I’m looking in to getting my first puppy that I want to show. The breeder doesn’t show so can’t answer my question.

The puppy is kc registered but it is having the dew claw removed this week. The puppy won’t be working and will be a show dog. Can you show a dog if dew claw is removed and it’s not a working dog?

I have read the KC stand point on removal of them but doesn’t say if it’s banned in the ring without a good reason

If you are showing in the UK, I think some breeds state in the breed standard what is required regarding dew claws. In my own breed there is no rule either way.
Maybe if you state what breed you have, it will help to answer the question, in more depth.

It is a whippet

If having the dewclaws on is required (in the Breed Standard) in the ring the judge might penalise accordingly.   But if the dog who doesn't conform to the BS in that respect, but is an otherwise excellent example of the breed when compared with the rest of the class, a judge shouldn't.   It doesn't apply in my main breed.  Now so many are being exported, most leave them on.   We left them on those puppies we bred and my last buy in, had his left on.   Years ago however, some of the major breeders felt removing them (front - we don't usually see them on rear legs) made for a 'neater paw'. 

My Whippet doesn't have hers on - they were removed before we bought her at 9 weeks.   I'm not sure, but I think it's more usual for a Whippet to have them taken off.

Dew claws should be removed during the first few days after birth btw when it's a comparatively simple procedure.   I'd not get them done later on - unless there's been an accident that means it has to be done.

https://junabeez.webs.com/dewclaws-vaccs

Well I am experienced in Whippets & you can show them with dew claws removed with no question.

our whippet has got hers- I'd have preferred without but its less common to do it now as is a trauma for a young puppy.  Both my previous weimaraners had them taken off as puppies. 

I've seen a lurcher that managed to rip one nearly off while running and it was pretty nasty injury and to my amazement the vet sewed it back on- it was hanging by a thread and meant poor dog had surgery to sort out where as a bit of local , a snip and a stitch it would have been over with forever.

ps they are a right faff to trim on such a little leg with a wiggly dog who isn't keen on it

My girl came from a breeder who shows.   So would have had them removed again, when just DAYS old which totally limits any trauma to the puppy.   When still taking them off our Basset puppies, they were back happily nursing with mum minites later.   If there was any trauma, it would have been fleeting.   It was more likely to be affecting my then vet, who hated doing that!!

> I want to show. The breeder doesn’t show

My main concern with your post is this statement. Generally speaking if you want to show successfully you should get a pup from a successful show breeder. Simply being KC registered doesn't make a show dog. And even if the bitch is a really good example and of good lines I'd wonder if the breeder would be able to choose the best sire for the litter if they don't show themselves? Of course if you just want to do fun companion shows and local open shows that's absolutely fine

You can show with or without dew claws. Most breeders will have rear ones removed when the pup is a few days old at most. Any later than that requires sedation to remove and its a medical procedure

My breed, (Beagles), can be shown either with or without front dewclaws. Many breeders prefer the neater leg line and reduced chance of injury, some prefer the au naturelle look. I haven't noticed that either style is discriminated against in the ring. Unless the standard for a breed made a feature of hind dewclaws, I would definitely want to remove these. They are often flappy with no bony attachment and, to me, they detract from the dog's appearance.

As this is a Whippet, they don't have dewclaws on the rear legs

As this is a Whippet, they don't have dewclaws on the rear legs

Does it never occur? I'm just curious because I get them in both my breeds frequently - Malinois and Papillon, but they are of course removed.

> Does it never occur?

Not in the 50+ years from my mother/me owning/breeding Whippets & I have never heard of any either.

I had an Irish Setter about 40 years ago and he had rearndew claws which were removed by the breeder as a tiny pup. I hadn’t realised they had them until then

Jodi that was what it was like with Papillons for me, I had no idea they ever occured until I had my first litter.

I have had 2 whippet puppies sired by my stud dog, not bred by me,  go abroad (Denmark and Germany) and in both cases the new owners were dismayed to find that the dewclaws had been removed, it is apparently not required nor encouraged. Interestingly I also was asked to provide a certificate to state that the stud dog has both testicles before the puppy was able to be registered (Denmark).

> I have had 2 whippet puppies sired by my stud dog, not bred by me,  go abroad (Denmark and Germany) and in both cases the new owners were dismayed to find that the dewclaws had been removed, it is apparently not required nor encouraged.

This is why in my main breed, it became more usual for the dewclaws not to be removed, given how many were exported.  However, there were still breeders who prefered the tidier look of the hound with dewclaws removed.  Coming from the UK and from a time when it was more usual to have them removed, we had them taken off our first litter overseas.  Our vet hated doing it and fact is we actually lost a puppy shortly after they'd been removed.   We were all heartbroken but felt he was not doing as well as the others although at only 2 days old, it wasn't obvious.  Having this quick procedure done may well have tipped him over the edge but for sure, after that litter, we left them on.