Dew Claws

**Dixieland Dancer** · 04-15-2005, 01:05 PM

Originally posted by WolfChan
Unfortunately, some people do still mutilate their dogs in that fashion.

The dew claw serves no functionality for the dog and is more of a problem area than not. Especially in working dogs it can be a cause of injury. If the dewclaw if removed within the first 48 hours of the dogs birth, removing it is nothing more than equating it as a hang nail in human terms. This is because the nail is so soft and has not started to harden yet. It doesn't even require stitches!

Personally, I have the vet remove the dew claws of all my puppies when they are first born. Of course my dogs are hunters and work in the field a lot so it has it's health benefit but even if they didn't hunt, they still play hard and in my opinion, why leave a source of potential injury if it's not necessary. I don't know anyone who does this as a fashion statement and I don't consider it mutilation. JMHO

**lv4dogs** · 04-15-2005, 01:24 PM

The rear dew claws usually stick out further than the front ones, therefore are more of a problem.

Raustyk doesn't have any dew claws, she came that way.
Nanook had all of his when I got him, I got the rear ones removed when he was neutered.
I do a lot of hiking with them and something as small as a tall blade of grass can rip those dew claws right off.

When I worked at the vets office I couldn't believe the amount of dogs that came in with ripped dew claws. Mainly just the rear ones, I've only seen 2-3 dogs with problems with the front ones. Therefore I reccomend that if your dog goes under anesthesia for any reason you should have the rear ones removed. Especially for any active dog. It can save a lot of heartache, money, time & trouble in the long run.

**finn's mom** · 04-15-2005, 01:31 PM

Finn doesn't have back dew claws (don't know if he ever did or if they were removed before he was seven weeks old - when i got him), but, he has front ones. They don't ever get in the way or anything, so, I've just left them alone. I don't see it as mutilation, though, when they are removed.

**PJ's Mom** · 04-15-2005, 01:58 PM

I wish Bailey didn't have hers. She keeps catching them on things and it hurts her.

Peej had his removed when he was a baby...before we got him.

**Muddy4paws** · 04-15-2005, 02:02 PM

I didnt realise so many dogs gets them caught up, Ive never seen my dogs do this or unless they have and I havent seen or maybe they just are not as active as other dogs!!

lol

**bckrazy** · 04-15-2005, 05:16 PM

Gonzo has no dew claws, I guess his breeder removed them. . . I'm actually happy he doesn't, I know he would've injured or ripped them out by now. . n_n

I don't consider it mutilation either, it's a lot more logical and humane than tail docking and ear cropping.