Dew Claws??

Yeah, the only times our vets have done it (we didn't even ask them to) the dog came with loose skin ones and they literally shave them off at the time of sp/n.

Like Elegy I'd never preemptively remove them if they were attached with bones.
Pebbles was one of the most hyper puppies there was, and she's a very active dog and her rear ones haven't even been an issue - they are that much a part of her foot.

I think they are cute even if it means 2 extra toenails to clip!

You can't see health effects by look at a picture of a dog - or even looking at the dog in person. A lot of health effects from an early neuter show up much later in life and are not always physically apparent.

That being said, I do understand why rescues don't wait to neuter.

I agree (that you can't always see it) but that's just not something I'm going to debate. If I was I'd mention the 7y. old unaltered male dog @ the vet the other day being euthanized because his owner couldn't do exploratory surgery to find out why the dog was in agony and couldn't pee.

Well, they knew why - enlarged prostate - but didn't know if it was cancer or BPH, or just what it was.
I'd neuter young to avoid that potential and play my odds with slightly elongated bones and/or possible bone cancer later on in life but maybe that's just me.

And in rescue, again, it's not negotiable or up for debate.

I wouldn't remove dews unless they were a problem.

Ozzy has his, so does Enzo, but Ozzy injured his QUITE often when he was around two. So much so that we seriously considered having them removed, because he was hurting them so often. The removal of them isn't really a big deal though, our vet was very understanding, he knew we didn't want to remove them because of aesthetic problems, but that they were causing a problem to the dog himself.

We waited, and while he STILL occasionally injures them, he hasn't almost ripped one off in a long while. We kept skidboots on him every time he went outside for months so that they could fully heal up. And his front dews are attached, by bone, and he does use them when chewing bones, playing with toys, even when he's cleaning his face you can see they come in handy for him. But had they kept getting hurt, we would have elected to have them removed.

Seems like you mentioned it anyway Then I'll mention the 7yr old altered purebred dog that died of bone cancer. Because one case totally means that it happens all the time.

If a dog is hurting them all the time I could see it - but in our case the only injury in years is a toenail torn off of one of the main toes.
I mean, if it was a common injury I'd be all for removal but I don't think it's really that common.

And Sae - it's way more than one case. But again, that's a whole 'nother thread if you want to open one

http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/longtermhealtheffectsofspayneuterindogs.pdf

Personally I don't see the big issue with the dews and think that should be up to the owners. It's an elective surgery, as are spaying and neutering. S/N is much more invasive and has far more lasting effects on the dog though.

Yes - lasting effects like preventing backyard breeding and pet overpopulation.

Perhaps you missed that this is a pet rescue and to adopt out intact animals is just the very antithesis of rescue.

Thanks Corgi, could you move that to another thread, though? Seriously.

I have read all the studies, etc., and perhaps people are simply overlooking the fact this is a rescued dog with no papers, no history, no nothing, there is no reason to leave these pet animals intact.

Meh, I like dewclaws.


(I wrote a post per the neuter debate then deleted it realizing this wasn't the best place)

I'm not even going to debate spay/neuter since it really doesn't matter to me what people think

But interestingly, I ran this by Venus' foster mom, who is a licensed vet tech who works @ our vet, also the vet we take all the fosters to - here's what she had to say--


We won't do dewclaws on older (than 3 days old) dogs unless there is a problem of them repeatedly tearing them, OR if they are floppy (i.e., no bone attachment). Venus' are firmly attached, and if they are trimmed, they should not cause her any problems. It is EXTREMELY painful to do an unnecessary toe amputation, and we have found from experience that it is nearly impossible to have a good recovery in an active dog (they have to be bandaged and wear an e-collar for a few weeks while they heal).

Perhaps your rescue just needs to learn to better screen it's adopters. As it stands now, you seem to hold people as little more than drooling morons playing with wooden blocks, who are incapable of managing an intact animals. It's amazing how all the reputable breeders on this board aren't just drowning under a flood of puppies!

"The very antithesis of rescue" would be to adopt animals out to labratories, dog fighters, known hoarders and abusers. THAT is the antithesis of rescue.

And I'm so glad that your rescue can afford to be so picky. It must help when you are your own rescue. I can point out a large number of other rescues and shelters that end up with "rare purebred Dobie pups" all. The. Freaking. Time.

Well considering we already have 3 very good homes who'd like this puppy and have submitted apps, I'm not too concerned about finding her that perfect home.

The rest...well, whatever...yes we do have our own rescue and IMO, no good rescue lets adult animals go out intact. Despite the best care in the world, sh*t happens and it's not going to happen on my watch.

If that offends you, well, so be it, if that's the worst my stance on s/n does is ruffle someone's feathers!

PS - to me the "very antithesis of rescue" would be to ADD to the pet overpopulation problem in our country.

:lol-sign: you must be reading my email in box!!

The post it was in direct reply to is in this thread.
Feel free to start a S/N thread and I'll be happy to repost if you'd like.

Nope, not overlooking that. And I never said this dog shouldn't be neutered. I was replying to your comment about neutering to prevent cancer/BPH.

And non breeders.
I've owned intact males and females in the same home for a decade now with not a single puppy.

I've known three excellent rescues who let adult animals go out intact. Besides, this dog isn't an adult.

Preventing unwanted puppies doesn't require surgery, it requires a responsible owner.

IMO no good rescue will turn down someone for something as petty as wanting dewclaws removed. Or put it in their contract that dewclaws cannot be removed. Honestly, if I was interested in a dog and for whatever reason I wanted their dewclaws gone, and the contract was changed specifically to make it so I can't get the dewclaws taken off, I would pass up the dog and go to another rescue. There are plenty of rescue willing to adopt a dog out and not worry about what you choose to do with its dewclaws.

I've been working at a vet clinic for going on 5 years. We DO do dewclaws when requested. They don't take "weeks" to heal - more like 7 to 10 days, which is the same it takes for the spay/neuter itself to heal. And they don't stay bandaged the entire time. More like a day or two. And the cone depends on the dog. Some need it, some don't. Just like some will need it for a spay or neuter and some don't. It also doesn't seem extraordinarily painful, but we also send all spays/neuters home with a weeks worth of pain meds anyway. They don't generally need it that long, but it's there if they do need it. We've also never had a problem with a dog not healing properly because they are active.

I don't see how someone who works in a clinic that doesn't do dewclaws can offer input on how painful it is or how long it takes to heal.

Also on puppies, we do them at 3-5 days. No younger than 3 days. I think we did have a litter once at 7 days that still was able to have them done, but that's not typical.

WTF???????? In all my years of dog ownership I have NEVER seen a dog without front dew claws!

i work in a clinic that does declaw removals and no, it doesn't take that long to heal, but you are, in the act of removing dewclaws, severing tendons and causing the atrophy of associated muscles and you are removing a functional digit.

convenient that chris zink talked about this at her seminar this weekend, eh? lol link to her thoughts on it.

btw her recommendation for all responsibly owned dogs is never neuter but strongly consider vasectomies for boys, and spay females after 2 heats.

i really think that we should be doing more vasectomies in this country. if the concern is truly reproduction (which i don't think it is, really, once you get below the surface, for the general people- i think we have a lot of testicle phobia in this country), why on earth *wouldn't* we be doing that? including rescues. it's healthier for the dog and eliminates puppies. win!

Elegy- Is there any way to check that a dog has been vasectomized after the procedure is done? I'm thinking of a rescue that has an intact appearing male, but has no way of knowing if it is truely intact, or if the dog has been sterilized. That would be my first concern.

I won't lie, testicles repulse me, but that's a personal issues and I wouldn't let it get in the way of making the best choice for my dog.

As far as dew claws, I've never had them removed from an adult, so I can not offer an opinion there. Both Argon and Gambit have nice tight ones.

if they are tight to the leg, and not loose then ya leave them. i dont see a huge deal with removing them if they may get ripped off in the future.

I wish most dogs had them removed. they are always the dogs that come in the grooming shop with declaws grown in to the leg, or wisted really tight around the paw pad.

I have been watching solos. they were very loose, like flaps of skin holding on. and I figured id get them removed (before he accidently removed one or both in his daily adventures at the DP), but now they seem to have grown in very solid.