In the present studies, we have intended to compare the EDS (20% EG + 20% DMSO + 0.4 M sucrose + 10% FCS) and EDT (20% EG + 20% DMSO + 0.3 M trehalose 10% FCS) methods for vitrification of canine oocytes, in order to improve the vitrification methods. The survival rate of vitrified‐thawed oocytes using the EDS method was 15.1±1.8% (p<0.05), which was lower than that of the control group (66.7±2.5%). About 45～55% of the vitrified‐warmed oocytes showed normal morphology, as assessed by PI staining. However, the ratio of survival rate of oocytes showed lower than that of normal morphology in comparison between EDS method and control group. The survival and developmental rates of vitrified‐warmed oocytes by the EDS and EDT methods were 16.7±1.4% and 11.1±0.8% and 8.3±1.4% and 4.4±1.8%, respectively (p<0.05). The results were significantly lower than the control group (66.7±2.5% and 16.7±3.7%). However, the survival rate of vitrified‐warmed oocytes using EDS method showed higher than that in the ETS group.