Some breeders remove the dew claws saying they aren't necessary and could catch on something and tear. Others say it's not good to remove them because it's like taking away their thumb. Any thoughts on this?
Some breeds have a very loosely attached dewclaw (attached only with soft tissue) on the hind foot and some people remove these. It's not necessary but some people do it (I wouldn't). The dewclaw on the front foot has bone inside, like a finger. It is the equivalent of the thumb. Dogs use these for grip. They have a function. It'd be cruel to remove this dewclaw, IMO, and would also be quite a significant operation.
It's not something I would do. Surely if you keep it trimmed it shouldn't catch on anything. I know my old family lab x did rip her dewclaw but the vet (from what I remember) patched her up and apart from having to stop her eating her bandage she was fine.
all mine had their dew claws and used them like a thumb. I would never cut bits off for no, if its not broke don't fix it is my usual way with my labs. They would find it hard to do some things like hold khongs down so i like my dogs as nature intended. Both Midge and Rory have hurt their dew claws leaping around Midge needed patching up by the vet but Rory was fine its not a problem and they do need em. Doug had SLO so his nails were weird if he had any at all but I found when his dew claws did grow they were useful indications of his general condition.
Our first lab Molly had her dew claw took off by the breeder when she was born but he was a very old fashioned breeder Tilly and Henry's dew claws are still in tact and cause them no pain don't fix it if it ain't broken!
Just watch a dog holding a toy..like a Kong.. and you will see they use their dew claws. To me, it would be barbaric to remove it.
It is very common in working spaniels to remove the dew claws at the same time the puppies are docked, when they are about three days old. I have five spaniels, four have had their dew claws removed. They have no problems holding a Kong or bones and one is extraordinary good at opening doors and gates by hooking his paw around them. It is most definitely not a case of missing a thumb when dew claws have been removed. The dogs are just as agile when running and turning. The youngest one with her dew claws intact has not yet started her working life so time will tell if her dew claws will cause her problems in years to come. I really hope not as I have seen some horrific injuries to dew claws in working spaniels and Labradors on shoots.
I guess I would say then that it's best to avoid activities that are going to cause horrific injuries to dogs or that will require the preventive removal of body parts.
Working dogs are an absolutely essential part of producing game for the table without causing suffering. They flush game that would otherwise not have been found, and they ensure that quarry species can be retrieved and despatched humanely. The ultimate conclusion of your statement above would mean the end of spaniel fieldwork, the end of a fantastic outdoor life for our working spaniel breeds and the end of a fantastic life for Heidrun, me and all the thousands of others involved in field sports in this country. It could also mean the end to a very important source of wild, fresh meat for those of us who chose to eat it. Life is often a compromise or a balance. Working spaniels derive a massive amount of pleasure from doing what they do. If their ability to do that job without suffering comes at the cost of a procedure that takes place when they are two days old, then who is to say whether or not there is a net gain for the dog. My personal belief is that there is. We use dogs in many different roles in this world, military, guide dogs, hunting dogs. Not all dogs are family pets. Of all these roles, I suggest the working gundog arguably has the best and most fulfilling life from a dogs point of view.
This is an article on docking and why we dock our working spaniels, the dew claw argument is pretty similar so I thought it worth posting here for those that are not familar with spaniel fieldwork http://totallygundogs.com/why-do-we-dock-our-working-gundog-puppies/
Well said Pippa. My German Shorthaired Pointers had their due claws removed, my Labs have not. My one Lab damaged his on a normal walk on the common and it was painful for him.
I get it for working dogs where injury is a genuine possibility, also tail docking for the same reason. Not for pet dogs though. I can't get my head around that.
Dogs don't have to be doing anything dramatic to tear a dew claw. My Lab works for her living in the winter, but the only time she has torn a dew claw was during play. What I would say about (my dog's at any rate) dew claws is they are a nightmare if I let them grow too much. They develop into really nasty sharp hooks that can cut an arm open like a knife! Ouch!
My Lab had both dew claws up until a few years ago. He spent his first 3 yrs having countless trips to the vet, sometimes needing a GA to sort out the dew claw on his left front leg which was growing out at a funny angle so forever being ripped. It's an extremely painful injury for any dog and Lucan soon came to the point of hating the vet! The decision was finally taken to take the dew claw off permanently. It's quite a big op to do on an adult dog, he had a really long wound with 15 stitches and needed a few weeks to recover but has been fine since. 4 years on and he still hasn't forgiven the vets though!
Personally I support dew claw removal and tail docking in hunting breeds primarily because many of those breeds regardless of whether they're worked or not will exhibit their natural behaviours which are nurtured and developed for the shooting field and cause themselves damage. I have no truck with altering dogs for aesthetic purposes but when you look at the trauma of a tail amputation in a grown dog or dew claw removal as mandyb has described I feel the procedures are worthwhile. Currently in Scotland they're reviewing their tail docking ban and evidence is being gathered to see what the impact of full tails has been. It will be interesting to see the outcome and statistics gathered.
On a slightly different note - what I really do find totally unnecessary is the cutting of ears, as used to be done on dobermans and Great Danes, and also the docking of tails on dogs for aesthetic purposes.
At one of my dog training classes the was a kind young woman who did a lot of showing with guarding breeds she owned sheperds which she and her familly showed very sucessfully and she got a scholarship in the US to go and work for a big doberman showing kennels. It was for a year, she came back in 3wks because she saw the cruelty involved with the cropping and shaping of the dogs ears. She just had not realised and was so upset she never talked about it. She was a changed person when she came back. It was really hard to she how she had been disturbed by this she was only just 19.
Interestingly (and just for the sake of argument, not because I agree with ear cropping - I don't ) there is a health argument for ear cropping in that flop eared dogs are far more prone to ear infections, mites, etc. I don't know why it was done originally though. Most of these practices did have a purpose, as the procedure itself would have carried a risk, and involved some effort.
