The litter is a day old, consists of 4, two of which have rear dew claws (1 single and the other both).

Keep or remove?

I always remove hind claws (Well the vet does I don't !)

Definitely remove. They can cause problems, especially for working dogs,  and it looks bad. I might have odd views but I often see my breed with them left on, and to me it acts as a signal of "the breeder couldn't be bothered".

My mentor once left them on a dog and he would end up getting his rear dewclaws stuck in each other at times.

I've got a litter at the moment -first one I've had without rear dewclaws. I've had the entire scale from small floppy ones to double ones in line with the other toes and the same size as them.

Definitely remove and definitely now, do not do as some vets "recommend" and wait until puppies are old enough to be put under GA to get them removed. Healing process can be very difficult once the dog is grown. When it is a 2-3 day old pup, even the worst type of dewclaws (double/triple that sometimes grow plastered all over the leg rather than from one point) take few days at most to heal.

Remove. Finding a vet that will might be a chore as mine won't. The only one who did has since died. Nearest vet to me who does is 1/2hr drive :(

What I thought too. Will call the vet in the morning to have them seen before the weekend.

First time I've come across them in a litter from personal experience and know there are those who are deadly against it but am sure my vet will oblige.

Thanks all x

Actually strangely enough they don't have to be done by a vet.

When they stopped lay persons docking,  it was onky tails and no mention of dew claws.

I don't know what your breed is,  but if you know an experienced breeder that dew clawed and docked before the law change,  they may be able to do them for younif your vet won't.

Thanks Barbara. The clue is in the name. Sadly I don't really know anyone who can do it apart from my black girl's breeder - the old school bloke who thinks anything non standard in colour should be drowned. As we don't see eye to eye, I shan't be calling him! I shall ring my vet and see what they say as these guys are all going to be worked so it really shouldn't be a problem I hope.

Definitely get them removed.  And asap because this should be done at days old.   I had a friend who did this herself but having been with her when she did one of her litters, I'd ALWAYS have a vet do this!!  Much as I don't bother any more - front dewclaws, on my main breed.

oops didn't twig, as tend not to take in posters name, just the post.

Sorted. Of the 5 (yes that's five) practices I am registered with, only one was happy to do it. Sad really when it is being done for practical reasons and not cosmetic.

What happened mama bas? Must have been bad if it put you off....

> Sorted. Of the 5 (yes that's five) practices I am registered with, only one was happy to do it. Sad really when it is being done for practical reasons and not cosmetic.

Same situation here, vast majority of the vets won't do them on newborn puppies. Yet they WILL do them on adult dogs. They quote ethical considerations, but I just cannot see how it makes sense as adult dog suffers way more than a pup....

If the dewclaws are small floppy ones (just little sacks of skin with a claw on the end) I always do them myself. When you snip these dewclaws, a tiny round dot-wound is what is left (max 1.5mm diameter, small/med dogs), there is never a blood. Often pups don't even squeak. If they do, its a tiny momentous squeak which compares to when you nudge a pup in their sleep and they issue a tiny annoyed sound. Way way less then when mom accidentally steps on them!

Some dewclaws though are huge, double, really wedged in the leg, etc. When you remove these dewclaws puppies scream, and a fairly large wound is left that must be treated to prevent bleeding and often a surgical glue on top (the wound could be as large as 5mm long, and 3-3.5mm across, small/med dogs again). I did these in the past, but find it emotionally difficult. So I would take these to be done by a vet. The vet would use a little local anaesthetic and they'll have a qualified assistant to help if there is a lot of blood etc (my partner nearly fainted the first time he witnessed the procedure!)

> What happened mama bas? Must have been bad if it put you off....

I just felt it wasn't done in the most hygienic of situations, and the puppies really cried, unlike when my vet did mine.   Small reaction, more to do with being held than anything else.  But in the end, after we lost one within 24 hours of being dew-clawed, and because at the time it was more of a UK thing in Bassets (said to make for a 'neater foot' - so yes, cosmetic) not a N.American thing where it was seen on Bassets, I thought why am I doing this.  And fact is in the UK these days (I think!! - Frankie has his on and I showed all mine with them on, here) these are not taken off because of the exports - breeders in other countries outside the UK, expect to see dewclaws.   I think the one we lost was perhaps because he wasn't doing as well early doors, as the rest and me and my vet, didn't pick up on that.   Going through the extra stress may well have pushed him over the edge.

With Basset dewclaws, it's not just snipping off the 'dangley end'.   You have to take the small bone out too.  And yes, there can be quite a hole left until it all heals over.

but you are of course talking of FRONT  dewclaws in this case, not ind ones that nearly always cause issues, unless the breed is required to have them as part of the standard, they are best removed.

I would never dream of removing the front ones which all my dogs have used like thumbs.

However I did have one puppy born without front dewclaws.  I have never heard of a purebred Norwegian Elkhound be born with rear dews.

> but you are of course talking of FRONT  dewclaws

Yes.   I've never seen, or heard of a Basset with rear dews.    My Whippet, on the other hand, had her's (front) removed early days.  And I think this is the norm with that breed?

Well we went and the vet was very helpful. Even told me of a couple of ways to do it myself and when not to. Pups were none the worse for wear and I took mum with me, even though she stayed in the car.

Just a random question... Why is she so reluctant to eat? She ate the placentas, she's had a couple of mushy meals, some mackerel in oil and even some eggs but she's not really interested. All of my previous mums have been ravenous even when one had a singleton. This one just wants to drink and sleep. Happy in herself and already chomping at the bit to go back to work....

So how are the puppies?   Gaining?  Quiet and content?   If they are then just leave her to rest, and take her out for a little exercise (on a lead preferable, just in case she decides to take off) which might help stimulate her appetite.   4 puppies, early days, don't need that much milk and if she had all the placentas, she may simply not need much food at this point.

Thanks mamabas.

Puppies are gaining. She doesn't particularly want to go out, she goes out to toilet but only once in the morning and once before bed, other than that she would rather sit next to the whelping box. I had to toilet one of the pups at 4am this morning as she point blank refused to do it. Poor mite was in such a state it took a long time for him to settle afterwards and he just fell asleep on my shoulder once he'd tired himself out.

It's her first litter so she is confused and torn. I sit with her all day but she desperately wants to go back to sleeping on our bed, go back to work etc but she also frets when the babies cry. She's preferring to feed them, settle then and then lie beside the box rather than in it.

It's early days yet, as you say, so hopefully she'll get it. Still quite a bit of digging going on so might just be the discomfort.

They are all different - even with different litters!   I had one who would 'pee ' her puppies, but would have nothing to do with poohing them - well beneath her!   As a result, apart from my best efforts (and eventually gravity!) the poor mites must have spent a lot of time being really uncomfortable.   I'd sit them in warm water to help, which, to some degree, did.   The other thing with her was she'd do her duty, feeding them, but then wanted out but once let out of the box, after I'd got the puppies to settle down for a nap after a feed, she'd sit outside and whine at them, waking them all up again.   It was a good job she gave me a couple of really nice puppies BUT that was her only litter!   Some bitches just find the whole thing too much, and some find it hard to switch off being a pet, to being a mother.

Did you have her checked to make sure she was empty after you felt she'd finished whelping?   Being restless can be a sign all is not as it should be (retained birthing material, or even a puppy).

I also think that regardless of what 'she wants', you might get her out to stretch her legs a bit more often than just twice a day?

And people think we ask a lot for our puppies - doing a litter can be HARD WORK!   Much as it would be hoped that through the first 3 weeks, with a good mum, your work doesn't begin until her's starts to end (weaning!).

I took her in and she was given a jab of calcium and oxytocin, although nothing came away after it. She is still bleeding a little but it is watery and reddish pink as opposed to blood red. I took her out for a little walk but she was having none of it. As soon as the magpies started chuttering, she sat and refused to move so we came back.

Gave her trousers a little rinse last night as she was beginning to matt and smell ripe and she obviously felt better for it but even today she has refused most meals.

In the end I made homemade chicken nuggets and she ate those but everything else has been sniffed at. Still drinking well and keeping hydrated though. If this continues, I'll have to take her in.

She's been more attentive to them throughout today and I haven't had to make her go in to them as much as yesterday so hopefully things will improve.