Tattooing Animals

Outrage is being expressed by animal lovers regarding the reported practice of tattooing animals. Ethical appropriateness is questioned stemming from news that a cat in Moscow was adorned while being anesthetized in a three-hour procedure.

The cat, a rare Canadian Hairless breed known as a Sphynx cat, received a Tutankhamen designed tattoo on its chest back in the month of February and the owner was said to be "delighted" by how everything turned out.

Reader polling thus far indicates that an overwhelming majority believes animal tattooing is animal cruelty. However, despite the thinking of the respondents, animal tattooing has been performed for eons. As an example, livestock is regularly tattooed for identification.

Regarding the application of a frivolous picture on a hairless cat, I'd be interested to know the opinions of folks who eat cat meat. Would a tattoo taint the meat?

Unfortunately, the question of what is or isn't animal cruelty is totally subjective and I would contend it has more to do with the intentions of the owner. Generally, if a cat owner intends to be cruel, it's cruelty. If not, it's probably not. In the case of the aforementioned hairless, I trust the owner wasn't trying to be cruel.