Reasons Not To Remove Dew Claws

[Diva]

Fauves have front dew claws and they should be left - they should never have rear dew claws.

Interestingly, from a breed standard point of view, the FCI standard currently says that the presence of dew claws is a disqualifying fault. It is currently in the process of amendment as it is purely a translation issue and the French club has confirmed that it is only intended to refer to rear dew claws. The front dew claws have a different name over there (wolf claws I think ) and so when the standard was translated into English it didn't translate what was actually intended. Obviously it is a bit of process to amend it though :laugh:

Same for the Russians in my experience, when they say dewclaw they mean rear ones, which are removed if they exist. They don't tend to call the front ones dew claws, they are the first toe/finger. Some remove, some don't.

None of my very active Belgians had injuries to their front dew claws ever, not even the 2 search and rescue dogs. They all had them left on and no issues.

All my first Borzoi had them removed, but my current two don't and have never had an injury. I did my own research when I bred a litter and decided on balance to leave them on too. It is a less clean line in the show ring, but I didn't find that sufficient reason to remove. I can understand both sides of the argument, I think if you had a dog with a dewclaw which was injured you would become risk adverse about them from the experience.

Edited August 16, 2013 by Diva

[Kirislin]

I wonder if 2 very similar dogs were in the show ring and all it came down to was that one had dew claws, would it lose because of them?

[Rebanne]

I wonder if 2 very similar dogs were in the show ring and all it came down to was that one had dew claws, would it lose because of them?

That's like saying would it come down to the one who had it's whisker's trimmed. :laugh:

There would be something to separate the two before it became so nit picky

[Kirislin]

I wonder if 2 very similar dogs were in the show ring and all it came down to was that one had dew claws, would it lose because of them?

That's like saying would it come down to the one who had it's whisker's trimmed. :laugh:

There would be something to separate the two before it became so nit picky

I dont like seeing trimmed whiskers on whippet or horses either. :laugh: I'm a bit of an au naturale girl.

[OSoSwift]

Removing dewclaws is something I am a little torn over. However not because removing them on a day old pup is cruel.

If they can cause issues with tendons, ligaments then I want them on, other than that I want them off. Having groomed and worked in by hospitals for a long time left on there are many potential very painful issues and removing them on an adult dog is traumatic, painfull and drawn out.

My babies got theirs removed, I sat in the whelping box, I felt worse for disengaging them from the milk bar than doing the dew claws. Over in seconds, no screaming, no blood, done in minutes, all babies back on the boob and happy.

As for the joint, tendon issues I have had Rottweilers, Dobermanns and Whippets. All have had their dewclaws removed, all have done obedience and agility none have had any joint issues, none have had arthritic changes even when advanced in age. I haven't had issues with slipping, they can all chew very effectively on bones.

Due to never having seen any joint issues in my own dogs I decided to do them. Far quicker and less traumatic than those I had seen done by vets. My oh said so when are you doing the toes, they were all finished and he hasn't heard a thing.

[OSoSwift]

Oh and I am someone that over thinks and over analyses everything, so the decision I came to was not arrived at lightly.

Their is no ripping out of a joint, their is no hacking of anything. My dogs and puppies health and happiness is at the forefront of every decision I make for them

[rubiton]

Never had a dog with hind dew claws (they seem to be the ones that look like they are 'swinging in the breeze' as mentioned earlier. But I wouldn't personally have such claw removed if my dogs had them though unless there was an actual injury.

But both our dogs use their due claws when they are doing things so removing the front ones 'just in case' is the same reason to remove a tail to save it 'clearing a coffee table' etc Yes dogs also use their tail much like horses do so no don't agree with that either. Cant see what dogs should have things cut off for cosmetic or 'it might get an injury to it'. (Desexing is different thats trying to prevent illness and future excess animals).

Our older dog is 14 she ripped off the nail of the dew claw ONCE in the last 12 years. Yes it hurt at the time and I bathed it in salt water. By the next day the quick had shrunk and the vet merely neatened up what had ripped (plus I think tablets to stop infection). If they are going to 'scratch' I assume the other nails would too so wrap up the foot in that circumstance.

[RiverStar-Aura]

I've only ever owned dogs who still have their dew claws -- I don't even know if it's common for terriers to have them removed or not. I'm very cautious in keeping them neatly trimmed because I've read about dogs who've needed surgery to repair torn dew claws and boy does it sound nasty.

I guess this is yet another area that prospective puppy buyers need to be educated in. The amount of poor dogs left suffering with overgrown dew claws is horrible and I can only imagine they'd be as painful as an infected/ingrown toenail in humans.

Edited to say that I've never had a problem with my dogs' dew claws.

Edited August 16, 2013 by RiverStar-Aura

[Weasels]

I've never had a problem with dew claws in past or present dogs, but Chess has managed to rip her RH outer claw out in spectacularly bloody fashion. And of course on a Saturday afternoon just after the regular vets all closed, how do they always know that??

[blakkjackal]

I've never had a problem with dew claws and I know of no people who have. I've also never had a dog with no dew claws as the practice is illegal from where I come from (as a preventative, not as a treatment to an already existing injury). It is considered as a cosmetic procedure the same way as tail docking and ear cropping is and really that's how I feel about it too as all of the mentioned practices have had their purposes in preventing injuries. Why is one of them still justified but the rest are frowned upon?

Edited August 16, 2013 by Hockz

[dancinbcs]

I have only ever had breeds that keep their front dew claws- Border Collies and Jap Spitz and cannot imagine a need to ever remove them. Rear dew claws, when they occur, unless required by the breed standard should be removed from all puppies by 3 days old.

[Alkhe]

I've never had a problem with dew claws and I know of no people who have. I've also never had a dog with no dew claws as the practice is illegal from where I come from (as a preventative, not as a treatment to an already existing injury). It is considered as a cosmetic procedure the same way as tail docking and ear cropping is and really that's how I feel about it too as all of the mentioned practices have had their purposes in preventing injuries. Why is one of them still justified but the rest are frowned upon?

My reasoning would be that for the majority of breeds that originally were utility/working breeds, ear and tail docking were performed for preventative reasons as you mentioned. But the work and activities etc that justified that prevention is no longer as prevalent, so there is no longer any need for docking for most dogs and the procedures are just cosmetic.

But dew claw removal is preventing the risk of the kind of injuries that some dogs can obviously still get, just from getting them caught on things, etc. So it's not like the preventative removal was ever linked to particular activities that the dogs no longer really do.

[Dogsfevr]

Well i see the issues of dew claws every day in the grooming world,i also have scars from where i have been sliced open by boarding dogs mainly from GSD's & other large breeds & i can tell you now when they rip you open it isn't fun at all .

We remove all ours & will do so until we have no choice ,the sad part is the people who make these types of decisions live with there heads in the sand about what happens in the real world

[trinabean]

I've never had a problem with dew claws and I know of no people who have. I've also never had a dog with no dew claws as the practice is illegal from where I come from (as a preventative, not as a treatment to an already existing injury). It is considered as a cosmetic procedure the same way as tail docking and ear cropping is and really that's how I feel about it too as all of the mentioned practices have had their purposes in preventing injuries. Why is one of them still justified but the rest are frowned upon?

My reasoning would be that for the majority of breeds that originally were utility/working breeds, ear and tail docking were performed for preventative reasons as you mentioned. But the work and activities etc that justified that prevention is no longer as prevalent, so there is no longer any need for docking for most dogs and the procedures are just cosmetic.

But dew claw removal is preventing the risk of the kind of injuries that some dogs can obviously still get, just from getting them caught on things, etc. So it's not like the preventative removal was ever linked to particular activities that the dogs no longer really do.

Agreed Alkhe. I for one am glad that my dog's breeder had his dew claws removed. Other Boxers I've known have had awful dew claw injuries. Much worse to deal with as an active adult dog than as a neonate I think....

[WreckitWhippet]

I've never had a problem with dew claws and I know of no people who have. I've also never had a dog with no dew claws as the practice is illegal from where I come from (as a preventative, not as a treatment to an already existing injury). It is considered as a cosmetic procedure the same way as tail docking and ear cropping is and really that's how I feel about it too as all of the mentioned practices have had their purposes in preventing injuries. Why is one of them still justified but the rest are frowned upon?

My reasoning would be that for the majority of breeds that originally were utility/working breeds, ear and tail docking were performed for preventative reasons as you mentioned. But the work and activities etc that justified that prevention is no longer as prevalent, so there is no longer any need for docking for most dogs and the procedures are just cosmetic.

But dew claw removal is preventing the risk of the kind of injuries that some dogs can obviously still get, just from getting them caught on things, etc. So it's not like the preventative removal was ever linked to particular activities that the dogs no longer really do.

My Whippets hunt

[Kirislin]

seems like front dew claws are more of a problem in pet dogs than working dogs. In some pets they seem to be forgotten and become overgrown and painful, or cause injuries to people from jumping up on them.

If there was a constant risk to all dogs then working and racing dogs would also have them routinely removed, but that isn't the case.

I know if I ever bred another litter this is something I'd be agonising over, to remove or not to remove.

[Dory the Doted One]

I must be weird.

I was relieved to see Willow still had her dew claws (front).

It's been interesting to read people's opinion on why they think we should remove them. I'm glad we still have a choice. My personal opinion is keep them. Front ones anyway.

Here's some scars, the nice straight ones are from dew claws. The little jagged one was a glancing blow from canine teeth.

Edited August 17, 2013 by Dory the Doted One

[Podengo]

Elsie's dew claws hurt me about as bad as the rest of her nails, but I do clip the sharp tips off all of them. What really hurts is when she misses her tug and gets my hand instead, maybe I need to remove those pesky teeth!

[Rebanne]

I know racing greyhounds who race without dewclaws, and doing ok too

[Kirislin]

I know racing greyhounds who race without dewclaws, and doing ok too

My 2 oldest whippets raced and stayed sound the whole time they raced. Both are Grand Racing Champions and Penny was fastest pedigree bitch for 2 years running, so I suppose the lack of dew claws didn't set them back.

The whippet standard does not require them to be removed, it's a choice breeders make, but not necessary to show them.

Edited August 17, 2013 by Kirislin