I've been looking at length at the subject of dew claws and realise that their removal seems to come down to the breeder's own preference. I really cannot find a yes or no answer to the subect of removal. I do understand that there is a different case for front and rear claws however my question is this, are they ever removed from an older dog for health reasons or are they left in place until there may be an issue and removed when necessary?

Simon

I always remove all dew claws in puppies (prevention is better than cure).

However if I was looking at a litter which had front dew claws, and I liked the pedigree etc, etc, I would not let this put me off buying the puppy. I would not buy one with rear dew claws.

I have owned a dog that kept catching her dew claws which is very painful so I had to place tape around her legs when she was working.

If she had ever needed an operation for another condition I would of had the dew claws removed at the same time.

So should I consider getting my vet to remove them when I get my puppy if it's not been done by a breeder?

Simon Todd at July 31, 2011 at 3:12 PM

So should I consider getting my vet to remove them when I get my puppy if it's not been done by a breeder?

I think it depends on what you intend doing with the dog. I had a labrador when I was teenager and into my early twenties and he had his dew claws and as I didn't work him he didn't have a problem other than having to trim them and file them from time to time as they tended to grow round and would have dug into his leg.  My previous springer has his removed as does my current cocker.

I have know people with dogs with claws haning off and have asked their vet to remove them (adult dog) and the vet refused and stitched it back.  Not sure how complecated the op on an adult dog is  - have heard they tend to bleed quite a bit.  As I say depends on what you want to do with the dog.  Marc

Simon, It's not quite that easy. they're done when the pups around three days old - along with tail docking. A simple quick job then but not so when they're even only a matter of weeks old. It's a much bigger thing that would require a general anaesthetic.Not something a vet would do unless they really were causing problems. I know a vet that works her springers and she likes her dogs with dew claws!  

We have a cocker that has all four dew claws intact. I keep them trimmed as short as possible and - so far- he hasn't had any problems. He is a hard working little dog too!

Ruraich at July 31, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Simon, It's not quite that easy. they're done when the pups around three days old - along with tail docking. A simple quick job then but not so when they're even only a matter of weeks old. It's a much bigger thing that would require a general anaesthetic.Not something a vet would do unless they really were causing problems. I know a vet that works her springers and she likes her dogs with dew claws!  

We have a cocker that has all four dew claws intact. I keep them trimmed as short as possible and - so far- he hasn't had any problems. He is a hard working little dog too!

I suppose as ours will be a pet then there is not an issue. I think I'd become a little confused with so many owners having it done. I wrongly thought it was more to do with the breed rather than what you do with it.

Ours will be out on the moors and in woodland a lot but will not be "worked"

Thanks for the advice

Simon

(Still waiting patiently for a puppy)

Hi

I found out alot about dew claws from those on this site when mine had an unfortunate accident with his dew claw.  I have had labs and springers and never a problem - but yet my cocker has had a problem with both front dew claws - we currently have an infected nail bed on a front dew claw which may well have to be operated on.    I would have previously asked for dew claws to be left alone but if you saw my coco with his horrible plastic hat on to stop him licking then I would advise have them done - as they do with working dogs on this site, as my vet says they just don't miss them so if they can be done painlessly as they do at 3 days then I would have had it done.  

As others have said I wouldn't not have a pup with claws but if you have a choice I'd have them done at 3 days but that's my personal preference.  I'm awaiting the vets decision this week as we've done our best to avoid an operation - my dog is not working but they are fantastic, keen and inquisitive dogs who get into all sorts but are the most rewarding breed I've ever had.

Cheers

Dimmy

Dew claw problems can be nasty, but nothing like as horrid as the complication of tail damage.  I'd not want a dog put under a GA for dew claws unless there was a real problem.  If they are done at 3 days along with the tail that's best, but if not leave well alone.

In the days when I was a vet, I had occasionally to remove dew claws from adult dogs - always because they'd ripped them while hunting (not always spaniels) and then my own lurcher who came with fronts but not rears had one removed at 2 years old because she tore it while turning tight after a hare.  It's a fantastically painful accident in an older dog and a relatively painless procedure in young pups  - I had my pups done (while leaving their tails on) and would always do so, but if your dog has them intact when you get it, it's really too late to think about it.

The key is to remember to keep them well trimmed because they don't wear down as other nails do and they can easily grow in a circle and embed themselves in the flesh of the leg which is painful and prone to infection.

good luck,

m

Thank you to everyone for the info, guess I'll raise it with our prospective breeder although I don't recall them saying they removed them. It may be a case of I'll get what I'm given, I don't suppose 1 pup from the litter can be done on the say so of a prospective purchaser and as they can't be viewed until 4 weeks there is no easy solution. If they have dew claws then I'll just keep them trimmed.

Simon, has your pup been born yet? If not tell the breeder you would like the dew claws removed.

If it is already born and has the dew claws, will you be getting the pup nuetered? This will be a good oppurtunity whilst under GA to remove the claws.

Hi Jacquie

Scan is in 2 weeks and due early Sept. So in all fairness, I could end up with nothing (don't fancy breaking that news to Michelle).

Although I thought I knew quite a bit about dogs, getting a pedigree puppy throws up lots of ifs and buts. My last retriever was a rescue, so it was take it or leave it so to speak but when your spending £500-700 you look at your options.

We have asked for a dog, of that we are sure, the colour is a preference that is way down the list. I want a docked tail but happy with half, two-thirds or one-third and I would prefer no dew claws. I do not intend to have the dog castrated and understand the responsibility that brings but I want the full dog, not one with just some of it's hormones.

I suppose for me its difficult to know what to ask for without seeming cheeky or pushy. Buying from a breeder is a real 2 way deal, I can ask, but it may damage my position on a waiting list if I say the wrong thing. I know that our chosen breeder is on this forum and am desperate not to fall out of favour so I'm treading a careful path so to speak. I am also very careful not to mention them by name as that would be unfair

Dogs intended for work are docked, pets should be undocked.

Kevelek Working Cockers at August 2, 2011 at 3:18 AM

Dogs intended for work are docked, pets should be undocked.

IMHO that statement is up for debate.

Why's that Mike?

Kevelek Working Cockers at August 2, 2011 at 3:54 AM

Why's that Mike?

Well I would suggest that since rectifying damage to the tail is such a difficult opp to do correctly (I know from experience) and that pet dogs do enter cover it would make sense to have then docked, unless they are kept on a lead or under strict control.

I understand it is difficult or even imposssible for people who do not work their dogs to get the proper paperwork to allow docking.

or am I writing a load of old prit stick.

The Bramble Monkeys at August 2, 2011 at 7:18 AM

Kevelek Working Cockers at August 2, 2011 at 3:54 AM

Why's that Mike?

Well I would suggest that since rectifying damage to the tail is such a difficult opp to do correctly (I know from experience) and that pet dogs do enter cover it would make sense to have then docked, unless they are kept on a lead or under strict control.

I understand it is difficult or even imposssible for people who do not work their dogs to get the proper paperwork to allow docking.

or am I writing a load of old prit stick.

Seconded.

About docking, not prit stick!

Yes, but legally, the dog must be intended for work, or the breeder is in deep trouble.  I know nobody enforces that now, but nobody took any notice of phone hacking either... and then they did and the evidence is easy to get hold of. 

As the owner of an undocked dog that regularly goes into cover and has no issues (grass seeds up her nose, yes, tail problems, no), I'd err on the undocked side.  She uses her tail so much that it would be hard to see her without...

m

Manda

I suspect you are in the majority these days, but tail problems can be terminal.  It's a law drafted by people who had no understanding of what a working dog does, but it is the law.

Regarding seeing your dog in cover, providing the vet does not lop the whole thing off a docked tail still works as a flag.