How many of you have a puppies Dew Claws removed?
If so why!!

I do, because I've seen too many dewclaw injuries to make me happy about leaving them on.

I do too.  To prevent injury and avoid any chance of requiring them removed in adulthood when the operation would be much more significant and difficult to deal with any resulting infection.

I never do.  Pharaohs use their dew claws so much.  They pin things down with them and also use them to dig in when they're turning at speed.  My Hamiltons had theirs left on too - never had a problem with them.  My Border Collies have got theirs and they've never caused a problem.  My Cresteds had theirs and would use them too.  Never, ever had a problem with a dew claw on any of the dogs of any of the breeds I've had, BUT, they've never been breeds which have loose, floppy dew claws, they were always tight to the leg - maybe that's why :)

Debs

My BC had rear dew claws removed they were causing him problems, but he uses his front ones to grip toys & bones, I used to have my Beardies dew claws removed as they can be overlooked by pet owners & one of mine actually ripped her dew claw off whilst out running, one of my CKCS has his dewclaws removed & the other two have theirs.

If I bred a long coated breed I would have the front ones removed, but it isn't such a problem in smooth coated dogs

I would obviously always have any rear dewclaws removed but most dogs don't have them

I would obviously always have any rear dewclaws removed but most dogs don't have them

I was just about to ask whether all dogs have rear dew claws. Our GR has front dew claws but none on his back legs and was wondering if he had his rear ones removed or if he never had any to start with. :)

Odds are he wouldn't have, only had one GSD puppy with rear dewclaws & Rjj's breeder had never before had a BC puppy with rear ones & he's been breeding for over 30 years

Never, but the breed have neat ones on front feet only, which they use like thumbs.

I unfortunately, seem to get the job of clipping most of our family dogs nails and I have to admit the dogs we have which do have dew claws, I really don't like doing them they are so wobbly and easy to move, I cringe at cutting them incase one of the dogs should move, I can understand why they would get easily caught and ripped in underbush or on uneven ground so often, hence I have my pups dew claws removed just incase.

Years ago I had two unrelated deerhounds tear dew claws badly requiring GAs and a long healing period. Since then I have all dewclaws off at 48 hours. The last time my vet dewclawed a litter for me he said that he couldn't understand why so many breeders leave them on because he saw so many dew claw injuries in adults.

I saw a Lab with a torn dewclaw once which did look nasty, but they do stick out rather on a short haired breed. My Cav Henry has dewclaws which are tucked much more out of sight and we have never had trouble. I would prefer them removed like my other Cav's are, but my vet doesn't do that so I guess when we have our litter later this year I will have to put up with them. Not too much of a problem as long as owners are aware they are there and need clipping more often than the other claws!

I don't because Malinois use them quite a lot to grip things with, such as holding a toy or bone to chew. I do of course remove the rear ones and have had rear dew claws in most litters.

one of my boys has his, one doesnt, I have to keep them trimmed because they really hurt  if he catches you when jumping up :rolleyes:

I grew up with Afghans and one of them still had his dew claws, he started really licking at his leg and when we got through all the fur we saw that it had grown right round and was growing back through the pad

That's happened to a Border Collie client at work. The claw's grown round and the leg's infected. He's on ABs to try to get the swelling down enough for them to be removed safely.

OUr old BC (farm bred) used to suffer the same problem so we had to be very vigilent about keeping the dew claws trimmed to avoid problems.

can dew claws be removed at an older age,if so would you reccomend it? our youngest charlie 11 months still has his and they do stick out quite badly, but he hasnt so far seemed affected by them at all. our oldest had his removed shortly after birth i think.

thanks

Chrissy

A recent thread on the pros and cons.

Apparently (and I stress the word apparently as I am told this second hand, albeit from a very good source!) they don't dew claw working GSPs in Germany.  The breeder who told me this hasn't dewclawed for nearly 20 years and hasn't had a problem or so she claims; she imports a lot of dogs direct from Germany and takes her bitches there to be covered and believes that the German lines are stronger in their make-up (ligaments etc) and the claws are less liable to break.  ?????  Dunno...........the dogs she keeps are worked and seem to do fine.  Lucky?  Genetics?  Or maybe both?  Who knows.  :-)  Or maybe just management and ensuring that the dew claws are trimmed to within a millimetre of their life!

We don't do it in our breed either as they also use them when turning.  Only know of one person whose dog has injured their dew claw.

In the Pom's we do do them if they have back ones and I would with the Spanish too.

We have always removed dew claws on the Basenjis & Buhunds, though the Basenjis only have front ones where as the Bu's have double rear ones. Yes I am not looking forward to my next litter here in Germany as you are not allowed to remove dew claws.

Interesting reading, not sure what to think as I don't like front dew claws on a dog. I'd like to see some evidence to back up the claim and perhaps a wide ranging survey.

The only one of mine to have arthritis in her paws (a labrador) was the only one whose dew claws hadn't been removed ...

Same here. Only one of mine to have it was a sheltie and he had his dew claws on.

Had multiple Labs, all with dew claws, only one has had an injury.  It looked painful and at the time, I was cursing the fact that he still had them but I've since had so many years without incident that I'm now thinking that removing all dew claws pre-emptively might not be the way to go.

No arthritis in paws in any of them. Plenty elsewhere.

Oh, I would also add, having read the previous thread, when the one dog did injure his dew claw, although as I said it looked very painful, the vet advised only removal of the broken piece.  Despite the mud and muck that we slosh around in, he did not get an infection, did not require antibiotics (now if you want to slate vets, always giving anti-biotics for a torn claw is an opportunity lots of you have missed) and didn't have to have his leg amputated. :rolleyes:

I am really sorry for anyone who has had any of those things happen but IMHO it is really quite exceptional.

I do not think anyone has suggested it will always happen just that there is a considerable risk.  When human bone surgery is done it is sometimes done in a room screened off with plastic and a negative pressure maintained to minimise risk of infection, which may give you some idea of the risk involved with these things. 
When you say your dog injured his claw do you mean the nail itself or was the bone exposed either before surgery, during or after.  You may have had no problems but it is the probabilities that count and I don't think you can say something is quite exceptional on the basis that it didn't happen on one instance even if it only happened once in ten times people might feel that is too much :)

Hi, Isabel

I thought the risks from "injuring" a dew claw, as portrayed in the previous thread, were overstated.  I wasn't meaning to question the undoubted risks of bone surgery - which my dog did not require.

I am totally, totally in agreement with you that one instance is no proof of anything - I applaud many of your previous posts regarding the risk of confusing anecdotal experience with sound scientific research - but there was beginning to be a suggestion that having dew claws = arthritis in paws so I posted to show that the opposite could be true and nothing could be proved by either anecdote.  (If you see what I mean.)

The years I spent working in a veterinary practice led to the comment that IMHO the worst case scenarios are rare.  Indeed, people may feel the risk is too high - I haven't entirely made my mind up one way or the other. :-)

I see :) Actually the other thread, and the post I linked it from in my response, were about the removal of dew claws in later life so I assumed that is what you were taking up :)

Whoops!  Now I look again, I see it was.  However, I was responding to stuff that followed from Tyby's question

>Generally speaking, what are the benefits of removing dew claws ?<

after which it seems to open out into the risk of leaving dew claws on - infected nailbeds/toe amputations etc. 

Sorry for the confusion! :-)

Dew claws are a sore subject here!
With my breed all four have to be removed for breed standard and to save injury etc:  I have a pregnant bitch and another to be mated and am finding it so difficult finding a vet in my area that will remove them for me.
Nearly all vets are saying they only remove them for medical reasons!
I have finally found a good vet that will remove them when pups are two days old but I am not looking forward to it!

>With my breed all four have to be removed for breed standard

I thought your breed standard only refers to the removal of dew claws in the section on Hindquarters? Ther seems to be no mention of them in the section on forequarters.

Get the vet to show you how to do it yourself for next time. :)

With my breed all four have to be removed for breed standard and to save injury etc:

Only the rear ones have to be removed.  The line for 'dew claws to be removed' comes under the standard for hindquarters only. :)

Debs

(Oops - posted the same time as JG :d )

Snap! :D

Oops sorry I just looked a breed standard and yes it only refers to hindquarters!!  Thank you!!!!!
(I feel a bit silly now!)

Sorry forgot to say, can you do them yourself??
Do they need to be stitched afterwards??
I will ask my vet to show for next time if it isn't too horrific!

Unless the law's been changed recently, anyone can do them. No, they don't need stitching (that would require a vet) because the wounds are very small. :)