neutering

[kaos]

I think that a truly responsible owner CAN safely own an intact dog.... however, I think that alot of people are deluded as to their actual level of control and would be really surprised the first time the dog blows them off to find a mate... all it takes is once, why do people always want to learn the hard way?

 

I stand by my post, I think it is utterly irresponsible to go to dog parks and have an intact male unleashed around many random dogs (of whom you know nothing about) and say that you are in control of your animal and their reproductive abilities. I think that if you were to do a search of your past threads you would see many such contradictions in your posts of this nature. I don't think you are being deliberately contradictory, I think you may just not realize the reality of your situation... for example, You state that your dog is never aggressive or bitey and then proceed to say that he bites your husbands heels, that he is never aggressive but that he fights at the dog parks... you see where this is going.... he is never out of my sight except at the park....

 

The present pet over population problem is horrible right now due to that type of assumption. I think you should go to a shelter not once but several times and see the dogs waiting for homes and biding their time until they are PTS, then GO BACK and see how many are gone and how many have come in to fill it right back up again, then GO BACK AGAIN and notice how many are gone and that a whole new crop of dogs (some of them from unplanned matings from irresponsible people who thought they had control) are now in awaiting euthanasia.

 

Likewise I find it ridiculous that people think only the females should be fixed (massive surgical intervention as opposed to a pretty easy snippity snip both should be done), how ridiculous. If your dog does impregnate a bitch, it would completely hypocritical to judge the other owner as irresponsible for leaving his bitch intact, when you are doing the exact same thing. Why do people always pass the buck when it comes to responsiblity? What is it you think he will be missing out on? Unless he is the most impressive example of his breed and you have carefully researched and decided upon an appropriately stellar mate, why leave him intact?

 

I have yet to hear any one state a reasonable reason for leaving a dog intact other than that the hormones are meant to be there (hint hint to continue the propagation of the species... biological imperative), you have the example of decades of dogs who are not adversely affected by castration and spay, so what is the hold out? .... what do you know that you aren't sharing with the rest of the world and history?

Sara

[Dixie_Girl]

Hmmmm....

[Journey]

I think that a truly responsible owner CAN safely own an intact dog.... however, I think that alot of people are deluded as to their actual level of control and would be really surprised the first time the dog blows them off to find a mate... all it takes is once, why do people always want to learn the hard way?

 

 

I have yet to hear any one state a reasonable reason for leaving a dog intact other than that the hormones are meant to be there (hint hint to continue the propagation of the species... biological imperative), you have the example of decades of dogs who are not adversely affected by castration and spay, so what is the hold out? .... what do you know that you aren't sharing with the rest of the world and history?

Sara

 

And just because some here choose to or not to alter their dogs does not make some responsible and some not. I think it was Julie P that posted a bit regarding growth, the growth plates closing and length of bone - based on "when" a dog is altered. Quite a valid reason I feel.

 

I rather doubt that there are many irresponsible owners on the boards. It's a personal choice and thank gawd we live in a counrty where we still have that choice.

 

Karen

[painted_ponies]

I have yet to hear any one state a reasonable reason for leaving a dog intact other than that the hormones are meant to be there (hint hint to continue the propagation of the species... biological imperative), you have the example of decades of dogs who are not adversely affected by castration and spay, so what is the hold out? .... what do you know that you aren't sharing with the rest of the world and history?

Sara

 

In addition to the Spain article I linked in my earlier post, dealing with the effects of early spay/neuter on ligament tears, see also the following:

Non-reproductive effects of spaying and neutering

The above is a link to research associating spaying/neutering with increased levels of aggression, fearfulness, obsessive self-grooming, UTI's and vaginitis in some animals. There is also the risk associated with any surgical procedure and general anesthetic. And of course if one wants to compete in AKC conformation (not saying anyone does), then one's animals must be intact.

 

Believe me, I'm as pro spay/neuter as anyone. I work in rescue and I spend more time than I'd like in shelters evaluating and pulling dogs. And on balance, in my personal opinion, the benefits of spay/neuter outweigh the risks for the majority of animals.

 

I just think it's important to lay out all the facts on both sides of any issue. By oversimplifying or stating only one viewpoint one risks one's credibility.

[Liz P]

Certain types of cancer, hormone disorders and other diseases are MORE common in neutered dogs. With health it's a trade off. I lost a dog to cancer who might not have died had he been intact. As far as health and neutering goes, choose your poison...

 

I used to own 2 intact males and I NEVER had a problem with them being around bitches in heat. Their training was tested many times when I asked them to keep on working (off leash) and ignore the girls flirting with them. OK, so maybe they would lose focus more often when a receptive female was around, but if I told them to leave the girls alone they did. Heck, I even told an intact dog I didn't know to get off a female in heat and he did because he was well trained.

 

I also own an intact bitch, used to own 2. I've had them at lessons, clinics and trials while they were in heat. Once again, I have never had a problem. I warned people my girls were in heat, kept my dogs locked up unless they were not working and everything was fine.

 

I have 2 intact males now (different ones) and they probably won't be neutered. When they hit puberty they will be leashed until I am certain that I can call them away from a bitch in heat.

 

If a person can't control an intact dog well enough to let it off leash in public they also can't control a neutered dog well enough. Someone else already pointed out that other countries have mostly intact dogs without having a huge pet overpopulation problem. The problem is not leaving dogs intact, it's people who don't take responsibility for their pets. Most unwanted mutts at the shelter are from people who leave their female in heat alone outside and let their intact males roam. Most unwated purebreds are from BYBs, puppy mills and pet stores.

 

Neutering is just a treatment for the widespread irresponsibility in the USA. We need a cure or the pet overpopulation problem will never be solved.

[borderlicious]

Sara,

 

So you think that the hormones posessed by intact dogs are there solely for reproductive reasons and have no impact on the way the dog matures? I think Julie P.'s post was very accurate - in my observations, and that of my vet, dogs neutered early are affected by these issues. The hormones do contribute to growth, IMO.

 

Another reason for not neutering him? I didn't want to. There was no reason to. My last dog had a poor reaction to anesthesia and I decided that after his ordeal, I don't want to put my dogs down for anything that isn't absolutely necessary. Now that I have an intact female, Dakota's neuter is absolutely necessary. I don't think I was being irresponsible prior to getting him neutered, he was always under control and closely supervised, as all of my dogs (neutered or not) are.

 

I think Julie W.'s post bears repeating, too.

[Anda]

About the aggression. I never said he fights at dog parks!!! I said that he was attacked a couple of times and that he avoided any confruntation until it got to the point where he had to growl back. That's it. He never bit anyone. He is not aggressive. Playfully nipping one person, who allows it , is one thing, it's a game with rules. Rules that include the fact that he only plays this with one person. He never does that to anyone else. I think you are blowing everything out of proportion just to make your point.

 

A lot of neutered/spayed dogs show aggression. It's been shared even on this board. That's not the point.

 

I'm listening to all the opinions, and as I said, I have not yet made up my mind in regards to his "intactness". I started out with the idea that he will get neutered at 6 months. Then I read some more, and decided to let him mature. Let it go. I do not indend to fight with anyone (same as my dog doesn't fight with anyone).

 

I think a lot of people are getting too emotional on this subject, and starting to get vicious. (I'll stop here .... )

[Bill Fosher]

A-hole boy stuff I was referring to was posturing and agression. I'm not sure I care that much about peeing as long as it's outside.

[kaos]

Alrightey.

 

First off, sorry for the long time in replying, life is hectic as always, plus I really wanted to go throught the articles and links posted.

 

Now, you are absolutely correct, I didn't provide nearly enough information in my post as I should have... you see I completely agree with delaying a neuter to allow the growth plates to close on a dog who will need to maintain a high level of stamina or perfomance. I still think that spay should be before the first heat to better ward off tumours. Where as a dog with a ligment tear will be impeded in some aspects of their life, they will not be undergoing extended treatment for cancer which can potentially kill them in a fairly horrible way.

 

Journey: I think reproductive responsibility is very well defined by altering a pet that is not to be used for breeding purposes. Your example dealt with WHEN to alter the pet not IF, a point that we were both making.

 

Painted Ponies: I read through your articles, and yet I didn't see any thing that was truly worse than cancer mentioned. The hip dysplasia correlation listed only one study corrobroating that claim. The parts dealing with temperament change contain wording that is vague and more suggestive than concrete ie: "...the results of that study suggested that spayed female dogs of SOME breeds tend to be more aggressive.... " frankly I think that the manner in which the study was carried out was too subjective and less specific and controlled than I would want or be able to put much faith in, so I will continue to believe the historical proof of the past few decades with myriad female dogs being spayed and very few showing aggression directly related to spaying.

 

The part of that article that I liked was that they were looking for alternatives to surgical spay/neuter not looking to avoid controlling reproductive abilities. I for one would be over joyed if they were able to find a safe alternative to complete removal of reproductive organs and what not, Just like I wish the medical field would find some less invasive and hormonally crippling methods for human birth control!

 

But above all, I believe that in order to stop the absurd numbers of pets being PTS every day and until joe public can be properly educated in appropriate pet ownership and responsibility that these measures are justified and necessary. The surgical dangers are no less real for an older dog undergoing cancer surgery than they are for a young healthy dog under going a spay or neuter. I personally would prefer my dog undergo that sort of thing while they are spry enough to recover. Likewise the UTI's while very upsetting to both dog and owner are not usually lethal as cancer can be or lethal as a difficult pregnancy or birth or phantom pregnancy. Not to mention 20% chance of UTIs or urinary incontinence compared to the occurence of mammary cancers in unspayed bitches or testicular cancer in unneutered dogs is a pretty easy choice for me.

 

Liz. P. you mention a laundry list of side effects but do not provide names, articles or links so I cannot comment, I am sure it is true and there really are some horrible side affects but I would like to know much more about it than a vague referrence. I agree completely with what you say about the ability to control a pet in any situation regardless of its reproductive status, however, I think that level of control is by far the exception and not the rule. To say that an intact dog in your hands is well controlled may be a far cry from most people from the general public as well from this board, myself included. I agree that neutering is a treatment and that until the general public can be better educated and the issue is given the attention it requires, it is a very necessary one that should not be blown off because.." I don't want to!".

 

Borderlicious: I apologize again, I neglected to make known my thoughts on early neutering. I think it is a necessary evil that shelters and resucers MUST do in order to not contribute to the problem they are trying to rectify. I think for average owners who recognize the difficulties associated with spay/neuter that waiting until the growth plates have closed or just before the first heat is fine as long as appropriate care is taken to ensure that their dog is under control at all times. Having had a pet have a poor reaction to anaesthesia is scary and would obivously lead to some trepidation on your behalf, completely understandable. However, each dog is different and what happened with one is no guarantee it will happen with the next, the surgeries are still worthwhile and necessary. Good for you for recognizing the need for it and overcoming your fears, it must have been difficult.

 

Anda: I am sorry you feel I am blowing every thing out of proportion just to make my point, that was not my intent. I do feel you need to take a look at your situation and truthfully answer if he is under control at all times (the bitch in heat at the park comment for example, if you bring an intact male, why do you assume no one would bring an intact female?) I do not want to fight with you either, and you are right it is easy to get very emotional about the subject. I, for one, am very passionate about the subject especially when I interpret some one as being flippant about it (" duck and cover" "throw stones here") I however, am not on the front lines, I just volunteer occassionaly when my schedule allows, I can't imagine how emotional the true rescuers and shelter workers must get. You say you haven't made any decisions, I would just ask that you continue to think about it and ensure that your dog is under control at all times and that you don't leave any thing to chance.

 

Sara

[Liz P]

http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html

 

Start with that link. There are hundreds of studies if you take the time to look for them.

[kaos]

The cancer stats were certainly cause for concern, however, since cancer stats (for different cancers) ,are very similar without a spay, are similarly frightening and spay surgery also prevents more dogs from being carelessly produced, I think the spay still wins for me.

 

These studies all seem to referrence each other, do you have one handy that doesn't substaniate itself by quoting the same studies over and over? As well alot of the studies had to do with early spay and neuters, which I believe we have all some what agreed upon or atleast agreed to disagree.

 

Apart from stats on two possible incidents of cancer, this study hasn't said any thing different from painted ponies, I can't say that this sort of thing would sway my opinion, is there perhaps a better study that you found persuasive that you could direct me to?

Sara