Re: [PyrNet-L] Dew Claws

[JGentzel@aol.com]

In a message dated 98-06-21 19:09:49 EDT, you write:

<<  but what's
 the opinion on pet owners having their pyrs rear dew claws removed? One,
 both, or none?
  >>

Unless there is a medical reason (cannot think of any at the moment and
haven't had to do it in 25 plus years), leave them.  There is a bias,
especially with some vets to remove them.  They really do not have a valid
reason but surmise that they do.  The  Dew Claws only problem is they need
trimming, but we should attend to our dogs nails anyway.  To me its opens the
door ever so slightly that they are not required.  I would hate to see them
ever go the way of the Berger des Pyrenees, the Pyrenean Mastiff, or even the
Ackbash dog (sp?) i.e. OK to have them or not.  Essentially no one argues that
they are not important. Lets not try not to soften this concept as it has been
an area of debate by those of us "improving the breed" (sarcasm intended) for
a long time.  From a practical point of view, the evidence, if you will, of
absent or missing dew claws is then lost.  If I saw it in one breeders dogs I
would forever wonder if they ever had them all.  

Joe