VeggieBoards banner
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,081 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was having a discussion with a friend tonight. He asked what I thought about tail docking, since I brought up that my ex's rott still had her (full) tail.<br><br>
I told him I thought that it was cruel and barbaric, just like declawing & ear cropping.<br><br><br><br>
Then I thought about dew claws. When my dog was a puppy and we had her spayed, we were told by the vet and a few other people that since she's a sporting breed (black lab/springer spaniel mix,) does a lot of running, etc., that it's suggested she have her back dew claws removed, as its highly likely they'd catch on something while she was running/jumping and break. We had her dew claws removed.<br><br><br><br>
I never thought about it again until just tonight. It seems so mean. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/images/smilies/sick.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title=":sick:"> They cut off the entire back "thumbs."<br><br><br><br>
Will they really break if not surgically removed? Is the surgery a good idea to prevent future pain if breaking is highly likely?<br><br><br><br>
What say you?<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>
*We have a million threads on declawing already. Please just comment on the dew claws. I guess tail docking & ear cropping, too, if you'd like. But at least say <i>something</i> on the dew claw front, too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,079 Posts
I don't know all that much about dew claws, but from what I've heard, it is not always necessary to have them removed. Sometimes it's best to 'watch and wait' and see if they dew claw will cause a problem. Many times it does not. However, as you mentioned, there are some breeds that are definitely prone to injuries and these injuries can be very painful and cause infection. So, bottom line, it's a personal call. I don't think it is 'mean' necessarily to have them removed. Most of us love our pets and we try to do what's best for them. It would seem that having your dog's dew claws removed was done it her best interest.<br><br>
As far as tail docking and ear cropping, if it's done solely for the purpose of 'looks' then I would probably consider it unnecessary.<br><br>
The jury is still out on the declawing issue but I'm leaning towards 'don't do it'.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,009 Posts
I think it depends on the dog. Apparently some dogs have looser dew claws, which makes it easier for them to get caught in something and torn off. Obviously dogs don't have a use for them, and they don't miss them when they are gone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
267 Posts
I dont think the dew claw is something that they really miss, and it does look really painfull when they tear them.<br><br>
On the other hand, the same arguments are used to justify docking sporting breeds --"what if the tail gets caught in brambles or barbed wire and it tugs and hurts." Given my views on hunting, I haven't seen sufficient sporting dogs in action to decide whether this really is an issue, but I can see how it could be. Course then I wonder whether my refusal to dock for cosmetic reasons (I think dogs with no tail trying to wag them look very odd) is more cruel than them docking for practical reasons.<br><br>
I think my point is that if something seems to be in the best interests of the dog, and is advised by a vet then whilst it might not necessarily have been the absolute best option for that individual (although obviously as you cant try both you will never find out what would have been) it isnt cruel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,203 Posts
I think dewclaws are just hanging on by a flap on skin so not like declawing a cat but I don't know as long as you keep them trimmed so it can't catch on anything <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dew-claw" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dew-claw</a>.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,153 Posts
My dog had her dewclaws claws removed. She probably would have torn hers by now with all the scrambling around she does.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,833 Posts
<span style="color:#008000;">My old landlord had a Jack Russell terrier who still had his dew claws. One day he was running in their yard and caught one of them on something and tore the dew claw almost completely off. I can tell you that the dog was definitely in pain and after it healed up they ended up having them removed. I'm not sure which would have been more painful to the dog (having them removed or the tear) but I do know I felt sorry for the dog. He yiped and yelped something fierce.</span>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,186 Posts
I've seen dogs with them on and they seemed fine. In Germany they don't remove them. Nor is tail or ear amputation allowed anymore.<br><br><br><br>
I suppose it depends on where the dog is going to live and what sort of enviroment. If the dog is in an envrioment where the tearing danger will never be an issue ( I suspect most dogs fit in here), I see no reason to get this done.<br><br><br><br>
I have a habit of saying, that's a nice dog...too bad about the amputated tail.<br><br><br><br>
PS:I had a bad toe injury which made walking painful..doesn't that mean that people should have their big toes amputated at birth to avoid these injuries?.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,227 Posts
I say wait and see. Why put an animal through a surgical procedure that they might not require. I had never heard of the whole dew-claw thing before, or ear cropping, I guess they don't happen in NZ. I'm obviously against docking anything unnecessarily.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,153 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>~Brandon</strong> <a href="/forum/post/0"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style=""></a><br><br><span style="color:#008000;">My old landlord had a Jack Russell terrier who still had his dew claws. One day he was running in their yard and caught one of them on something and tore the dew claw almost completely off. I can tell you that the dog was definitely in pain and after it healed up they ended up having them removed. I'm not sure which would have been more painful to the dog (having them removed or the tear) but I do know I felt sorry for the dog. He yiped and yelped something fierce.</span></div>
</div>
<br><br><br>
From what I've read.. the sooner it's done the less it'll hurt.
 

·
Ankle Biter
Joined
·
9,333 Posts
Okay - I'm confused. All three of my dogs have five toenails in the front (four on the foot, one on the ankle), and four toenails on their back feet (none on the ankles). Did someone remove their back dew claws before I got them?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,081 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Why do dogs have dew-claws? Or what the heck ARE dew-claws?<br><br>
Back to the ancestors again . . . 1000's of years ago we had 5 toes on each foot so that we could jump and climb to catch our prey. The dew-claws are up higher on the leg than our other toes and on the inside -- kind of like a thumb. Anyway, as we evolved and became faster runners, we really didn't need the extra toes, so they started disappearing. Today many dogs are born without rear dew-claws, but some breeds have all four present. Usually people have the rear ones surgically removed because they aren't attached as solidly as the front ones and they may get caught on something and rip. What really irks me is that many dog breeders think that dew-claws -- front and back -- are some kind of flaw that should be immediately removed so that we can look like YOUR idea of the perfect "breed standard". On the other hand, in a few breeds you have decided that we must KEEP our hind dew-claws in order to be perfect. Really people, would you just worry about more important issues!!<br><br><br><br>
Luckily, I wasn't born with dew-claws on my back legs, and Mom says she has better things to do than having my front ones removed. By the way, since they're on the inside of the legs and above the ground, they're fairly unlikely to cause any problem . . . I kind of like mine. Do you think that it would matter to us how many toes (or other flaws) YOU have?</div>
</div>
<br><a href="http://www.caninesolutionsaz.com/Ask%20Jax.htm#Why%20do%20dogs%20have%20dew-claws" target="_blank">http://www.caninesolutionsaz.com/Ask...ve%20dew-claws</a>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,067 Posts
Apparently removing dewclaws is illegal in some countries too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,090 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Poppy</strong> <a href="/forum/post/0"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style=""></a><br><br>
Okay - I'm confused. All three of my dogs have five toenails in the front (four on the foot, one on the ankle), and four toenails on their back feet (none on the ankles). Did someone remove their back dew claws before I got them?</div>
</div>
<br>
The majority of dogs are born with no dewclaws on their back legs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,090 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>~Brandon</strong> <a href="/forum/post/0"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style=""></a><br><br><span style="color:#008000;">My old landlord had a Jack Russell terrier who still had his dew claws. One day he was running in their yard and caught one of them on something and tore the dew claw almost completely off. I can tell you that the dog was definitely in pain and after it healed up they ended up having them removed. I'm not sure which would have been more painful to the dog (having them removed or the tear) but I do know I felt sorry for the dog. He yiped and yelped something fierce.</span></div>
</div>
<br>
Well if they're surgically removed the dog will be under anesthesia and pain medication. If they're ripped off while running, it's going to hurt quite a bit. The chances of getting caught on something and ripping completely off are very slim and depend on how the location and size of the dewclaws. My dogs all have their dewclaws. If my dogs were at high risk for an injury then I might have had them removed when they were neutered, however it's better to do it when they're a puppy than when they're adults.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
462 Posts
I have 3 greyhounds and only one still has his dewclaws. He is my hyper one that loves to run! When he goes to the dog park he can run for hours and has never had a problem with them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
119 Posts
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>gas4</strong> <a href="/forum/post/0"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style=""></a><br><br>
I say wait and see. Why put an animal through a surgical procedure that they might not require. I had never heard of the whole dew-claw thing before, or ear cropping, I guess they don't happen in NZ. I'm obviously against docking anything unnecessarily.</div>
</div>
<br><br><br>
Well, I would remove them as a pup. I've seen some dogs come in with ripped dew claws and they are very unhappy campers. If your dog is an active breed and you know he/she is going to do a lot of running or even be rambunctous, I would remove them. It may seem barbaric, but I think its much less painful for them when under anesthesia and physician's care then when they just rip them off completely or partially at home. Also, quite often people will have them removed when the dogs are just puppies- I think only one or two days old. The idea here, I think, is that the claws and dew claws don't really "set up"- the vet I work for won't do it after 3 days without calling it an "amputation"- a major surgery with anesthesia. Its also much more expensive. Before the 3 days the dogs don't even seem to notice within 5 minutes. I hope it doesn't hurt them.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,081 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
<div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>mslinzyann</strong> <a href="/forum/post/0"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style=""></a><br><br>
Well, I would remove them as a pup. I've seen some dogs come in with ripped dew claws and they are very unhappy campers. If your dog is an active breed and you know he/she is going to do a lot of running or even be rambunctous, I would remove them. It may seem barbaric, but I think its much less painful for them when under anesthesia and physician's care then when they just rip them off completely or partially at home. Also, quite often people will have them removed when the dogs are just puppies- I think only one or two days old. The idea here, I think, is that the claws and dew claws don't really "set up"- the vet I work for won't do it after 3 days without calling it an "amputation"- a major surgery with anesthesia. Its also much more expensive. Before the 3 days the dogs don't even seem to notice within 5 minutes. I hope it doesn't hurt them.</div>
</div>
<br><br><br>
So when he does it when they're newborns, it's just like circumcision? They just cut? No numbing, no anesthesia, nothing, I assume; considering they're only a day or two old. :shiver:<br><br><br><br>
My dog had her back dewclaws surgically removed at the same time she was under for spaying.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,610 Posts
I think that putting a dog or cat to sleep under anesthetic to have an operation is more dangerous than like docking, removing <b>dew claws</b>, or cat claws. When you put the dog under for neutering (which is also cruel in a way) you should have everything done at once.
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top