dew claws?

[LeeM 0]

my pals bich is not long out the vet she never had them dun [bANNED TEXT] she was a pup and cot and had to pay to get it taken of its another thing to go rong

[mooney1 120]

I spoke to my vet about whether my lurcher's dew claws should be removed and she explained that it varies from dog to dog. Some dogs' dew claws are held on loosely by nothing more than a flap of skin, so serve little functional purpose and can be removed to prevent injuries when they snag and tear. Other dogs' dew claws are much stronger and can be used by the dogs when turning with less likelihood of injury, and in these cases (including my pup) she said it's worth keeping the dew claws if possible.

 

I try to take what vets say with a pinch of salt, but seeing as my vet was turning dowm money by telling me to keep my pup's dew claws then I'm thinking I should take her comments seriously

 

atb, Joe

not saying your lying or anything like that pal, but i bred a litter of pups and asked the vets advise and he said have them off if we were going to work the pups as they will cause lameness thruought their working lives ,or leave them on if they were going to be pets atb mooney

[Malt 379]

I spoke to my vet about whether my lurcher's dew claws should be removed and she explained that it varies from dog to dog. Some dogs' dew claws are held on loosely by nothing more than a flap of skin, so serve little functional purpose and can be removed to prevent injuries when they snag and tear. Other dogs' dew claws are much stronger and can be used by the dogs when turning with less likelihood of injury, and in these cases (including my pup) she said it's worth keeping the dew claws if possible.

 

I try to take what vets say with a pinch of salt, but seeing as my vet was turning dowm money by telling me to keep my pup's dew claws then I'm thinking I should take her comments seriously

 

atb, Joe

not saying your lying or anything like that pal, but i bred a litter of pups and asked the vets advise and he said have them off if we were going to work the pups as they will cause lameness thruought their working lives ,or leave them on if they were going to be pets atb mooney

Well my vet said exactly the same as Joe's when I enquired about having my pups taken out, about some being flappy and some being strong.

 

She said they'll remove them if they are a problem when the dog actually starts working. Until then, I'll keep them trimmed and hope for the best.

[mooney1 120]

hope everything goes ok with the pup pal

[Malt 379]

hope everything goes ok with the pup pal

Cheers mate, he's coming up one now, so we'll soon see if the vet's right!

[TOMO 26,121]

i cant understand any one that keeps them on. if there damaged they will cause problems , and cost money, when they could just be removed when young.

 

they serve no purpose , and are like our own coxic , at the end of our spine , or our apendix, no use.

 

there are lots of body parts on difrent animals, that serve no purpose throwback to pre historic times . or that the animal has evolved and no longer needs them

[stabba 10,745]

Dew claws are a fcukin nightmare if not removed. Even if the dog is kept as a pet they will still cause problems. Take them off while they are still in the nest otherwise you are in for a shit load of vet bills or long lay offs. atb stabba

[craigyboy 1,274]

id say remove em as they serve no purpose but saying that ive never owned a dog without em and to date have never had any problems,just bloody lucky i guess...touch wood

[mick h 181]

mate take them 0ff at 3 to 4 days,other wise the dogs spend more time laid up than actually working.don't for get these greyhound people only run nice flat grass straits and sand bends, so they don't get knocked up much. were most lurchers have have to run 20 to 30 rabbits on the lamp on all terrain . and day dogs could run a few mile in a 3 or 4 minute chase on stubble,on plough up roads, over gates. so take them off.