Dew Claws??

[Shai]

FWIW Webster had all four dewclaws when we got him and he's now the only dog here without dewclaws. Three of the four were the floppy held-on-only-by-skin sort of deals that could be rotated 360 degrees in any direction...I was worried they would be easily ripped hiking, etc. And I wasn't going to leave him with one dewclaw (fourth one was attached though somewhat loosely).

He was also intact when I got him...and had whipworm...and a herniated bellybutton. So when the whipworm cleared around 15 months we took him in to have the herniated bellybutton repaired and elected to have him neutered and the dewclaws removed at the same time as he was an adult (small dog) and I wanted to reduce the risk of putting him under again in the future.

His dew claws healed in about a week along with everything else. He never had a cone since he didn't bother them, and feeling rotten from the neuter and, more so, from the herniated bellybutton repair, he stayed off his feet which may have helped there be no discernible complications from the dew claw removal...I can't say for certain of course.

I don't know that I would neuter him again, looking back, but what's done is done and I did the best I could with the knowledge I had at the time. It was amazing the reactions I got when people asked and I responded that he was intact...absolute horror as though I were abusing my dog and about to unleash a spawn of Little Websters upon the world. I would not have bred him...my concern was entirely over what was best for HIM. But I digress...


ETA: Concerning the rescues-require-s/n before the dog leaves the door thing...if there were any reason for me to not rescue again in the future, that rabid obsession is it. I do a lot with my dogs and prefer that they be given a chance to be a structurally sound as possible...if I were to get a puppy and the organization insist s/he be s/n'd at that time, it would absolutely be a deal-breaker for me.

 

[dachshunds4me]

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!

Good article! Makes removing them for looks and ease of clipping seem pretty ridiculous.

Can you message me about the "spay after two heats" thing? I'm on my phone and can barely find the reply button!!

If others would like to start a s/n benefit/ risk thread that is fine- I'm sure there's dozens in existence as well : )

 

[Aleron]

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

This certainly deserves repeating. Perhaps over and over and over again The movement to alter animals to supposedly stop "overpopulation" is misguided at best (and a tool of the Animal Rights movement at worst). A better campaign would be to really, really push "Train and Contain", as that takes care of not only unwanted litters but a slew of other dog issues - dogs with behavior problems, dogs running loose menacing people or other dogs, dogs being replaced (because that is how it goes - one dog out and another in) because they "don't listen" or "run away when I take the leash off" or "chew up everything in the house" or any number of easily prevented/managed things.

Concerning the rescues-require-s/n before the dog leaves the door thing...if there were any reason for me to not rescue again in the future, that rabid obsession is it. I do a lot with my dogs and prefer that they be given a chance to be a structurally sound as possible...if I were to get a puppy and the organization insist s/he be s/n'd at that time, it would absolutely be a deal-breaker for me.

ITA with this. Of course, if you have an intact animal living with you, most rescues will refuse to allow you to adopt even an altered dog. So I'd say once you decide to keep a dog intact, your chances of being approved for a rescue (if you are honest) are pretty slim. There are still county pounds that ask few questions and will send out intact animals but that is getting less and less common. And if you think that rescues would be happy to adopt a dog to someone who is very involved with their dogs, intact or not - think again! I have had friends turned down who have SchH titled dogs, CH/UD dogs, etc for getting an altered rescue because of owning intact animals. My friend with the SchH titled dogs was turned down to adopt a 10 year old neutered cat because she had intact dogs. It seems things have gotten very skewed with rescues in modern times.

And I don't know if I should laugh or cry about people's reaction to your dog being intact. It's a true sign of the times though.

 

[joce]

I wouldn't jump all over them about it. My vets office will routinely take them off with a alter. When my mom took my husky in she had thought I wanted them left on so she declined, and now they wiggle all over and tawny refuses to let me cute them so they snag on everything!!!!!

I think it depends on the dog and how they lie on them if they have issues though.

 

[dachshunds4me]

If they are attached merely with skin it is best to remove them and our vet will do this when she alters.

If they are attached with bone, it's an amputation and best to leave the intact rather than cut them off for convenience or appearance sake.

In our case with this particular dog, they are attached firmly with bone.

People apparently have the notion they are useless and according to the article Elegy posted, that is far from being the case.

 

[MandyPug]

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.

That's EXACTLY what Dr.Devall said yesterday at her lecture. She showed pictures of dogs running and exactly what their wrists do and it looks absolutely creepy to see the foot like that but it's normal because they need to use that dewclaw.

 

[Taqroy]

i would never pre-emptively remove front declaws. they are functional digits that help stabilize the wrist when a dog is turning at speed. i'd consider removing them from a specific dog if they were a continual problem, but not "just in case".

That's really interesting. I had no idea that they serve a purpose. (Although it makes sense now that I think about it). All three of mine still have theirs and we've never had a problem.

 

[Picklepaige]

I'm in the "never had a problem crowd." All of my dog's dewclaws have been small and functional. I guess it's the big floppy ones that need to be removed?

Oh, and after working at the kill shelter here for so long, it makes me really upset when people say that overpopulation is a myth. If you think it is, you come down here and find a home for the 93 puppies we killed last Tuesday.

I'm serious...I want to know what the north is doing that the south isn't.

 

[Dizzy]

Bodhi VERY much uses her dew claws!!!! I don't agree with removal unless they are dangling off.

She's VERY active, swims, jumps, climbs, runs through under growth, generally in territory any working dog is in and never had a problem. Removing 'just in case' doesn't cut it for me.

 

[-bogart-]

I'm in the "never had a problem crowd." All of my dog's dewclaws have been small and functional. I guess it's the big floppy ones that need to be removed?

Oh, and after working at the kill shelter here for so long, it makes me really upset when people say that overpopulation is a myth. If you think it is, you come down here and find a home for the 93 puppies we killed last Tuesday.

I'm serious...I want to know what the north is doing that the south isn't.

who said it was a myth? did i miss something? i read the thread and see a dew claw conversation and a early spay/neuter convo mingled with unreasonable rescue practice comment thrown in. ( not you dash , just in general rescue)


and as to what the north is doing that we aren't . general education and affordable clinics are top of the list , follow closely by changing the historical view on pet ownership here.

 

[Doberluv]

The one thing I don't get regarding the article is: some dogs have rather long forelegs and their dew claws are quite a ways up from the ground. How do they dig into the ground to help them turn if they're as far from the ground as many are. I get that there are those that are closer to the foot. Take Jose` for instance...he has front dew claws that are quite near the rest of the toes and these are the kind that are short and tight...held close to the foot. They almost look like regular toes. So, I can imagine that his may strike the ground when turning at a run. On the other hand, Toker, my son's dog, for example has dew claws that are quite a ways up. I doubt they touch the ground when she's running and turning. I mean...some dogs would have to be leaning way over like a motorcycle when it turns tightly. Animals don't lean way over, almost onto their sides when they turn.

I had always thought that dew claws use to serve the purpose of helping to claw an animal in defense or to help with hunting or tearing meat from bone....that sort of thing. This is an interesting idea though...that it has to do with weight support when running and turning. I'd be interested in seeing more.

At any rate, if the dog's dew claws aren't causing repeated problems in the future, I'd be inclined to insist they be left alone. I realize with a very active dog in a very brushy setting, they may be injured more easily than in another dog or in a city-type setting. But I'd wait and see. Tokers dew claws aren't the close, tight kind. They hang out and are rather loose. And when she lived with me, she rip roared around through the forest and pasture like nobody's business. I mean she is FAST and completely unabandoned. Anyhow, nothing so far as ever happened to her dew claws. My niece's dog too....same thing, long, loose dew claws. Part hound, tallish.... and he always was a lunatic in the woods when she lived here, flying over brush and logs, up and down very steep, sheer hills or cliffs, with no apparent caution about anything. LOL. So far, no injuries.

 

[corgipower]

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

Neither of my corgis have front dews. They're usually removed from corgi pups. My malis do have front dews.

Supposedly working corgis ~ running cattle through woods and brush ~ are prone to ripping the dew claws often. It's something I need to do more research on before I'm ready to breed them.

 

[dachshunds4me]

It just makes the foot look "neater" and I'm willing to bet every dog shown in AKC has them off. At birth.

 

[~Jessie~]

All of mine have dewclaws except for Chloe. Her breeder removes dewclaws when the puppies are days old.

Rory has ripped off a dewclaw nail while doing stock work. It ended up growing back, though.

Personally, I wouldn't have dewclaws removed unless there's an issue. After 3 days of age (I think that's the right age), the bones begin to fuse and it becomes more serious than just clipping them off.

 

[~Jessie~]

It just makes the foot look "neater" and I'm willing to bet every dog shown in AKC has them off. At birth.

Nope. Tucker, Rylie, and Emma's breeders don't do dewclaws, and they show. MOST chihuahua breeders do not remove dewclaws. It's really uncommon, actually.

 

[Laurelin]

It just makes the foot look "neater" and I'm willing to bet every dog shown in AKC has them off. At birth.

Nope. Depends highly on the breed. My AKC champion has his dewclaws still. There is no preference either way in papillons as far as front dews go (rears are to be removed but most paps are born without them). Some breeds though are actually disqualified if you remove them.

 

[Taqroy]

The one thing I don't get regarding the article is: some dogs have rather long forelegs and their dew claws are quite a ways up from the ground. How do they dig into the ground to help them turn if they're as far from the ground as many are. I get that there are those that are closer to the foot. Take Jose` for instance...he has front dew claws that are quite near the rest of the toes and these are the kind that are short and tight...held close to the foot. They almost look like regular toes. So, I can imagine that his may strike the ground when turning at a run. On the other hand, Toker, my son's dog, for example has dew claws that are quite a ways up. I doubt they touch the ground when she's running and turning. I mean...some dogs would have to be leaning way over like a motorcycle when it turns tightly. Animals don't lean way over, almost onto their sides when they turn.

Mu's are up high too. In fact the only time I remember she has them is when she *hugs* my arm. They're really sharp (because they don't hit the ground ever) and she always ends up scratching me when she does it.

I'm kind of inclined to think that the working dog removal theory is a "once it's happened you never forget it" kind of thing. I imagine it's pretty traumatic for a dog to rip off/up a tight dew claw since it's attached to the bone.

/shrug Just my theory.

 

[MandyPug]

The one thing I don't get regarding the article is: some dogs have rather long forelegs and their dew claws are quite a ways up from the ground. How do they dig into the ground to help them turn if they're as far from the ground as many are. I get that there are those that are closer to the foot. Take Jose` for instance...he has front dew claws that are quite near the rest of the toes and these are the kind that are short and tight...held close to the foot. They almost look like regular toes. So, I can imagine that his may strike the ground when turning at a run. On the other hand, Toker, my son's dog, for example has dew claws that are quite a ways up. I doubt they touch the ground when she's running and turning. I mean...some dogs would have to be leaning way over like a motorcycle when it turns tightly. Animals don't lean way over, almost onto their sides when they turn.

I had always thought that dew claws use to serve the purpose of helping to claw an animal in defense or to help with hunting or tearing meat from bone....that sort of thing. This is an interesting idea though...that it has to do with weight support when running and turning. I'd be interested in seeing more.

At any rate, if the dog's dew claws aren't causing repeated problems in the future, I'd be inclined to insist they be left alone. I realize with a very active dog in a very brushy setting, they may be injured more easily than in another dog or in a city-type setting. But I'd wait and see. Tokers dew claws aren't the close, tight kind. They hang out and are rather loose. And when she lived with me, she rip roared around through the forest and pasture like nobody's business. I mean she is FAST and completely unabandoned. Anyhow, nothing so far as ever happened to her dew claws. My niece's dog too....same thing, long, loose dew claws. Part hound, tallish.... and he always was a lunatic in the woods when she lived here, flying over brush and logs, up and down very steep, sheer hills or cliffs, with no apparent caution about anything. LOL. So far, no injuries.

When dogs run full out their "wrists" bend and the claw and that pad at the back of the foot do touch (or in some breeds get very close to touching). You don't really see it unless you're watching closely or watching slow motion.

YouTube - Italian Greyhound running in UltraSlo motion Same dog Close

Look how the dog's wrists bend. If the dog were turning tightly the dewclaw would very much be able to hit if needed.

 

[Laurelin]

Beau's ripped his dew off before. It bled a lot but eventually it grew back just fine. Other than that we've never had a problem with dews even though my dogs are very active and do a lot of running. To me it seems silly to remove them just in case. It's not enough of a reason imo and certainly not in an adult dog. I don't really mind puppy dewclaw removal (but I don't like it either) however, I cant' see why people would want to removed attached dewclaws on an adult dog.

 

[Doberluv]

Mandy, thanks for posting that. Unfortunately, because of my dial up, loading a video would take half the day. But I'll take your word for it. In fact, now that you mention it and I picture in my mind dogs running and turning, their wrists DO bend and sort of sink down sometimes. Next time I'm on a computer with fast Internet, I'll look at that. (if I remember) Thanks again!