minimiss Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Hi all, Benny and I were just at the Vets getting his 16week needles and to speak about the right time to have him desexed. The Vet also mentioned that Benny has rear dewclaws, and suggested I have them removed at the same time he's desexed. Are dewclaws something that should be removed? Is there any implications in having them removed and is it invasive? This Vet wasn't the usual one at the clinic that I see, and I didn't really warm to him and would like some other opinions on this. Thanks in advanced :D C x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
persephone Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Unless your breed is one of the few in which rear dewclaws are a normal/desired thing .. then having them removed is a useful op . They do not serve a purpose..they need clipping a lot, and they can easily get hooked up /torn . It's odd they weren't removed when he was a baby ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leema Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 With rescue dogs, I remove the 'flapping' dew claws. They seem likely to injury. I have had some dew claws that are solid and attached and firm, I leave them on. They are normally small and close to the leg, and I perceive little risk of injury. It's up to you, though, whether you want them on or not. :) You can weigh up the risks. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancinbcs Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 The breeder should have removed them at 3 days. There are only a few breeds like Briards and Pyrenean Mountain Dogs that require them. Unless the breed standard mentions them they should be removed in all other breeds. Definitely get them taken off when he is desexed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simply Grand Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Mm, I'd go with removing them when he's desexed, he won't need them and doing it while he's already under GA seems sensible. None of mine have had them but a friend with a toy poodle x had her pup's removed during desexing and it was no problem at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minimiss Posted February 6, 2012 Author Share Posted February 6, 2012 I didn't realise this was something the breeder -had- to do? The vet showed me that the claws aren't even really attached to anything and assured it wasn't a very invasive procedure because of this. I guess removing them now would probably outweigh the risks of not having them done.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mumof4girls Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Rogue was done on day 3 by his breeder, I would rather have them done than not :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
persephone Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 If the dewclaws are not attached by bone .. it's basically a 'snip' of the skin, and a stitch :) Pups are usually done at a few days old - and it's odd the breeder left them on . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gretel Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 Yes rear dewclaws seem to cause more a problem than front ones. I'd have them removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirislin Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 If they are flapping about loose and dangly I would agree with taking them off, if they are firm, sitting in close to the leg, I might be more inclined to leave them, but if the vet is suggesting taking them off, unless you feel he is someone who over services, I'd be taking his advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minimiss Posted February 6, 2012 Author Share Posted February 6, 2012 If the dewclaws are not attached by bone .. it's basically a 'snip' of the skin, and a stitch :) Pups are usually done at a few days old - and it's odd the breeder left them on . You've repeated that it's odd that the breeder left them on twice now persephone, I'm interested to know why you think it's so overtly odd to you. Should I perhaps ask the breeder why this procedure appeared to be forgotten? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crisovar Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 It is something that Breeders routinely check for and deal with when pups are a few days old. I don't know any Breeder that would intentionally leave them on a breed where they are not standard. Maybe it was an over sight, but it is something that is normally automatically checked and dealt with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
persephone Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 You've repeated that it's odd that the breeder left them on twice now persephone, I'm interested to know why you think it's so overtly odd to you. Didn't realise I'd repeated myself, sorry. Why does it seem odd?Because in my experience no one intentionally leaves them on . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minimiss Posted February 6, 2012 Author Share Posted February 6, 2012 (edited) Hmm, I assume it was an oversight as the breeder herself is fantastic, and there are so many wonderful things about her (on DOL and off). They're such tiny little claws, but the Vet said that they have the potential of ingrowing, and since they're not really attached, they could catch on carpet etc. I might email her anyway seeking advice in the removal and ask what she has usually done or suggested in the past.. I don't want to accuse her of puppy sabotage but at least that way will prompt her to inform me of what she's done in the past and that she's forgotten about little Benny!! :laugh: ETA slight grammar fail! Edited February 6, 2012 by minimiss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oakway Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Firstly are the front ones removed???????. If they have been removed I would guess that the breed is not known for having back dew claws and the breeder would have never thought of looking for them. I have a breed that back dew claws are unheard of but I found one in a litter. Fortunately I found it within the time frame for me to remove the one lonley back dew claw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancinbcs Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Hmm, I assume it was an oversight as the breeder herself is fantastic, and there are so many wonderful things about her (on DOL and off). They're such tiny little claws, but the Vet said that they have the potential of ingrowing, and since they're not really attached, they could catch on carpet etc. I might email her anyway seeking advice in the removal and ask what she has usually done or suggested in the past.. I don't want to accuse her of puppy sabotage but at least that way will prompt her to inform me of what she's done in the past and that she's forgotten about little Benny!! :laugh: ETA slight grammar fail! I would just let the breeder know that she missed them and that you will have them removed when he is desexed. Maybe she has never had them before but the vet should have noticed them at the after whelping check. In my experience they are a dominant trait so one parent had be born with them for the puppies to have them. Maybe she used an outside stud dog this time but she needs to know to look for rear dew claws in every litter. All breeds are born with front dew claws and most have some with back dew claws. In some breeds they are all removed and in others just the back ones are removed, except for those few breeds that require them in the breed standard. I have known of the odd breeder to miss the back ones but it is pretty rare because it is something most breeders check for as routine when puppies are born. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuralPug Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I would definitely vote for them to be removed at desexing. I picked up a new surrender Sunday night, a crossbreed with a longish silky coat, and she has been looked after and groomed regularly but today I was tidying up her feet and discovered that she had rear dewclaws under the hair and that they have badly ingrown. One had broken off partially some time ago and I was able to clip it a little but the other requires surgery. This girl since early puppyhood has been with a responsible owner who regularly clipped the front dew claws and nails but simply had no idea that rear dewclaws even existed. This bitch is almost two years old and I'd say she has been in pain for some time with these. Off to the vet tomorrow, and will ask about complete removal of the rear ones it is a much more major operation in an adult dog but I think this girl deserves to be free of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
persephone Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 I have known of the odd breeder to miss the back ones How? Do breeders not check every square inch of new born puppies? Count fingers & toes? check under tail ? make sure legs are glued on tight? check suction pressure in mouth , and amount of insulation around the inner workings? :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alyosha Posted February 7, 2012 Share Posted February 7, 2012 Rear ones are often less attached than front ones, so it can be a less invasive procedure to remove them from older dogs. Often means they are more susceptible to injury as well if left on as they are more dangly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minimiss Posted February 7, 2012 Author Share Posted February 7, 2012 I've emailed the breeder detailing what the Vet suggested and I've asked her what she has done in the past, and asked what she recommends.. I'm sure I'll get some insight from this when she responds. Doing a quick google search it looks like that it's not uncommon for Pomeranian breeders to retain the rear dewclaws, surprisingly. There is a very popular Pomeranian breeder in Vic who has a care sheet on her website, noting that the rear, and front dew claws need to be trimmed more regularly than the other claws so they don't ingrow or snag on anything. Is it possible that it's just not a big issue in this particular breed? From what I've gathered from the responses, and doing a bit of additional research it appears it definitely is more beneficial to remove these dewclaws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now