|
Another
Look at Dewclaws |
|
by Fred Lanting |
Some breed magazines a few years ago carried a short article by
Doctors Foster and Smith on dewclaws. Now,
these are good vets and good businessmen as well as lovers of dogs, and besides, one of them looks a little like me, so
they must be really good, right?
However, I would like to give another side of the picture than their
surgeon’s view, that of the breeder, handler, trainer, naturalist, and
judge. These vets concluded that
dewclaws are undeveloped and serve no purpose, and on the basis of this
erroneous premise, they advocate removal.
I’m not going to play the purist here and now, as I usually do, to
insist that the word “dewclaw” should only be applied to the first digit on the
REAR limb when it exists, and that the one corresponding to a thumb should
simply be called a “first digit”. But I
AM suggesting that the first digit on the front limb IS indeed useful and
functional. I have raised and raced
Whippets, reared hundreds of my own puppies and adults, worked Shepherds in Schutzhund, handled and judged all breeds, and closely
observed all types of dogs. I am sure
that vets see some torn small digits, especially the less-developed rear ones,
but I have seen countless active dogs break through crusty snow, ice, and very
rough brush, on the sleeve in bite work, and both hunt and lure course over
broken ground with no torn first digits on the forelimb. I have also observed innumerable dogs using
that first digit in manipulating bones, sticks up to the size of logs, balls,
and other toys. I have seen many dogs
use them to get out objects that were stuck between their teeth, and even to
remove (gingerly) material from the eyelids.
I have watched them scratch their muzzles with these little claws, grasp
the Schutzhund sleeve, and do other useful,
functional things with them. I
respectfully submit that you might get a second opinion, especially from an
experienced dog trainer/breeder, if your vet wants to remove them.
The forepaw’s first digit (sometimes
called the medial digit or thumb) has inward and outward rotator muscles as
well as flexor and externsor muscles such as the pollicis brevis. They each have their own ennervation
(motor nerves serving to contract those muscles). On the other hand, the first digit (muscles,
ligaments, and bones) of the hindpaw is usually
absent. In those breeds where it is
completely developed, branches of an extensor and a flexor muscle accompany its
own muscle, the hallucis brevis, a very weak and “fleshy” organ --- so weak and
soft, in fact, that it could be said that the dog has no observable motor
control of it.
What about those true dewclaws, the ones
on the rear limbs? I agree that these
seem to be useless appendages, as I’ve never seen any muscular control over
them, even in the breeds whose standards require them to be present, such as
the Briard or Beauceron or
Great Pyrenees. I wonder what reason they
are there, too, when they have been lost from the genotype of most other
breeds, but I haven’t seen any torn-up dewclaws on such dogs as have them. I haven’t worked those breeds on sheep
flocks, so I can’t be as sure, but I tend to give at least mild approval of their
recommendations here. I can imagine these lower-to-the ground, non-prehensile claws being
snagged in very rough use, such as might accompany the injuries to the stop
pads I’ve seen in coursing hounds. Some
people have claimed that they interfere with good movement in the ring by
brushing against each other and the hock on the opposite leg, but I can tell
you I’ve seen many a true, single-tracking single- and double-dewclaw dog
moving away with no trace of interference, and I’ve never seen a movement fault
that I could attribute to the presence of those claws.
So, do you want to get rid of the ones
on the rear in your German Shepherd Dog (usually imported) or other breeds in
which the show fashion does not call for them?
Go ahead. If you wish not to be
bothered with it yourself, or if the “roots” are very developed; i.e., if the
bones in that phalange are ossified and/or there is an active growth plate,
surgery at the clinic is the way to go.
Now, I won’t suggest you do otherwise, because some reactionary
young vet might kick up some dust with accusations about practicing veterinary
medicine without a license, but I CAN tell you what I’ve seen and heard or
done, and you can take them as anecdotes rather than advice. Remember that animal husbandry, the father of
veterinary practice, is itself a timeless occupation of farmers, shepherds, and
drovers; the people who worked with their own animals and successfully treated
them were asked by their neighbors for help and
gradually became “horse doctors”.
Numerous breeders or owners today still do their own tail docking, ear
cropping, medicating, removal of gas from the belly of a colic-stricken sheep
or other animal, first aid, even minor suturing. I have neighbors
who castrate their own pigs and de-horn their own
cattle, and dairymen friends who remove dead or breech calves by reaching in up
to their armpits. Therefore, can it be
at all surprising that many dog breeders remove dewclaws themselves? They find that if it is tiny and has the appearance of being loosely attached “by a thread”,
it is easy to remove a dewclaw at home.
The typical practice is to tie a very tight knot around it, as close to
the body as possible, and on as young a dog as possible, and as the pup grows
the stricture will become relatively tighter.
Nutrient supply to the little flap is prevented, and eventually (often
in just a few days), the piece dries up and falls off. Most people use dental floss or nylon
filament, cutting the ends short enough not to be an attraction to the pup or
its dam, and long enough to see that it is still there until the operation is
complete. This is the same method used
by people who dock their own puppies’ tails, in which case the medium used is most
often a very tight rubber band: the unwanted portion of the tail simply falls off. Many prefer this to the sudden, but very
slightly traumatic surgical approach at the veterinary clinic. They claim the pup experiences only minor and
fleeting discomfort, and there is no need for sutures, usually not a drop of
blood, and no infection or bill for antibiotics and an office visit at that
time. It’s your dog, and your
choice. Make it a wise and humane one.
Incidentally, while in Germany one year
for the largest specialty show in the world, I was shown an instrument sold for
castration of pigs and sheep, but used by the breeders for docking tails also.
It looked like a pliers but had four rod-shaped “jaws” instead of two grippers.
When the handles were squeezed hard, the prongs opened (spread) the tough
elastic rubber cord into a wider circle (actually a square), and what was
before a very small-diameter O-ring was now big enough to fit over a scrotum or
tail. When the handles were relaxed, the ring came off and closed amazingly
tightly. Animals felt little or no discomfort, but lost those parts that were
no longer getting nourishment from the blood supply.
Return
Home
Copyright 2001 Fred Lanting, Canine Consulting.
Mr.GSD@juno.com. All rights reserved. Please
view his site Real GSD.
NOTE: A well-respected AKC and Schaferhund
Verein judge, Mr. Lanting
has judged in more than a dozen countries, including the prestigious FCI Asian
Show hosted by Japan Kennel Club, the Scottish Kennel Club, a Greyhound
specialty in