Get those dew claws removed

[Fury]

I was going to post a pic of Abba's torn dew claw, but I see that I can't post in these thread.

Anyway, I call her "stubs" since her right dew claw is just a stub of the shortened quick. She tore the claw and half the quick off from fetching.

[Renee750il]

Thanks, Fury; good warning!

[dee_9125]

hi
i have had none of my dogs dew claws removed, i am totaly against the procedure, most breaders do it before the pups can walk, a friend had her great dane pups dew claws removed and she got her hubby to walk the dog, hubby and mum were about a mile and a half away (the vet usually does not use any kind of numming agent) the vet started to rip the dew claws out and as the first claw on the first pup came out the pup screamed and the mum heard it and got very distressed, she heard every one after that ( dog and owner were still walking further and further away form the house). it is cruel!!!!

[Brattina88]

Not all vets are like that, and I think that was a very inhumane act from this so called vet, someone should maybe check out his other 'procedures'. Grrr
It is completely understandable on you views on this issue. I'm usually against cropping, docking, any surgery altering the dogs look other than a medical purpose. Most breeders do have them removed and here's why (well, besides Fury's point). They get easily caught on things, my Mother's Chihuahua (I say we have split custody ) got her toe caught on the carpet somehow - she was in a very awkward position -- and ripped it out in panic, herself. How painful! Because of this and another incident with her back leg dew claw scratching her eye (we had to apply special cream to the eye, this is actually quite common I'm told) the vet said we should have them removed. It would have been so much easier for a vet to numb a pups foot and remove them before they will notice and have walking changes. Its going to be a much bigger deal removing them now - Minnie is over a year old.
Some dogs don't have problems, but others do.
If its a good vet and is done early on I'm absolutely for it.

[Quincy Wisdom]

Originally Posted by dee_9125

hi
i have had none of my dogs dew claws removed, i am totaly against the procedure, most breaders do it before the pups can walk, a friend had her great dane pups dew claws removed and she got her hubby to walk the dog, hubby and mum were about a mile and a half away (the vet usually does not use any kind of numming agent) the vet started to rip the dew claws out and as the first claw on the first pup came out the pup screamed and the mum heard it and got very distressed, she heard every one after that ( dog and owner were still walking further and further away form the house). it is cruel!!!!

uhhu...and its not cruel to leave them on so the dog can rip them off at a later date? Seems that would hurt more than doing it at an early age. The same argument applies to circumcision in humans...men who have it done don't remember when they grow up.

Its better to have then removed when the dog is newly born...I've seen dogs get them ripped out by having it caught on something, its much more painful and terrible to the dog if it happens at a later date. I support having them removed, 100%

[bogolove]

Brady had to have them removed because he had one that was slightly deformed, it had a lot of flesh around it and it protruded badly. It was so soft, almost like an extra toe without any bone (sorry not trying to be gross), and I was so scared he was going to rip it off since he is a very active dog. We had them removed when he was neutered, and though he ripped of the bandage after the first day, he never messed with them too bad. Our vet was really great though and I liked him a lot. I am glad i don't have to worry about him, well in that area anyway. Mothers always worry.

[RD]

Yikes, that's good reason to get them removed. I can imagine how painful it is, probably quite like ripping off a finger.

[Ratboy]

My Pit mix had them and tore one of them off about every six months, sometimes he wouldn't even react when he did it, other times he would yell and scream about it like he was getting killed. One time, he was going ballistic in the car, and slipped and CRUNCH, he screamed and it was bleeding all over. I took him over to the vets right away and they stopped the bleeding. By the end of his life, the left one was all deformed from getting torn repeatedly. I always planned to have them removed if he ever had surgery, but other than some "mystery lumps" done while he was wide awake, he never had any gas until just before the end.

I saw a litter of Labs have them removed as very young pups, and it hardly seemed to phase them at all. A couple didn't even appear to wake up! I would think it would be better to remove them at a young age than let them tear them off.

[2_of_a_kind]

I've talked to my vet about getting them removed on my beagle.. and the vet said it wasn't necessary unless they had them on the back legs (and she didn't). The vet said that she recommended they not be removed if they're on the front legs-- the back legs are a different story--according to her. Anyway, i took her advice and my beagle does a whole lot of running around all over the place, on all kinds of different terrains, and she's fine.

[Ratboy]

My dog had them front and back, and never had a single problem with the back ones, just the fronts. My two dogs I have now don't have any at all. At first, it seemed very odd, since every dog I ever had before them had them on the fronts at least. If they had ever had them at all, they were long gone by the 10th week, when I got them.