Ed Boks Speaks FOR Declawing Cats

by Michael
(London, UK)

Mr Boks supported this great campaign on his blog.

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.

His arguments

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.

My comments on his argument

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.

Some Comments from YouTube Viewers on Ed Books speaks for declawing cats

This bloke is talking, nay reading from a script, pure unadulterated tripe…



He does NOT know what he is talking about. 9 times out of 10….



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

Comments for
Ed Boks Speaks FOR Declawing Cats

Click here to add your own comments

Dec 13, 2009 To Jamie
by: Ruth aka Kattaddorra

Hi, you are probably right ! People who hide behind anonymous don't have the courage of their convictions and there are quite a few pro declaws like that !

Dec 12, 2009 Who is Anonymous?
by: Jamie

5 dollars says Anonymous is Ed Buck. Another idiot.

Nov 04, 2009 To the person calling us morons
by: Michael

To the anonymous person calling us morons; we object to your insult.

In terms of this discussion about declawing it is irrelevant that Boks has saved the lives of cats.

Boks's submissions at the council meeting tells us that the pro-declawers are bereft of an argument.

His arguments were nothing short of pathetic. I would ask you to please try and make good argument rather than resorting to insults, which by the way shows how short of a good argument you are too.

Nov 04, 2009 Declawing 'Anonymous'
by: Gail (Boston, MA USA)

Anonymous, I concur with the previous poster. Unless you are willing to identify yourself, you have no credibility here, much the same as Ed Boks.

Mr. Boks doesn't have a clue if he is willing to put declawing in the same category as spay/neutering or clipping a feral's ear for identification. Pure rubbish! It just further proves that you are either misinformed or you are deliberately trying to sway people from the truth. This forum, however, is much smarter than that futile ploy.

Unless you have something of value to discuss, as any intelligent individual would, and are willing to identify yourself, please do not waste our time.

BTW - I wouldn't be so quick to call people 'morons' when you cannot even correctly spell the word "career."

Nov 04, 2009 To anonymous
by: Ruth aka Kattaddorra

Hiding your identity and calling people morons won't earn you any credibility or respect.
Mr Bok isn't the only one to rescue animals, I can go back over FOUR decades of VOLUNTARY animal rescue and so can many more people I know.
But it doesn't matter how much anyone does or doesn't do for animals, it still doesn't justify condoning the uneccessary mutilation of cats by taking their very necessary claws.

Nov 04, 2009 You people argue emotion over facts!
by: Anonymous

You people are morons. I've been following Boks' carreer for over a decade and he has saved tens of thousands of animals every year. How many of you can say that? To better understand Boks on all the issues you should read his blog at http://www.latopdog.blogspot.com/

Nov 04, 2009 To Anonymous
by: Ruth aka Kattaddorra

If you are so sure of yourself, stand up and be counted, don't hide behind Anonymous and post a biased link !
There is no getting away from the fact that declawing is a cruel uneccessary mutilation and should be banned worldwide to stop those people who think it's acceptable from having their cats declawed and to stop those vets who agree to declaw from doing it.
Read the remarks on here:
Many of these people didn't know the awful truth that declawing is actually amputation and that cats suffer physically and mentally from the operation.
If all vets adhered to the last resort policy there would be no need for a ban !
Our Pet Welfare law in the UK covers a ban on this mutilation,along with other uneccessary mutilations,but because our vets follow their oath to harm no animals, declawing was not done here even before the ban.

Nov 04, 2009 Anonymous?
by: Barbara

If what you have to say "Anonymous" is so relevant why not have the courage of your convictions, expand a little on your opinion and put a name to your post? Hiding behind anonymity and merely posting the link to a load of biased rubbish is so very helpful - not!

Nov 03, 2009 Now I know the definition of hypocrite
by: Susan

Ed Boks. Shame on you Ed. Disgusting, evil greed.

Nov 03, 2009 Hello Anonymous!
by: Everycat

Advocatesforfacts.org looks like it was hastily thrown together by someone who is experienced at collating evidence then skewing it massively. Think para-legals, think journalists. Think third rate bloggers who call themselves journalists.

The site contains some very pro-VIN material(who are vehemently pro-declaw), so I'd guess that a cheap, immoral pro-declaw hack who was once on the payroll of VIN was hired to quickly put together those pages.

The way European and UK law has been misquoted totally out of context to state that declawing is not banned anywhere is outrageous and shows the desperation of whoever compiled the information.

Interestingly, Gina Spadifori on her pro-declaw blog post back in September was very keen on comments that incorrectly stated that no country had banned declawing. Shamefully one of the comments came from someone purporting to speak as an RSPCA group treasurer.

Make your own guesses as to whom is behind the cheap, third rate guff that comprises the whole of advocatesforfacts.org.

Nov 03, 2009 Advocates For Facts
by: Michael

To the person who asks that we visit advocates for facts. Ed Bocks says there are no facts on abandonments due to the ban. Also the people who make comments on this page are far better informed and present more balanced views than the people who write for Advocates for Facts in my view.

I have seen this site Adocates for Facts and it is biased. Yes, we are passionate but we are always conscious of being accurate.

Tell me please who is behind Advocates for Facts. It seems to be driven by pro-declawers.

Nov 03, 2009 Ed Bok
by: kathy

EAr tipping can not be compared to declawing because it doesnt actually harm the cat in any way. My feral cat had her ear tipped and she never even flinched compared to the pain administered by declawing. I beleive this man needs to be educated or maybe be in the vets office when they perform this outragous procedure.

Nov 03, 2009 Two sides to every story...
by: Anonymous

Please visit www.advocatesforfacts.org to better understand the issues surrounding a Declaw Ban.

Nov 03, 2009 We Love You Too
by: Jo Singer

That is what I have to say to you Michael. Thank you so much for spreading the word, and keeping us all informed so beautifully!

Nov 03, 2009 Love You
by: Michael

I love you ladies. You keep fighting and you can see that this idiot (in my view) spouts out pure unsubstantiated rubbish. He looked like he was almost embarrassed! He looked like he knew he was talking rubbish. He has sold his soul to the money grabbing vets :-). His reputation (if it existed) is buried.

Nov 03, 2009 Boks is being paid to lobby against the ban
by: MaryAnne

Boks is being paid to lobby against the ban. He is being paid by Dave Weisman of the DAX Foundation. Boks' argument carries no weight. He states it is declaw or die. Death is not the only alternative to declawing. One can use soft paws, trim nails, train the cat, train the owner, get another cat for companionship...

His analogy saying that tipping feral cat ears and spayneuter are also inhumane is crazy. These procedure benefit the cat. They don't leave them maimed, unable to walk, unwilling to use the litter box. Boks needs to leave the country and find another career.

Nov 03, 2009 As much use as an Egg Box
by: Barbara

Well they chose a pearler to put the side of the pro-declaw brigade, he probably single handedly convinced the council members to vote for a ban after hearing his stuttering, scripted, unproven drivel and seeing him make the wobbly fingers sign as he spoke the word "mutilation". Thank goodness good sense and compassion prevailed. I hope Mr Egg Box never stands for president.

Nov 03, 2009 Ed Boks - Misinformed
by: Gail (Boston, MA USA)

It is all too obvious that Mr. Boks has no clue as to what he is spewing. Thankfully, the council chose to use common sense, rather than listen to this diatribe. Declawing is absoltely inhumane and anyone saying any different either is ignorant of the medical/psychological facts or is in denial.

Thank you, Michael, for posting this very telling story. Let's hope others join this crusade to ban declawing world-wide!

Nov 03, 2009 Ed Boks is a Piece of Work
by: Jo Singer

How Bok ever arrived at his position is totally a mystery to me. His ignorance coupled with how he speaks out of both sides of his mouth at the same time astounded me.

Thank you for posting this brilliant expose of a "piece of work" that belongs hidden in the archives somewhere, buried so deeply that it would never be ressurected.

This said, I think his rhetoric was a huge contribution to further opening the eyes of the very courageous council members. Their questions were very pointed, debunking the garbage Bok was spewing. Again, thank you from the bottom of the hearts of all the cats in danger of being declawed. I so deeply wish that the action which the council took will be completely contagious to the rest of the United States in short time.

Nov 03, 2009 Eb Boks
by: Ruth aka Kattaddorra

Thank you for a brilliant article Michael. This hypocrite of a man also said people are always asking for declawed cats at Rescue Shelters,yet of course he had no statistics or evidence on this ! I wish the chairman had asked him if that was so, how come so many declawed cats end up in Rescue Shelters if they are so desirable and sought after !!!
The man just stuttered and flannelled as he knew he had no real argument not to ban declawing !

Corruption at it's utmost !!!!


Nov 03, 2009 Greasy palms.
by: Everycat

The CVMA failed to brief their latest patsy properly and have scored an own goal in using this two faced weakling Boks to evidence their cause of protecting the income of vets who offer routine declaw.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please only upload photos that are small in size of max 500px width and 50 KB size. Large images typical of most default settings on digital cameras may fail to upload. Thanks.