ends up growing back, meaning multiple surgeries are needed.

“Imagine what it would be like to have constant laryngitis,” Lawrence said. “Whenever you go into surgery, there’s always going to be scar tissue. In the wrong hands, it can be very detrimental to the dog.”

Some doctors support the procedure, but only in the hands of a licensed doctor. Dr. Charlotte McGowan speaks on her website about the benefits of performing the procedure, and that it actually has minimal harm on the dog.

“Debarking is a more simple procedure than removing the uterus in spaying or removing testicles in neutering,” McGowan said.

McGowan and other supporters of devocalization credit the procedure to saving the lives of many dogs that would have otherwise been abandoned to pounds due to excessive barking.

If behavioral training is not working and a dog continues to bark excessively, devocalization may be the only option for owners who do not want to get rid of their dog. It can also be court-ordered in some cases, in which case the owners do not have a choice.

“The majority of people who debark have run out of options and are trying to be good neighbors,” McGowan said on her website. “We are not talking about people who are irresponsible and leave their dogs out all night or ignore chronic barking. We are talking about people who are faced with having to move or having to give up the dog. It is a procedure of last resort.”

What most doctors can agree on it seems, is that devocalization should only be used as a last resort. With the availability of this surgery, dog specialists fear that some people may use it as an easy way out rather than having to train their dog themselves. With the right training from an early age, most unwanted canine behavior can be eliminated.

Doctors agree that consistent behavioral training throughout a dog’s life is the best way to address excessive barking.

“There are other things to try first and ways to modify behavior without something as drastic as surgery,” Lawrence said. “Dogs learn from positive reinforcement and sometimes negative reinforcement. You can train them not to bark in certain situations.”

Lawrence also believes that if this surgery is offered as a regular service it will discourage people from actually trying to train their dog.

“That just seems lazy on their part,” Lawrence said.

While supporters of the procedure claim that it can make the difference between life and death for a dog, there is actually no evidence to show that devocalized dogs have a higher chance of survival than vocal ones.

Shelter executives say they see many devocalized dogs being abandoned to shelters just like regular dogs. Devocalized dogs may actually have more difficulty adapting to a new home, since people may not like the raspy, wheezing sound they make in place of barking.

Although they can still make some sounds, the inability to bark creates a huge communication barrier between the dog and other animals, and between the dog and people. This could lead to dangerous situations with other animals or small children, because of the dog not being able to give warnings about being angry or frustrated.

Many dog owners report “protection” as one of the main reasons for getting a dog. The abilities to scare off intruders and alert its owners if something was wrong have always been desirable traits in a canine companion.

Not being able to bark would take away this protective behavior that well-trained dogs can exhibit. If there were ever trouble in a large house, a dog with no ability to bark would not be able to alert his owner to danger.

Many dog lovers also believe that devocalizing a dog would remove its ability to communicate if it was hurt. However, when a dog has been hurt, it typically does not bark anyway.

“When dogs are hurt they typically get really quiet and passive, they don’t really make a lot of noise,” Lawrence said. “It would still be able to make slight whining noises, so the surgery doesn’t really affect it in that area as much. However, if the dog was to fall down a hill or something, you wouldn’t be able to hear it barking in the distance.”

The West End Animal Clinic in Radford is one of a majority of clinics in the area that have chosen not to partake in this procedure because of its physical consequences for the dog.

The United States Humane Society has taken a stance against the procedure, and the Pulaski County Humane Society in Dublin has done the same.

“We do not agree with it all,” said Shayne Pruitt, office manager of the Pulaski Humane Society. “The main problem is that it cuts off their form of communication with dogs and confuses them, and that’s where the biggest problems come from. Just like a dog with a docked tail or ears, other dogs won’t be able to see or hear the signals it puts out.”

The Town & Country Veterinary Clinic (TCVC) in Christiansburg is a local clinic that offers the procedure.

“We discuss with owners why they want it done and if it’s going to solve the problem they’re having, because it doesn’t completely stop them from barking” said Kelly Burdette, owner of Town and Country Veterinary Clinic. “I think people are under the impression that they don’t make any sounds, but they still do. It’s just a lot less than what a normal dog does.”

Burdette said that some of her employees had questions about the procedure, so she sent out a letter explaining the surgery, why some people choose it for their dogs, as well as her views on its safety.

“I personally breed dogs, and some of my dogs I’ve performed this surgery on,” Burdette said. “I believe it’s not that horrible of a procedure, but it’s definitely a controversial decision.”

TCVC and the Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine Veterinary Teaching Hospital are the only vet facilities with emergency services 24 hours a day in the New River Valley, and TCVC is used by many other area veterinarians and their clients as an emergency clinic.

Animal rights activists are protesting this procedure throughout the country, and hope to get more states to follow Massachusetts’s lead and ban it permanently.

More information on devocalization can be found via the Humane Society of the United States.

What are your thoughts on devocalization? Let us know by commenting below!

Elise Chretien, a former New River Voice intern and recent graduate of Virginia Tech wrote this article with additional reporting from current Voice intern and VT student Lindsey Macdonald.