# Average Cost to remove dew-claws from an older pup; is it worth it



## Hunt'EmUp

Have come across a breeding where the breeder did not remove dew-claws, I guess the vet told him he had waited too long or some such. In any case, the litter has them, and this breed seems to have a propensity to produce rear dews-claws as well (a couple have all 4). Me, I'm recommending he get them all removed, but I have no experience, with the procedure after they are over the newborn cut off point. Does any one know ~related expense, and is there a time point -age where it would be better do the procedure, healing time and activity-wise. Also worried about knocking young puppies out, would it be better to wait, until they are older? 

Then there's new age, thinking to leave them; I just can't see doing that for back dew-claws (breed DQ, if left on), and if the puppies are going under anyways, my opinion would be it's better to take them all off at that time.


----------



## quackaholic

I just ran into this myself, I had a litter of pups and made the decision to leave the dew claws. Recent evidence has shown that this can be a cause of arthritis in dogs. After all it is an amputation and the ligaments atrophy over time. My vet advised against also and he no longer does them at all. I guess that's why breeders do it with the old toe nail flipper.

That being said, one of the pups will be going under anesthesia to have them removed. At a cost of roughly $400. That could run higher depending on the area you are from.


----------



## Dave Farrar

My wife's standard poodle had them removed when we had her spayed at 5 months. The cost was an additional $250. Stitches and a cone of shame for 10 days. She was RUNNING through the dog door with the cone in 2 days.


----------



## NateB

Just leave them, except for rear legs. No sense taking them off now. "IF" they ever snag them then have them removed. I would not do it later, "just to do it". They are probably better overall with them left on anyway.

Tradition can take forever to change.


----------



## Tobias

NateB said:


> Tradition can take forever to change.


Isn't that the truth. I wish more breeders would leave front dew claws on. Rear dew claws need to be removed no matter what.


----------



## J. Marti

My first curly, imported from England, came with both front and rear dew claws (the breed only very, very rarely has rear dews). He was 16 weeks old when he arrived and my vet was adamantly against removing them--said it was major surgery. We left them on and he was hunted at least 60 days a year on waterfowl and lots of upland. Never a problem even with the rear dew claws. When I first started breeding, I always had them removed. On my last litter--16 years ago--I kept them on. One of the puppies became an all-breed BIS winner even with dew claws. More and more breeders are choosing not to remove them. I mention the BIS because some breeders believe they cannot win in the show ring or will be penalized somehow if their dog has dew claws. (Rear dew claws are a show ring DQ in some breeds...)


----------



## José Nijssen

I would definitely leave them on. In Europe there is no tradition of removing them in the first place. We also see a difference between our American imports and the rest of the bunch here. With them dogs can get out of the water much easier. They are there for a reason.


----------



## ErinsEdge

I'm in the camp of I remove them, but if I bought a pup with them on, I would NOT do surgery to remove them


----------



## NateB

José Nijssen said:


> I would definitely leave them on. In Europe there is no tradition of removing them in the first place. We also see a difference between our American imports and the rest of the bunch here. With them dogs can get out of the water much easier. They are there for a reason.


Especially up a steep bank. Watch how the dog spreads out its feet coming up a bank.


----------



## Steve Shaver

NateB said:


> Especially up a steep bank. Watch how the dog spreads out its feet coming up a bank.



Just cannot believe people actually believe this. Its easier for a dog to climb a steep bank by spreading his feet whether he has dew claws or not. From my observation OF MANY MANY DOGS there is much more danger of injury then there is of any benefit of keeping them on. I will NEVER buy a pup with dew claws left on.


----------



## EdA

ErinsEdge said:


> I'm in the camp of I remove them, but if I bought a pup with them on, I would NOT do surgery to remove them


I agree, a dog near and dear to my heart had front dewclaws (HOF FC-AFC Trumarc's Hot Pursuit) and they were never a factor one way or the other.


----------



## Chris Atkinson

Steve Shaver said:


> Just cannot believe people actually believe this. Its easier for a dog to climb a steep bank by spreading his feet whether he has dew claws or not. From my observation OF MANY MANY DOGS there is much more danger of injury then there is of any benefit of keeping them on. I will NEVER buy a pup with dew claws left on.


Nate's a veterinarian and the breeder of my 10 year old all age dog Bus. Nate removed dewclaws for Bus' litter and a few others. 

My understanding is that Nate has considered a re-think of this and has provided some documentation to someone who had a recent litter. He was not necessarily trying to influence them not to remove the dews - just giving some alternate ideas.

I look at removing dew claws a bit like politics or religion. There are those for whom it works well, and they don't necessarily agree with the others on the other side.

Like Patrick Johndrow used to say when he quoted his grandpa: "If we all liked the same thing, everyone would be chasing your Grandma".


----------



## Hunt'EmUp

Realistically for the breed have to remove the rears, it's a breed DQ in the show ring. Sure that might not be a big deal to some, but others like to have the option. There's still the ability to have DC's in the breed, and a smaller population that shows, if the dogs turn out to be nice in that, it might be worthwhile to do the show thing. Me I'm taking them all off mine have had several bad experiences with dews on my dog that has them, I'm not going through another decade of that. I believe most of the other owners might not care, a few will insist on having the rears off. Calling around Quotes $115-$135, to get it done. I'm leaning towards doing it now rather than when the pup will be ready to train, missing downtime. 

General question for the gallery, If more people are keeping them on, are they at least advertising the litter as having them? Seems like a real pain, to have to take them off later. Honestly I would pass on most litters where owners didn't remove dew-calws, If this wasn't a special breeding to me, I wouldn't choose to go through this hoop.

Didn't know Chessies were such a primitive breed, that they could produce rear dew-claws, learn something new everyday  

Thanks for the input everyone


----------



## Tobias

Yes, chessies occasionally will have rear dew claws. If they are present, the dog (chessie) cannot be shown - it is an immediate DQ from the show ring.


----------



## NateB

To each his own, I doubt I will take them off again. For every story of a dog that has had problems in the field there more that have ended up with carpal and foot arthritis at an older age. Cannot prove it was removing the dewclaws, but the scientific evidence is beginning to gather on leaving them. if someone wants them off buy from a different litter. Every litter should have full disclosure. Every decision we make is a risk/benefit, make your own decision. Wish I could remember where I saw the slow motion video of dogs climbing with and without, it was my strong impression the dewclaw gave a significant extra "bite" into the dirt. That was my point.

Another side issue may be how tight are the feet. My dogs tend to have "tighter feet". Dogs with longer toes and looser feet MAY be more prone to injury. Pretty hard to divide out those variables though.


----------



## Longgun

I watched a video recently on dogs getting out of the water onto ice where they were using their dews. It was pretty amazing to watch in slow mow. The dogs without dews had a much harder time getting out and some only managed to break the ice and not get out.
deb


----------



## blindfaith

I have stayed away from posting lately and this is probably not the time but here goes. A few scattered comments. I definitely would have them removed but would not buy from a breeder that has not already taken care of it. No way cost should be $400 or so. Some countries who " do not have the tradition of removals" may also prohibit their removal along with other such surgeries. They " are there for a reason" is bad reasoning and ignores the existence of vestigial body parts which in fact have no useful purpose. Determining their usefulness by watching a dog climb out of anything in a video or in person would actually take a "rocket scientist." 

If you don't believe dogs should have them removed because it is cutting on them, makes you queasy or whatever just say it. Anyone who has seen a adult dew claw torn would like to avoid that eventuality. It isn't pretty and usually does not occur at a convenient time... as an aside dew claws can wreak havoc in the house and in 42 years of having Labs we have never had one who could not negotiate a mud bank or get out of water, etc. Not all traditions are based upon ole wives tales. some are grounded in solid science!


----------



## ErinsEdge

All my dogs but a rescue have had dew claws removed and all the pups I have bred have had them removed. I must be extremely lucky because I have never had a case of carpal arthritis on mine or heard of any of them, and I know people would tell me if it happened to their dog I bred. I have had MANY people inquire if I remove dews so I don't think it will ever evolve that people will go to no removal in the US, especially in hunters. The rescue and her dews were a huge PITA. Anyway, that is my story.


----------



## Zombini1

Longgun said:


> I watched a video recently on dogs getting out of the water onto ice where they were using their dews. It was pretty amazing to watch in slow mow. The dogs without dews had a much harder time getting out and some only managed to break the ice and not get out.
> deb


My new Golden Retriever pup still has the dew claws. The breeder used to have them removed but now believes they are essential. She shares a video of a dog pulling himself out an ice hole. I do not plan on having them removed.

Steve


----------



## EdA

NateB said:


> To each his own, I doubt I will take them off again. For every story of a dog that has had problems in the field there more that have ended up with carpal and foot arthritis at an older age. Cannot prove it was removing the dewclaws, but the scientific evidence is beginning to gather on leaving them. if someone wants them off buy from a different litter. Every litter should have full disclosure. Every decision we make is a risk/benefit, make your own decision. Wish I could remember where I saw the slow motion video of dogs climbing with and without, it was my strong impression the dewclaw gave a significant extra "bite" into the dirt. That was my point.
> Another side issue may be how tight are the feet. My dogs tend to have "tighter feet". Dogs with longer toes and looser feet MAY be more prone to injury. Pretty hard to divide out those variables though.


Nate I would be interested to know where this evidence comes from other than the writings of Christine Zink who writes about canine sports medicine topics. Christine Zink DVM, PhD is is a highly respected microbiologist and immunologist at John's Hopkins School of Medicine. This is not to say that her opinion on the topic is not worthy of consideration but professionally should carry no more weight than mine or yours.


----------



## Brad

Why risk dogs life with or wihout claws on Ice. They are good for scratching thier face and putting scars on my leg. If Ice was that bad Why send them


----------



## Steve Shaver

Chris Atkinson said:


> Nate's a veterinarian and the breeder of my 10 year old all age dog Bus. Nate removed dewclaws for Bus' litter and a few others.
> 
> My understanding is that Nate has considered a re-think of this and has provided some documentation to someone who had a recent litter. He was not necessarily trying to influence them not to remove the dews - just giving some alternate ideas.
> 
> I look at removing dew claws a bit like politics or religion. There are those for whom it works well, and they don't necessarily agree with the others on the other side.
> 
> Like Patrick Johndrow used to say when he quoted his grandpa: "If we all liked the same thing, everyone would be chasing your Grandma".






Totally agree, to each his own. There is just no way in hell anybody could ever convince me that the one little claw and the back side of a leg is actually good for anything and to me the dangers of a possible problem is very obvious. Sure there are plenty of dogs that don't have them removed and never had a problem. There are also plenty of people that feed Ol" Roy and have healthy dogs but I sure aint gonna feed it. Just sayin.


----------



## Brad

Question? I didnt know they had rear dew claws Our litter didnt and our other dogs dont


----------



## EdA

Brad said:


> Question? I didnt know they had rear dew claws Our litter didnt and our other dogs dont


I have owned and administered to many Labradors in my 47 years as a veterinarian, I have never seen a purebred Labrador Retriever with rear dewclaws.


----------



## windycanyon

I rescued one w/ rear dews once from the shelter, and learned at that time that there are lab lines that still produce them... I think most breeders who choose to leave the front ones on would likely remove the rears if they appeared because most are "floppy" and so would have a higher risk of injury.

As to the initial question, one of my pup owners purchased a Lab from a breeder ~4 yrs ago who claimed she had removed the dews but obviously did not so so properly, as they grew back. About a month ago, she was clipped to a tie out stake in my yard while we were doing some obed training. She went to stand up and put her right front down, over the top of her leash, dislocated and tore the dew on that side. It was obviously quite painful but we got it taped up. She had just done something in hunt test training to the other one a month or so earlier and after $150 at the vets to trim that down, treat and tape it, they were quoted $560 to surgically remove the 2 front dews. I suggested they contact one of my other vets (I too use the one they went to and know they are priced on the high side), and had them book an appointment w/ them for removal. $220 there and that included follow up stitch removal and any bandage changes they needed (they did that themselves).


----------



## Chris Atkinson

Steve Shaver said:


> Totally agree, to each his own. There is just no way in hell anybody could ever convince me that the one little claw and the back side of a leg is actually good for anything and to me the dangers of a possible problem is very obvious. Sure there are plenty of dogs that don't have them removed and never had a problem. There are also plenty of people that feed Ol" Roy and have healthy dogs but I sure aint gonna feed it. Just sayin.


I've written before about my Adirondack and Green Mountain Ruffed Grouse hunts with my old boy Champ - who was backyard bred and had dews. The ice-crusted snow that is frequently on the ground during peak grouse time was notorious for tearing his dews back and making a painful mess. 

I vowed never to have dews on a retriever since. My last three well-bred labs had no dews. Guess how many snow-crusted grouse hunts I did with them..... none.


----------



## Charles C.

I had a dog that had a dew claw grow back because the breeder's vet was out of town and he did it himself. It was a PITA! As I recall, it was torn at least twice, once just from jumping on the tailgate. I would have to see some serious evidence that they were helpful or necessary not to remove them as a breeder.


----------



## Tobias

Chris Atkinson said:


> I've written before about my Adirondack and Green Mountain Ruffed Grouse hunts with my old boy Champ - who was backyard bred and had dews. The ice-crusted snow that is frequently on the ground during peak grouse time was notorious for tearing his dews back and making a painful mess.
> 
> I vowed never to have dews on a retriever since. My last three well-bred labs had no dews. Guess how many snow-crusted grouse hunts I did with them..... none.


it is amazing to me that I have never seen a wolf (in my taxidermy career and as a trapper) with torn dew claws or dew claws that had previously been torn. Wolves can get some wicked long toenails during the winter - including their dew claws. Actually, I have never seen a fox, coyote, wolverine, or wild cat with torn dew claws either. Seen many with injured toes or healed broken toes, especially bears.


----------



## quackaholic

Tobias said:


> Chris Atkinson said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've written before about my Adirondack and Green Mountain Ruffed Grouse hunts with my old boy Champ - who was backyard bred and had dews. The ice-crusted snow that is frequently on the ground during peak grouse time was notorious for tearing his dews back and making a painful mess.
> 
> I vowed never to have dews on a retriever since. My last three well-bred labs had no dews. Guess how many snow-crusted grouse hunts I did with them..... none.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> it is amazing to me that I have never seen a wolf (in my taxidermy career and as a trapper) with torn dew claws or dew claws that had previously been torn. Wolves can get some wicked long toenails during the winter - including their dew claws. Actually, I have never seen a fox, coyote, wolverine, or wild cat with torn dew claws either. Seen many with injured toes or healed broken toes, especially bears.
Click to expand...

What he said.


----------



## Renee P.

Chris Atkinson said:


> I've written before about my Adirondack and Green Mountain Ruffed Grouse hunts with my old boy Champ - who was backyard bred and had dews. The ice-crusted snow that is frequently on the ground during peak grouse time was notorious for tearing his dews back and making a painful mess.
> 
> I vowed never to have dews on a retriever since. My last three well-bred labs had no dews. Guess how many snow-crusted grouse hunts I did with them..... none.


My dog's dew claws were removed, yet she still gets cut up by ice crusted snow in the same place.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp

I do not buy the wild canine argument; Dogs are not wild animals, dogs are not wolves, foxes, bears, coyotes. They have evolved with humans, for over 20,000 yrs. You only ever will see wild animals that were able to survive in the wild, able to pass along strong genes-structure that aided in that. You wont' see many wild animals, with broken legs, broken bones, those that get massive infections from injury, or hereditary conditions such as EIC, DM, CNM. 

A wolf or any wild animal prone to ripping of dew-claws, would be slowed down, other animals that didn't rip them would thrive, weaknesses get cut from the gene pool. With dogs we are involved, we have removed them from being wild-natural selection, removed them from environments that play on paw, tail, ear structure. We take care of them, adapt for their weaknesses and breed them, taking only certain aspects into mind when doing it, while being unconcerned with others. Thus we get several traits in our dogs, not optimal towards natural function. Just look at the whip-like tails in many breeds that break (thus we dock them), or ears that flop, although wild canine ears, are erect. Saying wild animals do not get dew-claw injury, and relating it to pedigreed dogs, that we breed just doesn't make much since. I don't know I single breeders-or breed who ever looked into proper dew-claw structure for work, never seen it put into a standard; expect for that weirdo breed of climbing dogs that have 2 or 3 full sets of dew-claws. 

On the contrary most breed founders of working breeds decided it to be worthwhile to cut them off, rather than leave them, now I don't know the motivation; could've been look, but isn't it easier to just leave something alone than to cut it off unless there was reason in removing them. One could select for generations for proper dew-claws, or tail structure; so they don't cause injury not break, or you could just cut them off and not have to worry about it.


----------



## NateB

EdA said:


> Nate I would be interested to know where this evidence comes from other than the writings of Christine Zink who writes about canine sports medicine topics. Christine Zink DVM, PhD is is a highly respected microbiologist and immunologist at John's Hopkins School of Medicine. This is not to say that her opinion on the topic is not worthy of consideration but professionally should carry no more weight than mine or yours.


Ed, a lot of comes from her and her website *http://www.caninesports.com*, she apparently has quite the canine rehab program. Only know what I read on the web site, not an endorsement. I would suspect she knows more than me about rehab. The "tighter feet" idea is just me "wondering". I have just recently started to side on leaving them. Have taken them off for over 20 years. All my dog did get some foot/digit arthritis at an older age, only one needed some treatment and does great with just Dasquin, and occasional laser therapy. So I have to wonder, would that still happen with the dews?? No way to know, my dogs are never kept on concrete, either in the yard or in a kennel with a wood deck floor. A guy I shoot with has had several setters and told me the setter community is going that way. Not sure how many people he knows. I am trying to keep an open mind. I have treated a few torn dewclaws on pet dogs, but also treated torn regular nails, ripped pads etc. Stuff happens.

So bottom line is we don't know. But realize we do not know everything. Maybe the dewclaw is worthless like the appendix or maybe it helps stabilize the foot/carpal area. Pretty hard thing to research with all the dogs on both sides of the study having vastly different lives.


----------



## Julie R.

Like NateB I always removed them on litters I bred but I do have one adult that has her dew claws. Hers are small and tight and have never gotten in the way. And she is hard on herself; she has ripped out and broken several nails but never her dew claws. I no longer remove them; interestingly about 3 years ago I had two hunting buyers (of a 4 puppy litter) ask to have them left on. This presented a problem: you don't know which pup is going where at 2 or 3 days. So I asked the other 2 buyers if they minded if I did not remove them and no one cared. I've only had one litter (well, one and a singleton) since then and I left them on, explaining to the buyers why. The singleton I kept, and left hers on as well. What convinced me was not the writings of Dr. Zink but a chart showing how many ligaments and tendons are connected to that front dew claw. 

I know more and more breeders who are choosing to leave them on and IMO it's a personal preference, not a big deal. If leaving dew claws on is a deal breaker for a puppy buyer, they can always find a breeder who removes them. My dogs are Chesapeakes, and I have seen a few with rear dew claws (and I would remove those, because the ones I've seen are larger and floppier than the fronts besides being a disqualifying fault) but in over 30 years no puppy I ever whelped had rear dew claws.


----------



## Tobias

I saw that diagram Julie, I also know from experience of skinning the feet of wolves and other wild canines that the dew claw is quite well attached on these species. I suspect much has to do with the tightness of the claw. Also interestingly wolves have quite long and splayed toes/feet as compared to their coyote counterparts.

Hunt'em up. I never claimed wild canines do not tear their dew claws. Only that I have never seen it myself.


----------



## Hunt'EmUp

Tobias said:


> Hunt'em up. I never claimed wild canines do not tear their dew claws. Only that I have never seen it myself.


The point I was making is you can't compare wild animals and how structures function on them, to domesticated ones that we've screwed around with. Humans select for their fancy, they are not as intelligent nor as unforgiving as nature, which only selects for what is best suited to survive. You can't expect a dog to have a nice tail or proper dew-claw structure when they've simply been cut off for generations. I'm sure we could ask those across the pond, how hard it is to find a strong functional tail, in breeds of dogs; where it was never a consideration until AR politics ruled they could no longer be docked. 

I do know that my girl with full dews has developed arthritis in her wrist, gives her a bit of a limp, when moving it. Now I don't know if this has to do with injuries she's received in that wrist due to a couple of dew-claw debacles she's had over the years. Or just from age-working, but she has her dews and she still it developed it, so I question that argument for keeping dews as well. .


----------



## NateB

Hunt'EmUp said:


> The point I was making is you can't compare wild animals and how structures function on them, to domesticated ones that we've screwed around with. Humans select for their fancy, they are not as intelligent nor as unforgiving as nature, which only selects for what is best suited to survive. You can't expect a dog to have a nice tail or proper dew-claw structure when they've simply been cut off for generations. I'm sure we could ask those across the pond, how hard it is to find a strong functional tail, in breeds of dogs; where it was never a consideration until AR politics ruled they could no longer be docked.


I agree with your premise, wild and domestic are very different and our selective breeding is not for the same traits that nature selects for. Pretty sure if dogs were wild there would no selecting for long straight lines, LOL.




Hunt'EmUp said:


> I do know that my girl with full dews has developed arthritis in her wrist, gives her a bit of a limp, when moving it. Now I don't know if this has to do with injuries she's received in that wrist due to a couple of dew-claw debacles she's had over the years. Or just from age-working, but she has her dews and she still it developed it, so I question that argument for keeping dews as well. .


Just too many variables, especially our dogs that get worked much harder and consistently than pet dogs. Makes it so hard to find the truth. And the truth may be different for different dogs. Even tougher yet...


----------



## kims

Yes... well.
I think of it this way... My child might some day dislocate and injure their thumb. I guess I should amputate my child's thumbs when they are 3 days old to prevent them ever having an injury like that? I will never buy a puppy for performance without that important digit. Yes... I know that the thumb in the human and the thumb of a dog are different... but my dog's with dews on use them all the time for turning and gripping. And yes... my older girl with dews removed... has significant arthritis in other digits and wrists. My other older dogs that had dews on... never did. I am a believer based on what I have seen with my own dogs over 20 years.


----------



## EdA

kims said:


> I will never buy a puppy for performance without that important digit.


That certainly does limit your options.


----------



## Steve Shaver

EdA said:


> That certainly does limit your options.




That is probably a good thing.


----------



## windycanyon

kims said:


> Yes.. well.
> I think of it this way.. My child might some day dislocate and injure their thumb. I guess I should amputate my child's thumbs when they are 3 days old to prevent them ever having an injury like that? I will never buy a puppy for performance without that important digit. Yes.. I know that the thumb in the human and the thumb of a dog are different.. but my dog's with dews on use them all the time for turning and gripping. And yes.. my older girl with dews removed.. has significant arthritis in other digits and wrists. My other older dogs that had dews on.. never did. I am a believer based on what I have seen with my own dogs over 20 years.


But Kim, I thought you WERE on a couple puppy lists w/ breeders last winter who remove dews???


----------



## Hunt'EmUp

NateB said:


> Just too many variables, especially our dogs that get worked much harder and consistently than pet dogs. Makes it so hard to find the truth. And the truth may be different for different dogs. Even tougher yet...


Nate It's nice to discuss things with you, I would like some hard evidence either way, I would like that on a lot of K9 related issues that are discussed here. However most of the time research relies on veterinarian case studies, from different clinics who's documentation practices are lacking, and usually comprised of very small sample sizes. In addition to that even if it somethings were somewhat "proven" in normal-pet type dogs, doesn't necessarily mean that it applies to ours dogs. 

So failing having indepth research either way, on issues like this I feel people can only do what personal history tells them is best to do with their animals. Personal history; dew-claws are trouble and I've never seen a dog with intact dew-claws, benefit or be superior in any aspect vs. dogs that do not have them. On the contrary I have lost weeks of hunting-working, healing up from dew-claw injuries, and now I'm dealing with a wrist issue which might be related to one of those injuries. 

As it took several months of rehab to get her gait back to normal, after she became hung by that dew jumping off the tail gate; and now years later it's back same location. I wish it had just torn off, it would've been better to break than sprain, because of all those ligaments up in there. So for me Dew-claws are a never again. I'm just glad that it's not $400 to get them removed. $135 is well worth it for me, just wish the breeder had done it initially.


----------



## kims

Yes.. I was. But have since changed my mind about it. Watching dogs in person and on video doing lots of different things , and what I understand about anatomy and structure as a retired Hand Specialist has tipped the scale for me. I know that others will have their own opinions. I realize that my viewpoint is not "the popular" one in the USA Retriever world. But just watching my girl with Dewclaws left on run down her bumpers at full speed and snatch it on the fly without loosing her front feet on the grass.. compared to my other girl who often slid or even would flip herself over trying to stop is evidence to me that there is a functional difference in how she uses her front feet. No worries. I am not trying to convince or change anyone's point of view.. just expressing my thoughts is all. Does anyone know what they do in Europe? Do they removed Dews on their Field dogs?


----------



## mwk56

I have had Labs live to be as old as 17 and have never had any arthritis in any of them...I should clarify that they all had dew claws removed.

Meredith


----------



## EdA

kims said:


> and what I understand about anatomy and structure as a retired Hand Specialist has tipped the scale for me. I know that others will have their own opinions.


While not wishing to belabor the point but comparing the anatomy of a human hand with a prehensile thumb to a quadriped foot which supports about 60% of the dogs body weight is quite a leap and does not meet the standard of even the murkiest of scientic observation.


----------



## kims

Yes.. of course they are different. I do wonder however that removing an entire digit even more so for an animal that weight bears on it might reduce the stability of said structure. Not only the claw and bone but supporting ligaments ARE removed. I know from personal experience that many of my patients with Thumb Amputations struggled with doing things that involved bearing weight on their involved hand. No worries... this is my last post. Thank you for your open minded discussion.


----------



## Tobias

Hunt'EmUp said:


> As it took several months of rehab to get her gait back to normal, after she became hung by that dew simply jumping off the tail gate.


jumping off the tailgate is definitely something I try not to let my dog do. Too much possibility of damage to elbows and shoulders. I am not 100% about offering assistance to my dog jumping down like this, but try to be very diligent about it.


----------



## EdA

Tobias said:


> jumping off the tailgate is definitely something I try not to let my dog do. Too much possibility of damage to elbows and shoulders. I am not 100% about offering assistance to my dog jumping down like this, but try to be very diligent about it.


One more reason to own and use one of Duane's Dogs Up Ramps, everyone in my training group use them: *http://www.canvasworksincmn.com/Dogs-Up-Ramps.html*


----------



## Hunt'EmUp

Update; Dew claws have been removed, vet decided it best to wait until the pups were 12weeks old. One pup had 2, The other had 4 (with back-ones akin to velociraptor). Price for 2=$287 Price for 4 = $487. Base price was $135 plus anesthesia ~$100. Appeared to be a rather involved procedure, obviously the 4 pup was under a lot longer, which I believe was the main reason for the price difference. 

She was still pretty out of it when picked up. Pups doing fine with their $20 hemi-stay in place for a week bandages (not sure they will last a week). Pretty much gritting my teeth at "breeder' for not removing at 3 days ($30) and saving the procedure; at the very least removing the back ones. But it is what it is, I consider the price quite reasonable for the amount of work; good job vet.


----------

