Dog grooming salons: trimming whiskers, a matter of whiskers

By Francisca Gutiérrez Jáimez, lawyer, member of the Animal Law Commission of Santa Cruz de Tenerife Bar Association, member of INTERcids Legal Operators for Animals and president of the Canary Network of Lawyers for Animal Welfare and the Environment.

Cutting a dog's hair is such a common practice that it rarely sparks debate. It's part of the collective understanding of responsible pet ownership, hygiene, and animal welfare. Some breeds, such as the [unclear - possibly "dog breeds" or "dog breeds," which are cut regularly to maintain hygiene and prevent matting], have their hair cut regularly to maintain hygiene and prevent knots.  Bichon Frize, Poodle, Yorkshire Terrier, Schnauzer, Shih Tzu, Maltese, West Highland White Terrier (Westy) and Cocker Spaniel, among others.

For years, the legal focus on mutilations in companion animals has centered on visible and socially recognizable procedures, such as declawing in cats, ear cropping, or tail docking. However, a silent and normalized mutilation—the trimming of whiskers in dog grooming salons—has received far less attention.

Because not everything that's cut is simply hair. Dogs' muzzles contain specialized sensory structures whose function goes far beyond aesthetics. And when these are removed without veterinary justification, the issue ceases to be a matter of style and becomes a legal problem.

What are vibrissae and why aren't they "hair"?

When we talk about vibrissae, we are referring to what we commonly know as whiskers in animalsThese are the longer, stiffer, and more visible hairs located on both sides of the snout, above the eyes, on the chin, and on the face of dogs, cats, and other mammals.

From a strictly physical point of view, the vibrissae they are hairs. However, These are not ordinary hairs like the rest of the coat. They constitute a highly specialized type of hair, designed to perform sensory functions.

Unlike cosmetic hair, whose primary function is thermal, protective, or aesthetic, vibrissae are embedded in complex follicles, richly innervated and surrounded by vascular structures and facial muscles. This anatomical configuration makes each vibrissa a true sensory receptor capable of detecting minute variations in the environment. This is crucial for analyzing the consequences of trimming them in routine activities, such as grooming at dog salons and other settings.

Whiskers serve essential functions for them such as the perception of the proximity of objects, spatial orientation, particularly in low visibility situations, the detection of air currents and vibrations, and the protection of the eye area and snout from possible impacts.

From an animal welfare perspective, this makes a crucial difference: while hair can be cut without affecting relevant biological functions, The removal of vibrissae involves the suppression of a structure with a specific sensory function..

Therefore, we are not dealing with an aesthetic issue, but with an intervention that directly affects the animal's ability to interact with its environment.

This distinction is key for subsequent legal analysis, since the law does not only protect against visible injuries, but also against functional losses that affect the animal's physical bodily integrity.

Applicable legal framework in Spain

Spanish law currently contains no explicit reference to whiskers or their trimming. However, this does not mean that the practice falls outside the scope of legal protection. On the contrary, it must be analyzed in light of the general principles and prohibitions contained in current animal welfare regulations.

The legal analysis of whisker cutting must start from an essential premise: Spanish law generally prohibits non-therapeutic mutilations and bodily modifications in animals, regardless of whether the affected body structure is expressly mentioned.

First, the European Convention for the Protection of Pet AnimalsThe Convention, ratified by Spain, establishes in its Article 10 that surgical interventions intended to modify an animal's appearance or to achieve non-therapeutic ends are prohibited, including, among others, tail docking, ear cropping, vocal cord removal, and claw and tooth removal, except when there is veterinary justification. Of course, the convention speaks of “surgical interventions” and it would be necessary to study whether non-therapeutic haircuts would fit within that behavior.

Although this precept establishes a clear principle, which is that any bodily intervention without a therapeutic purpose is prohibited, regardless of the specific part of the body on which it falls.

On the other hand, the development of this principle, the Law 7/2023, of March 28, on the protection of animal rights and welfare, provides in its article 27.b):

It is forbidden “To perform on them any type of mutilation or permanent bodily modifications; this prohibition does not apply to identification systems by ear marking of community cats and those necessary for therapeutic purposes to guarantee their health or to limit or annul their reproductive capacity, without any functional or aesthetic reason of any kind being able to serve as justification, and which must be accredited by a report from a registered veterinary professional or belonging to some public administration, which will be recorded in the corresponding identification register.”

Likewise, article 3. y) defines as mistreatment "any conduct, whether by action or omission, that causes pain, suffering or injury to an animal and harms its health, or causes its death, when it is not legally protected.”

These precepts establish a broad protection system, which is not limited to listing specific body parts, but protects against any unjustified loss or alteration of a body part that has a biological function.

From a criminal perspective, the Article 340 bis of the Criminal Code It penalizes anyone who, by any means or procedure, causes an animal an injury that seriously impairs its health, as well as other acts of serious mistreatment. Specifically, the legal right to be protected is... “physical and mental integrity of the animal.”

A little research is enough to discover that cutting or pulling out whiskers is a practice that veterinarians do not recommend or endorse, as it is harmful to the animal.

Although the isolated cutting of whiskers will hardly reach the typical threshold of the crime on its own, it can acquire criminal relevance when it is integrated into a context of continued abuse, repetition or other harmful acts occur.

Consequently, the cutting of whiskers should be analyzed, as a general rule, within the administrative sanctioning sphere, without prejudice to its possible criminal assessment in aggravated cases.

Does the cutting of whiskers fit the definition of mutilation?

The central question is not whether vibrissae are expressly mentioned in the regulations, but whether their removal without veterinary cause can be legally classified as an offense. non-therapeutic mutilation or body modification.

To answer this question, it is necessary to start from an interpretation functional and finalist of animal protection regulations.

Law 7/2023 does not define mutilation, neither according to the size of the affected structure nor the existence of bleeding, but rather according to the unjustified alteration of the animal's bodyThe determining factor is the loss or modification of a biologically relevant body part.

Article 74 states that a serious infraction is the “Performing unauthorized mutilations or bodily modifications on the animal”

As explained in the previous section, vibrissae are not cosmetic hair, but specialized sensory structures, integrated into the peripheral nervous system and linked to functions of orientation, spatial perception and protection.

Its deliberate cutting involves the removal of a functional body structure, the loss (at least partial) of sensory capacity, and an objective alteration of the animal's bodily integrity.

From this perspective, the cutting of whiskers It cannot be equated to trimming the rest of the coat hair.but rather constitutes a body modification with functional impact.

Furthermore, the regulations require that any body modification be justified by a therapeutic purpose and performed by a veterinarianIn the field of dog grooming, the trimming of whiskers is, in practice, for aesthetic, comfort or routine reasons, never for a clinical need.

Consequently, since it lacks a therapeutic purpose, its disposal falls under the prohibition of article 27.b) of Law 7/2023.

Furthermore, Article 3(y) defines mistreatment as conduct that causes pain, suffering, and harms the animal's health. The loss of a sensory function constitutes harm, even if there is no visible wound or immediate pain.

Therefore, from a legal point of view, the cutting of whiskers without veterinary indication meets the necessary elements to be classified as non-therapeutic mutilation or body modification, with the corresponding sanctions that will be analyzed in the following section.

Sanctions regime

Once it has been determined that the cutting of whiskers without a therapeutic purpose could fit within the prohibition of mutilations or unauthorized body modifications, it is necessary to specify what the legal consequences of such conduct are.

Administrative route

La Law 7/2023, on the protection of the rights and welfare of animals, classifies as a serious offense:

“Performing mutilations or unauthorized bodily modifications” (Article 74.e).

According to article 76.1.b) of the same law, these types of infractions are subject to an economic sanction consisting of:

• Fine of 10.001 to 50.000 euros.

In addition to the financial penalty, the law provides for the imposition of accessory penalties, among other:

• Animal removed from owner
• Disqualification from engaging in activities related to animals
• Prohibition of engaging in activities related to animals.
• Temporary closure of premises and establishments.
• Work for the Benefit of the Community
• Others

These sanctions are especially relevant in the field of dog grooming, where the conduct can be directly attributed to the professional who performs the cut.

criminal proceedings

From a criminal perspective, the Article 340 bis of the Criminal Code It punishes anyone who, by any means or procedure, causes an animal an injury that seriously impairs its health.

The isolated cutting of whiskers, considered individually, will hardly reach the threshold for a crime on its own. However, it can acquire criminal relevance when:

• It is done repeatedly (in the same animal or in a plurality of them).
• It is integrated into a context of continued abuse.
• It occurs in conjunction with other harmful behaviors.
• There is veterinary accreditation of a serious impact on welfare and health.

In these cases (and others), vibrissa trimming can operate as “evidence” within a set of acts constituting animal abuse.

Professional Responsibility

The existence of suitable techniques for cutting and shaping the facial mantle without removing vibrissae prevents its cutting from being considered a mere inevitable accident.

When elimination occurs systematically, we are faced with a professional decision, which reinforces the imputation of administrative responsibility.

Top of the form

Dog grooming and professional responsibility

Dog grooming is a legitimate and socially accepted activity within the field of pet care. However, its common nature does not exempt it from animal protection regulations.

Professionals who carry out this activity are obliged to know and respect the legal prohibitions regarding mutilations and non-therapeutic body modifications, regardless of whether certain practices have been traditionally normalized in the sector.

From a technical standpoint, there are established procedures for trimming and shaping the facial coat without removing the whiskers, such as identifying the whiskers beforehand (they are also present on the chin and upper eyelids), separating them manually or with a comb, and trimming only the surrounding hair. Therefore, removing whiskers is not a technical necessity, but rather a matter of personal choice.

This circumstance is legally relevant, as it precludes considering the event as fortuitous or unavoidable. When the cutting of whiskers occurs systematically, we are faced with a conscious professional decision, likely to generate administrative liability, extendable to the center as a legal entity.

Furthermore, the absence of specific sector-specific protocols or mandatory regulated training in this area does not exempt anyone from complying with the law. The general principle is clear: ignorance of the law does not excuse liability.

In this context, dog grooming salons must move towards incorporating animal welfare standards that expressly include the preservation of whiskers as part of good professional practices.

Comparative law and international trends

The consideration of vibrissae as sensory structures whose removal is incompatible with animal welfare, although not sufficiently regulated in Spanish law, does respond to a consolidated international trend.

A particularly significant example can be found in the equestrian field. The International Equestrian Federation (FEI) It prohibits, from July 1, 2021, horses with trimmed or shaved whiskers from participating in international competitionsunless there is a veterinary justification. The reason for this prohibition is the explicit recognition of vibrissae as sensory organs relevant to the animal's welfare. This measure was later extended to the hair (vibrissae) inside the ears.

This measure has been adopted by numerous national federations and constitutes a benchmark standard in equine welfare.

Similarly, in countries such as Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, animal protection authorities and certain national regulations consider trimming whiskers in dogs and other animals for aesthetic reasons to be equivalent to amputation of a sensory structure and, therefore, prohibited outside of clinical contexts.

These examples highlight a clear trend: the removal of whiskers for aesthetic reasons is increasingly understood as a practice incompatible with the principles of animal welfare.

From this perspective, the interpretation of Spanish law to include the cutting of whiskers within the prohibitions of non-therapeutic mutilation is fully consistent with international standards.

Conclusions: mustaches are here to stay

– Trimming a dog's whiskers can no longer be considered a mere aesthetic issue or a routine professional practice. Whiskers are specialized sensory structures whose function is directly linked to the animal's orientation, perception of its surroundings, and protection.

The current legal framework prohibits non-therapeutic mutilations and bodily modifications, as well as actions that cause physical impairment and are harmful to health. From a functional interpretation of these regulations, the removal of vibrissae without veterinary indication falls under these prohibitions.

– The absence of an express mention of whiskers in the regulations does not constitute a legal loophole, but rather confirms the open nature of the protection system, aimed at safeguarding the animal's bodily integrity regardless of the size or visibility of the affected structure.

– In the field of dog grooming, there are sufficient techniques for cutting and shaping the facial coat while fully respecting the whiskers. Therefore, their removal is not a technical necessity, but rather a voluntary professional decision, which may generate administrative liability and, in aggravated cases, criminal implications.

– The international trend reinforces this interpretation, by increasingly recognizing that vibrissae are sensory organs that should not be removed for aesthetic reasons.

In short, “mustache is here to stay.” It’s not just a decorative accessory, but a functional structure that deserves legal protection.

Links of interest:

https://www.zooplus.es/magazine/perros/salud-del-perro-y-cuidados/bigotes-de-los-perros

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibrisas

https://www.cun.es/diccionario-medico/terminos/vibrisa

https://cooperativasimbiosis.com/bigotes-de-los-gatos/

https://italcol.com/las-vibrisas-y-el-bienestar-en-los-caballos/

https://blog.terranea.es/prohiben-recortar-bigotes-caballos-competicion/