Rensselaer Republican, Volume 14, Number 31, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 20 April 1882 — DISHORNING CATTLE. [ARTICLE]

DISHORNING CATTLE.

It is not generally known, perhaps, that firing the poll of a calf when quiteyoung will prevent the horns from growing, and make a veritable polled animal of it. The operation is not as painful or cruel as that of castration, which all admit to be necessary. It is thought, by those well qualified to jndge, that it is Dot even as painful as the ordinary branding so extensively and universally employed over the grazing districts of the West. A veterinarian recently stated, in the Breeders’ Gazette, that it would serve no useful purpose to teach people the correct method of performing this operation. A writer replies to him in the same journal, as follows: Would it be more painful than firing the tendons of a horse? or the practice, so common is some sections of branding? How much more painful is it than to insert a ring in the sensitive membrane of the nose? Is it humane to allow aD animal of immense power to develope a strong, sharp weapon with which to inflict terrible wounds upon human beings, upon norses and colts, or upon its own kind? Does not every bovine that reaches maturity with horns inflict more pain, in the barnyard or at the watering trough, than would have resulted in firing its poll? The first colt ever bred by the writer lost its life by a thrust from a “harmless cow.” This winter another was severely injured and suffered intense pain for weeks—more pain than wosld have resulted in firing the polls of a whole herd of calves. The removal of horns from mature animals must, of course, be condemned as a general practice; but the preventive treatment in calves will soon be regarded as necessary and humane. A 9 the doctor says, “The absence of horns in cattle is certainly a considerable advantage to the farmer the feeder, breeder and shipper, for reasons which are too obvious to need any explanation.” Is it not a fact that these num erous and obvious reasons place the repression of horn growth in the category of proper and necessary operations? The temporary pain of which is fully justified by the increased safety of human beings. Castration, a much more painful and dangerous operation, can be justified by no more or cogent reasons. As the doctor deems it improper to describe the operation, permit me to offer the following, which lie can correct if erroneous in any particular: Before the horn makes its appearance clip the hair from both sides of the poll over the spot where the horn grows; take an ordinary firing iron, or any pointed iron that can be kept hot, and mark over the clipped space three or four lines each way, being careful not to burn through the skin, as this is needless, if there is any horn growth after this it will be simplv a nubbin, and a second firing would prevent this. Perhaps the doctor knows a better method; if he does, he can render the cattle breeders no greater ser - vice than to de-cribe it. There is no breed of cattle so good but what they would be better without horns, and the day will come when bovine horns w ill be regarded as a curious relic of barbarism. Now permit me to gently call in question the doctor’s dictum that this practice would not establish a breed of hornless cattle. Why have underground fish no eyes? Why have domesticated cattle smaller horns than wild? Nature is an economist; she ceases to produce what is needless; she conforms the organs and shape of animals to their surroundings. Man can guide and expedite these tendencies. An accidental variation is often transmitted. The persistent repression of a growth that natural pauses are gradually reducing will surely aud certainly result in its total extinction. A cross from the Jersey to the Short-horn unites the efforts of two breeds to diminish Uorn production, and the result at most is only a stub. Add to this the constant sid#,of man in destroying a feeble growth, and nature would soon cease alt effort.