thanks teri.
Another question for you :-) Why is it not all breeds that have claws removed? Is the risk of accident not present in all dogs?
Cheers

dew claws can be a big potential safety issue (as can tails i suppose though). the only dog with a dew claw we ever had (a rescue) was forever catching it on things and hurting himself. never split it etc but it just seemed like more trouble to him than help. tails can help with signaling, balance etc so have an active function that qualifies the risk of potential damage, and while tail damage can be horrible its not that common in comparision to caught nails etc (i think, please correct me if i'm wrong). i think that dew claw removal in pups is quick and relatively stress free as opposed to dealing with an injured adult dog.

To Astarte

I've now met a Rott, 2 dobes and several spaniels with tails and so far each has look woeful - bearing in mind these bear no resemble to my own breed I can only imagine how disheartening it must be to those dedicated to these breeds over many years.  Yes, some will continue their interest and hopefully work towards a uniform standard for each of the breeds which will eventually become the norm.  But for those who have already given many years of their lives to helping sustain correct type, temperament, improving on health issues and all the numerous other things which go into planning matings (sometimes for generations in advance) the time may well have come when they feel that within their lifetime (or health/age restraints at any rate) it is not feasible to produce the top quality specimens they have always tried to produce.

Some breeds its essential in the Standard to have dew claws - even double ones at the rear

Whether or not some breeds or lines within breeds are more susceptible to injury I can't say with authority :)  The accidents mine have had and caused have all been in normal day to day situations, playing with one another in the garden, racing through parkland and bushes etc and also greeting us at home so not unduly or unusually traumatic circumstances :)

There are those who believe that dew claws are essential for certain work, holding bones, climbing etc - none of mine have been hindered in any way shape or form by having no dew claws from day one or by having them removed as adults following traumas.  I currently have one which still has front dew claws and has already had one painful injury - if it should happen again they will be removed for the safety and comfort of that dog :)

so is dew claw removal not a breed thing, but a personal preference thing.

I mean -in the old days you could make a blanket statement that probably 99% of the boxer breed had docked tails. So is it particular breeds that remove claws or s it just if thats what you do as a breeder regardless of breed?

Does that makes sense?:-)

>i think that dew claw removal in pups is quick and relatively stress free as opposed to dealing with an injured adult dog.

Absolutely right - exactly as tail docking in newborn pups is a walk in the park compared with the procedure of amputation following injury when grown.

Thanks. We both posted at the same time but that has answered my question.
Cheers

Sorry but i dont quite agree that its painfree. Cheaper maybe as pups but still painful.

Reply to Blue - Thats so true as well, maybe it will help people get over the ban if their dogs are still winning BOB tho, its got to help and want you too keep the breed and not exchange for another.
I feel sorry as well for the peop,e who ahve worked fr years to attain the perfect specimen only to have to start allllllll over again, those people I truly do feel sorry for. :( All that hard work for what seem is nothing, and Joe public or least of all the MP'S should have had nothing to do with the vote, it wasnt their place to interfer because they dont understand the dog world or have any sympathy for the people who breed dedicated.

If only you could tell a working pup from a pet pup when theyre real young and the problem would be made easier wouldnt it, dock the working and not dock the pet.

Edited to add : whether docking is painful or not it should be only for certain breeds who are working as like JG says, amputation later on its terrible :(

i do totally see the point that those who approve of docking, and as you say it might seem like a lot of effort suddenly gone to waste. but on the other hand it is an unnecesarry removal of a body part. i do agree with dew claw removal simply as a safety issue, ditto docking for working dogs but i cannot agree with non essential, potentially painful and damaging surgery on a creature that is supposed to be our responsibility to care for. i really don't aim to critisise those who are pro docking, its just my feeling on it.

To Astarte

>i cannot agree with non essential, potentially painful and damaging surgery on a creature that is supposed to be our responsibility to care for.

of course that view taken to its logical conclusion would also totally rule out neutering of any pet animal of any species :)

But then i swear on here I have seen posted that Dew Claw is more painful then docking.

Why cant we just leave dogs intact! lol

freds mum, we didn't mean totally pain free but a pup that doesn't know whats about to happen and has it done quickly and in a controlled way is different (and far easier on the dog) than a dog doing itself an injury, having to be rushed to a vets, have surgery when its in distress (not medically trained but maybe the vets/nurses on here might answer whether that makes the surgery more dangerous? can't image it helps at least), then having an adult dog recovering from the op (i.e. refusing to leave the wound alone or stay still to recover). painful both physically and mentally in an adult

Neutering is done under anaesthetic, dew claw removaal is not. so you cannot compare the two

I see where you're coming from Astarte but it's still painful and distressing for the pup. If it wasnt painful then why do they squeal at the tops of thier voices???

how so? responsibilty was what i mentioned-the creation of homeless or badly owned animals is something we should take responsibilty to avoid. neutering is usually done to avoid unwanted pregnancy or to avoid health concerns like pyometria etc. thats not in my opinion unnecesarry but is rather essential to responsibly care for an animal.

Dew claw removal done at 3 days old is no problem to a puppy.  I do all of mine ( well the vet does)  but I opt to have them removed. Hate them too :-)     a huge % of pet people forget they are there and let them over grow etc.  a lot in my breed don't do them but as long as I can I will. 

But dew claw removal (and docking) take seconds to do and it's all over. Remember that final pull to remove a loose baby tooth that you'd been wiggling with your tongue for days? A quick tug, which hurt a bit, and it was all over? That's like dew-clawing and docking in a 3-day pup.

As an adult an injury bad enough to require surgery is going to be very painful in itself, then there's the trauma of going to the vet (not many dogs bound in there as if they're greeting a long-lost friend!), the anaesthetic, feeling ill afterwards, maybe the wound getting sore and trying to make it better by licking or nibbling so having to wear a buster collar for a couple of weeks ...

Hardly comparable!

i'm not saying it isn't, but with dew claws its usually done to avoid worse pain later on. i got a lump taken out of my leg as a kid, they thought it might turn cancerous later on. it hurt but i'd rather have been sore for a few days than be getting chemo now (hope that illustrates the point). they would be squeeling more if they hurt it when they were no  where near medical assistance. as pups its over, its done, its not a drawn out, damaging process

see you put it so much more clearly than i did lol

But the likelihood of injury is quite minimal and i think its mean to put such young pups through it "just in case"

To Astarte

>neutering is usually done to avoid unwanted pregnancy or to avoid health concerns like pyometria etc. thats not in my opinion unnecesarry

same could be said for docking and removing of dew claws - both are for all intents and purposes  "preventative measures" and, by those who breed animals affected are measures to take full responsibility towards the care of the pups they produce ......

Best to judge practices on their individual merits ratrher than over emotively don't you think?  Otherwise we can't have it all ways - i.e. either we agree prevention is better than cure or we dont!

We really dont have a lot of faith in dogs ability too look after themselves do we?
We take alot off dogs,  we remove tail, dew claws, claws, womb, testicles its a wonder there is any of the dog left by the time we have finished with it.

Dew claws (from my expierance) arent a problem in dogs unless the owners dont clip their nails, Mitz still has hers and all our friends dogs do and havent had one problem and they all get run reguarly over a field or digging like mad in the sand/dirt on the beach.

Mitzs tail is so fierce when it wags we do wonder if she will break it one day, it hits with a sharp crack everytime she hits it on something, doesnt mean we will dock it incase she does something to it. :)  

> But the likelihood of injury is quite minimal

are you talking about tails or dew claws? dew claw injury is really not uncommon and can be agonising! have you ever properly broken a finger nail? imaging it going inside and having to walk on it. nope, take them off i say, not worth the risk for the tiny proceedure

But then you could say take away everything which could harm a dog be it on body or external and mother the hell out of them!

To Fred's Mum

>But the likelihood of injury is quite minimal

based on what?  There are no clear cut facts here because quite simply one pet owner may walk their spaniel on long road walks and running in well kept public park land thereby having relatively low risk of tail injury whereas another pet owner may run theirs through brush, scrub, and bracken and so be at increased risk of injury/damage and subsequent amputation - there are a great many factors involved in this debate don't you think before we can make sweeping statements and/or assumptions?

Yes Astarte i have broken a nail before. it was painful. Maybe i will remove all my nails just in case i do it again.

teri my statement is no more sweeping than anyone else's. I do with my dog what i assume everyone else does with theirs:walk on lead on road, runs in fields off lead. I've never had a problem with claws and neither has anyone i know.

To Rach85

>Dew claws (from my expierance) arent a problem in dogs unless the owners dont clip their nails, Mitz still has hers and all our friends dogs do and havent had one problem and they all get run reguarly over a field or digging like mad in the sand/dirt on the beach.

I can assure you my dogs' nails, including dew claws when present, have always been kept in short neat condition being regularly trimmed and dremelled when coarse ground, gravel, sand, shingle, etc has failed to keep them as neat as I prefer :)  Matters not what we do - if dogs will be dogs they will be at risk of some injury, but then those we can prevent are surely better addressed when but 2/3 days old rather than major surgical intervention and GA risk in an adult, already severely traumatised ....

Fred's Mum,

to clarify, a damaged dew claw is not likely to be a problem if it is restricted to the NAIL - albeit still very painful.  If, as in my experiences, it is the "joint" between the leg and claw which is damaged then that is more correctly equated to having your thumb almost - but not quite - ripped off!  Hardly the same as a manicure ;)

Was replying to Astartes question Teri..... obvioulsy im not comparing it to a manicure.

In Response to Rach85

It has been illegal to dock since April last year,a nd only those with certain working dogs (Gundogs adn Terriers mostly) that can prove the pups are likely to work are allowed to have pups docked (if they can find a vet that will do it).  Each pup has to be identified, and the breeder has to show they belong to a Shooting club, have a shotgun license etc.

Do we not do the same to ourselves????  Dogs are often better looked after.

We trim out nails, take precautions or are sterilised    all the same to me.  :-) 

> Can you breed for a certain tail type?
> And will breeders now have to think of that when breeding

Yep you sure can.  My breed are supposed to have a tightly curled tail, so if they don't it is a fault and one to take into account when breeding.  This is the problem now with the formerly docked breed the very variable tail type and carriage.  Some are down some curled right over and all things in between, which is what makes the dog look mongrelly, some have thin ones some fat ones etc.  You will see the correct tail described in every breed standard, they aren't accidental they are bred for.

> But the likelihood of injury is quite minimal and i think its mean to put such young pups through it "just in case"

No Freds mum the likelihood of a dew claw injury is not minimal. As a dog groomer, I see many people come in with dogs with damaged dew claws, they think I can deal with it, but I have to send to the vets most of the time. The dogs claw easily gets caught and pulled back, which ends up with a painful, blood covered injury which could so easily have been avoided with the claw being removed. One of my bichons has his dews the other doesn't, I wish they had both had them removed.
I have seen 2 yorkies with torn dew claws this week, 1 last week. One of them was horrific, poor dog could not put her foot to the floor and was crying so pitifully. Awful.

(Hope im not tempting fate now) but we must be very lucky then. None of our dogs have ever had it, nor have any of my friend's.

I think the breeders will have to look at the whole picture as well as the tail. There are lots of tail types and sets in poodles (though thats not according to the standard, obv,) which make it so hard, I think.

see where you're coming from Astarte but it's still painful and distressing for the pup. If it wasnt painful then why do they squeal at the tops of thier voices???

New born  puppies squeal "period"   they squeal, when they are stepped on by mum, they squeal when  you pick them up, they squeal for many reasons,   it doe not mean they are in pain.

We really dont have a lot of faith in dogs ability too look after themselves do we.

Maybe that is because they  are domesticated..... we took it upon ourselves to domesticate the dog, to fit our needs.  So it is up to us to take the responsibility to do what we feel is right to protect them. 

Dew claws (from my experience) aren't a problem in dogs unless the owners dont clip their nails, Mitz still has hers and all our friends dogs do and havent had one problem and they all get run regularly over a field or digging like mad in the sand/dirt on the beach

If it was just as simple as clipping nails , we would not see the injuries we do see with dew claws.

i honestly hope its not something you do see in your dogs in the future. our odin never did himself a serious injury to it but even the splits were sore for him

to rach85

i don't think you could say that at all. its about risks versus gains. dew claws are not terribly useful (except for those breeds required to have them) but are potentially dangerous- so why not take them off? its hardly saying that e.g. they could get injured on a walk so don't walk them. they need that so the cost is more than the gain. i think its a personal choice thing (actually thinking about it i'm pretty sure mum and dad didn't get the last littlers claws removed-shall check on our youngest...) i'm simply arguing the sense of having a minor proceedure carried out that can protect the dogs health and wellbeing.

In Response to Polo

This is now what they have to do, as until now they were breeding without having to take anything but the tail set into account.  It will take a very long time to get tails to be as uniform as other breed traits.

to teri

not sure what emotive comment i made but no i agree, things should be judged logically. dew claw removal is an issue of potential safty for the dig as is docking in working animals. i do agree that prevention is better than cure but if the argument is that a dog might damage its tail ALL breeds (with long tails) would have to be docked. 99% of pet dogs don't require docking as they don't injure their tails.

I do think we need to distinguish here between rear and front dew claws.  Most dogs do not have problems with front dewclaws, but the ones that appear on the hind feet are often loose and dangling and these do seem to cause problems more often.

In my own breed front dew claws are neat and very much used, but I have never know the breed born with rear ones.  Their cousin the Buhund is born with bunches of ugly loose dangly rear dews which are always removed, but they keep the front ones..

thats a good point actually.

just checked the rottie breed standard about the tails, the descriptions fairly specific actually, ditto the dobe (not going to check all the previously docked breeds though!). i take it thats been changed recently then? (states previously characteristically docked). anyone know how they came to the description?

the breed clubs were all asked to decide what thew natural tails should b e like and that was added to the breed standards about two years ago, but for the foreseeable future a large proportion of the breed are going to have incorrect tails..

hopefully there will be some nice examples with good tails coming up now. 

that won't happen for a couple of genrations, other than by sheer fluke.

>i take it thats been changed recently then? (states previously characteristically docked).

The Standards seem to last have been updated in September 07, but the clauses about undocked tails were in them prior to that - certainly in 2001 or 2002. It's not terribly recent.

>Most dogs do not have problems with front dewclaws,

Our old lab, working bred but living a normal active pet life, ripped the nail from the quick of both her front ones several times. It was the only time she ever squealed in pain - gashes from barbed wire or glass never caused her to even murmur.

> The Standards seem to last have been updated in September 07

Faults
Any departure from the foregoing points should be considered a fault and the seriousness with which the fault should be regarded should be in exact proportion to its degree and its effect upon the health and welfare of the dog.  The addition is shown bold.

The docked breeds now have previously added in the tail descriptions and then give the description for both docked and undocked.

Here is the breed standard description for the correct Poodles tail:
Tail
Previously customarily docked.
Docked: Set on rather high, carried at slight angle away from the body, never curled or carried over back, thick at root.
Undocked: Thick at root, set on rather high, carried away from the body and as straight as possible.

So poodles with curled tail would be incorrect.