dew claw removal

[JackLover]

Do you agree with it? Reasons please?

[Novel]

In a Sporting Dog the dew claw needs to be removed when the tail is docked at about 24 hours of age. If not, the dog could sustain numerous painful injuries working in the field. The procedure at 24 hours is not painful and does not even require a stitch. That is my main reason. Another reason, is that a show Weim can't have 'em, however I would do it because of the first reason, not just the second.

[Pugdawg1]

I don't have a problem with them removed when they are tiny pups, but when they are older dogs, I think it's more of a big deal to remove them. Four of my five have them (dew claws). No problems.

[mulroony]

My pups have them (no reason not to), but I do find them harder to trim then the other claws (dog's reluctance)

[Novel]

I think the average house pet would probably never damage them. It's the working field dogs that I have seen have the problem. We had a Weim when I was a kid that had not had them removed and she broke one during a hunting expedition, and it was a mess. Her pain was intense, it was really really bloody, the risk for infection was high, the vet had to remove it, and we had the others taken at the same time. Although all the dew claws were removed at the same time, she always favored that foot that she had injured from that time onward.

[GSD]

If done right away its a no brainer IMO, It is something the pup won't remember, won't ever miss, will never become a problem, isn't invasive at all, so basically the benefits far outweigh the risk.

[oc_spirit]

It's a good idea to remove them from pretty much any working dog as it can get snagged in so many odd places and liek already mentioned, it's very bloody and very painful. OC's was supposed to be removed but didn't get done oops! oh well i just keep it trimmed short to reduce the possibility of snagging

[JackLover]

I agree I think its necessary on working breeds, also on breeds who are known for digging

[elegy]

i don't have a strong feeling about it. i don't object to it done on newborn pups. it's a bigger issue in older dogs and it's an attached dewclaw, and most dogs these days aren't going to be at much risk of tearing them anyway. but at the same time, i don't think i'd like a dog with big floppy hind dews.

both my dogs have nice tight dewclaws on their front legs and they use them. i know they use them when they're turning when running and i see them holding bones using them. i don't see any point in removing them.

[Winjammin]

All 3 of ours have front dewclaws, and we won't have them removed, since removing them increases a chance of hindering/changing movement in the show ring, from what we've been told. They are wonderful movers all 3 ways and are known for their movement, so for us, removing the fronts would be like playing with fire, IMO. We just keep them trimmed along with all the other nails.

However, Avalanche also has his rear dewclaws, and they are starting to get real floppy. When he has his OFA done in Oct, they are going to remove the rear dewclaws (and clean his teeth )while he is under. No point in putting him under any more than necessary....