The two other dog related laws involve veterinary services. One makes it illegal for anyone other than a veterinarian to provide ear cropping, tail docking and dewclaw removal procedures to dogs. Ear cropping is painful and anesthesia should absolutely be used and therefore provided by a veterinarian. However, tail docking and dewclaw removal, said to prevent future injury to working dogs, can be performed on newborn puppies too young for anesthesia. Though this could increase the price of puppies requiring this procedure to meet breed standards, it's easy to see why many people prefer medical professionals be involved in such procedures. It's also hard to justify removing body parts because they might be injured in the future, even if you justify it by removing only "unimportant" parts. One unintended consequence of this law may be to pressure breed clubs to leave room in their standards for intact dogs at dog shows. The UK already allows for this.
There are many rumors about the reasons that hunting and working dogs have their dewclaws or tails removed but he best explanation I've heard was a 15th Century Tax law that assessed taxes by counting the tails of a man's stock. Men began cutting the tails of dogs, sheep and cattle to avoid the tax so the tradition changed to taxing based on counting heads, thus we say "how many heads of cattle". This could just be fable, too.
The second, requires veterinarians to medically justify disabling the vocal chords of cats and dogs. I have not heard this procedure being performed or requested in decades and know many veterinarians who would not offer it but this law suggests it is misused.