# A position on spaying and neutering.



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

httop2://time4dogs.blogspot.com/2014/01/dont-spay-or-neuter-your-pets.html


Thursday, January 23, 2014
DON'T Spay or Neuter Your Pets!
We shouldn't be listening to the Bob Barkers of the world.

Two significant new studies were released in 2013 on the adverse health effects of spay-neuter. This adds to a large body of previous information.

A study on Golden Retrievers done by UC Davis revealed some SHOCKING facts about what we are doing to our canine companions when we neuter them.

"The study examined hip dysplasia, cranial cruciate ligament tear, lymphosarcoma, hemangiosarcoma, and mast cell tumor...... The disease rates for ALL FIVE diseases were significantly HIGHER in both males and females that were neutered either early or late, compared with that of sexually intact dogs. Specifically, early neutering was associated with an increase in the occurrence of hip dysplasia, cranial cruciate ligament tear, and lymphosarcoma in males and in the occurrence of cranial cruciate ligament tear in females."

"In most areas, the findings of this study were consistent with that of earlier studies, suggesting similar increases in disease risks. The UC-Davis study, however, is the first to specifically report an increased risk of mast cell tumors and hemangiosarcoma with late neutering."

"Furthermore, the new study showed a 100 percent increase in the incidence of hip dysplasia among early-neutered males."

Read all about it in the AVMA Journal:

https://www.avma.org/News/JAVMANews/Pages/130401s.aspx

The study report:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0055937


Golden Retrievers are one of the most popular breeds in the US, and the vast majority are going to end up as sterilized pets.

Why are we as a society setting up our dogs for pain and early death? Are YOU inflicting pain and suffering on your dog by spaying or neutering, just so you can feel morally superior and politically correct?



Now here's the other major study, just released. It's a retrospective done on literally THOUSANDS of Vizslas.

The study showed that, regardless of the age at the time of neutering, altered dogs had "significantly increased odds of developing mast cell cancer, lymphoma, all other cancers, all cancers combined, and fear of storms, compared with the odds for sexually intact dogs."

Female Vizslas spayed (regardless of age) had "significantly increased odds of developing hemangiosarcoma, compared with the odds for sexually intact dogs" as did males spayed AFTER the age of 1 year.

The study concluded that spay/neuter when done prior to six months old "significantly increased odds of developing a behavioral disorder."

"The younger the age at gonadectomy, the earlier the mean age at diagnosis of mast cell cancer, cancers other than mast cell, hemangiosarcoma, lymphoma, all cancers combined, a behavioral disorder, or fear of storms."

Translation: The sooner the neuter is done, the sooner your dog will likely develop a health or behavioral problem.

http://avmajournals.avma.org/doi/abs/10.2460/javma.244.3.309

Of course, for followers of this blog, none of this is earth-shattering news. We've posted many previous studies that come to the same conclusion. For more information , do a search on the blog for the label "spay/neuter" or "rethinking spay and neuter".

Don't pretend you're spaying and neutering to keep your dog healthy....because, in most situations, you're NOT.


----------



## Doggle (Sep 5, 2013)

Thank you for this informative post. I have had two females spayed before, one after her first heat and the other at about 5 months, before her first heat. Neither dog seems to have been adversely affected. 

BUT I had my male dog neutered at age 4. It was the wrong thing to do. It was a horrible catastrophe. Initially everything seemed normal, then he started gaining wait uncontrollably until he was clearly much too heavy. Much worse, his hormones were extremely f***ed up. He had always been a wonderful dog- lively, confident, handsome. Shortly after his neutering, he lost a tremendous amount of vitality. He looked and felt very depressed every day. Only by using my knowledge of herbal medicine was I able to turn things around somewhat. I could not get his weight down, but some of his old personality came back with herbal hormonal therapy. 

I will never, ever have a male dog neutered again. I have read other similar accounts online. Heartbroken caretakers just wanting their neutered male dog to feel like himself again.

ENOUGH LIES. Neutering can irreversibly ruin your pet's life. NEVER AGAIN.


----------



## spotted nikes (Feb 7, 2008)

Doggle said:


> Thank you for this informative post. I have had two females spayed before, one after her first heat and the other at about 5 months, before her first heat. Neither dog seems to have been adversely affected.
> 
> BUT I had my male dog neutered at age 4. It was the wrong thing to do. It was a horrible catastrophe. Initially everything seemed normal, then he started gaining wait uncontrollably until he was clearly much too heavy. Much worse, his hormones were extremely f***ed up. He had always been a wonderful dog- lively, confident, handsome. Shortly after his neutering, he lost a tremendous amount of vitality. He looked and felt very depressed every day. Only by using my knowledge of herbal medicine was I able to turn things around somewhat. I could not get his weight down, but some of his old personality came back with herbal hormonal therapy.
> 
> ...


I think the problem with the studies is that they are using dogs where inbreeding/genetic issues are common. Isn't there something like a 65% chance that Golden Retrievers develop cancer? Also, the intact dogs of that breed are probably better specimens 9show dogs/working dogs) than the ones that were neutered early (pet quality/spay neuter contracts due to not being breeding quality/BYB dogs/Puppy mill dogs. So you would naturally have more problems with them than the show quality unaltered/breeding quality ones who's parents were health tested.

FWIW, the last 2 dogs I owned that were neutered lived to be 17 and 18 yrs old, respectively. The 17 yr old was a Husky, heeler, germ shep mix, and the other was a chow/border collie mix. The 17 yr old was neutered at 6 mo, and was still playing Frisbee 3 mo before he died. The 18 yr old was neutered at 7 yrs of age.
My current dogs are all spayed and neutered. My Germ shep/Boxer mix is approx. 13/14 yrs, and was spayed at 1 yr. She's been completely healthy and is just now getting arthritic. My Chow mix is approx. 11, and was neutered at 6. No problems and very active and healthy. My 8 yr old Cocker was neutered at 6 mo and has been completely healthy.
Personally, I don't have a lot of faith in those studies. 
When you compare the risks of spay/neuter VS the number of dogs euthanized every yr in shelters due to irresponsible breeding, I think any supposed neuter/spaying risks are worth it.


----------



## Kayota (Aug 14, 2009)

i would rather get my dog spayed than risk pregnancy or pyometra or uterine cancer.


----------



## Foresthund (Jul 17, 2013)

My dog is intact,but I do think its best for some people to get them neutered. 
I would likely late spay any females I have,and although I want to keep males intact if I get one from a rescue or some breeders I know it's not a option.
I think having my male Rott intact helps his drive and weight stay intact. I remember my neutered female Malamute mix that only lived to 8,despite plenty of exercise and not being fed much she was overweight and not that playful. Still energetic enough though. I also heard keeping them intact helps build more muscle on their back preventing injuries.
The test with Rottweilers said that females if left intact for the first 6 years live longer,but I may not be able to wait more than one or two heats with my own. I keep going for males anyways.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

On a population level, I think altering is a beneficial policy. The more people I meet, the more I realize most people can't handle intact dogs (or many other things). On an individual level, I think each person should make a decision based on a realistic evaluation of their specific situation.


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

cookieface said:


> On a population level, I think altering is a beneficial policy. The more people I meet, the more I realize most people can't handle intact dogs (or many other things). On an individual level, I think each person should make a decision based on a realistic evaluation of their specific situation.


I like how you put this cookieface, and I agree with you completely. 
I've read the articles before this (except about the Vizlas). I don't like how the blog is really sensationalizing the anti-speuter stance, and somewhat demonizing the idea of altering pets. My personal stance is, wait a year, two if possible, especially for larger breeds....basically wait until they are full grown. I've read the arguments about growth plates not closing properly, hormones affecting size and shape of the body and being necessary for development. Those arguments make sense to me, so I'm all for waiting as long as possible, but like cookieface says, most people can't handle intact dogs (some not even for a year!)...."realistic evaluation of their specific situation", definitely a better way to go.


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

there are vets in my area refusing to neuter males before fully grown...I work in the "pet" dog industry and I am seeing a LOT of incredibly frustrated owners recently with intact males that cannot handle them and look like they are going to fall apart everytime I see them, they are seriously near tears counting down the days till they can neuter their dog. more intact males makes my job harder as well. I honestly despise this anti neuter movement. if "dog people" can handle them fine suit yourself but what I am seeing is the general public and they clearly can't.


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

cookieface said:


> On a population level, I think altering is a beneficial policy. The more people I meet, the more I realize most people can't handle intact dogs (or many other things). On an individual level, I think each person should make a decision based on a realistic evaluation of their specific situation.


I concur. Working in a pet store then a daycare has taught me a lot about dog owners. 95% of them have no idea what they are doing. I had a young woman come in and ask if female dogs could get periods. How do you not know about heat cycles?! All animals go into heat at some point!!! I swiftly directed her to low cost speuter clinic and the doggy diaper section. The amount of uncontrollable dogs a daycare is... Messed up. 25% of the people bring their dog in off leash with 0 control over them. 

Merlin is intact. He is friendly and gets to play with the other dogs. He is a tad on the shy side but I'm working on his confidence levels. I don't think I'll be neutering him anytime soon as he will hopefully be a long lived sport dog.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

cookieface said:


> On a population level, I think altering is a beneficial policy. The more people I meet, the more I realize most people can't handle intact dogs (or many other things). On an individual level, I think each person should make a decision based on a realistic evaluation of their specific situation.


I agree with this as well. Provide people with the correct information, and let them make the choice that makes the most sense for them and their lifestyle.

Let's face it, MANY dog owners are barely vigilant enough to responsibly own a dog period, let alone an intact one. I'm not trying to hate on the 'average' dog owner but it's just the truth.


----------



## jade5280 (Feb 20, 2013)

Great info. Our vet said that the average age to neuter was 5-6 months. It doesn't sit right with me to cut off certain hormones during a crucial growing period. I'm going to wait until around a year to get our boy neutered. I've seen lots of intact male dogs around here and I've never noticed much of a difference in the behavior of neutered vs un neutered dogs.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> Are YOU inflicting pain and suffering on your dog by spaying or neutering, just so you can feel morally superior and politically correct?


Um, yeah, that's why people do it, instead of preventing unwanted/ill-advised pregnancies :/.

Women who have had children (the more the better) have MUCH lower incidences of reproductive cancers. It's a huge protective effect. Unused female reproductive organs get cranky. I'm going to assume the same is true of dogs and probably all mammals, although I'm not sure if any dog studies have considered that factor. Problem: so what? We can't let every dog have a litter---what would we do with the puppies? Killing many dogs to maybe increase the lifespan of one dog seems, um, counterproductive. 

Same with not spaying/neutering---what are the alternatives? Being that half of American human pregnancies are unintended, I'm going to say that maybe preventing pregnancies is a not a strong suit.


----------



## Shep (May 16, 2013)

Doggy-Thoughts-ICP said:


> I cannot comment on the medical side because I'm not an experienced Veterinarian or Scientist. I would like to respond to the comments regarding behavior. Why is it that ALL of the most highly respected Canine Behaviorist/CABB in the world like Dr. Ian Dunbar, Dr. Patricia McConnell, Jean Donaldson, John Rogerson and among many many others ALL strongly advocate spaying and neutering. Two of these individuals (Dunbar, McConnell) are Scientist in Canine Behavior/Cognition, which I have personally heard them speak (seminars) adamantly for S/N, especially neutering males! As far as behavior goes, I would stick with listening to the true authorities in this matter and not a few studies


It's true that most behaviorists recommend spay/neuter, but it's also true that these studies that question it are pretty recent, and some canine experts are beginning to change their minds. Patricia McConnell had a blog entry on this subject several months ago: http://www.patriciamcconnell.com/theotherendoftheleash/2013/06


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

cookieface said:


> On a population level, I think altering is a beneficial policy. The more people I meet, the more I realize most people can't handle intact dogs (or many other things). On an individual level, I think each person should make a decision based on a realistic evaluation of their specific situation.


Totally agree with this as well.

Watson is my first intact dog and overall I'm very happy with him. I do have moments where I wonder if he would be easier to manage if he were neutered though. He can be a little obsessive about other dogs and smelling them, which I think is related to sexual maturity. He also seems to piss other dogs off and I wonder if it's related to being intact since it's typically the neutered males who have an issue with him, not females (intact or not). So I do think there are behavioral components that some people would find difficult to live with, but it's really hard to tell what is just his personality vs hormones.


----------



## Sarah~ (Oct 12, 2013)

I got Xena spayed at 6 months and she's had a lot of health problems since then, but the vet thinks her incontinence started before the spay and I'm sure getting spayed didn't give her epilepsy or allergies... But the spay did make her incontinence worse. She just turned a year old so I can't really say I regret having her spayed, I just did it to keep her from getting pregnant, it seemed easier than getting Eko neutered. Like I could get him fixed but any random stray dog could get her so get her fixed and there is no problem.

Still debating on getting Eko neutered... He will be 2 in 2 weeks and I just don't know if I want to. He is very healthy but has a ton of temperament issues, I don't think getting him neutered will automatically fix everything.


----------



## greenmaria (Oct 9, 2013)

Wow, I am totally ignorant about this issue! I sort of assumed that, unless you're breeding dogs, you would have them "fixed." I can't image having an unaltered dog in *my* life situation: busy household, small home, urban neighborhood, three kids, lots of activity, etc. 

But if others prefer and can handle unaltered dogs, I think that's okay too. But that "can handle" part is important. I have read (though correct me if I'm wrong) that the majority of dog attacks have been committed by unaltered dogs. If true, I think that's an interesting and important fact.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

greenmaria said:


> Wow, I am totally ignorant about this issue! I sort of assumed that, unless you're breeding dogs, you would have them "fixed." I can't image having an unaltered dog in *my* life situation: busy household, small home, urban neighborhood, three kids, lots of activity, etc.


Females are a bit different, but it's honestly not a second more work to handle a single intact male. I wouldn't let any dog run around outside unsupervised, so getting random neighborhood dogs pregnant isn't really an issue. A female is really only more work because heats can be annoying. And of course, having intact dogs of each gender can create more work or stress when the female is in heat.



> But if others prefer and can handle unaltered dogs, I think that's okay too. But that "can handle" part is important. I have read (though correct me if I'm wrong) that the majority of dog attacks have been committed by unaltered dogs. If true, I think that's an interesting and important fact.



I think that's a case of correlation more than causation. People who don't take good care of their dogs, manage them around children, or train them, may be more likely to leave them intact. It's not necessarily that intact dogs are inherently more aggressive to people. I don't know any intact dogs who have bitten, because they're mostly owned by show people and selected for their good temperaments. I know plenty of altered dogs who have bitten people.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

cookieface said:


> On a population level, I think altering is a beneficial policy. The more people I meet, the more I realize most people can't handle intact dogs (or many other things). On an individual level, I think each person should make a decision based on a realistic evaluation of their specific situation.


I should clarify that I'm speaking from an American perspective. From what I've read, folks in (some) other countries seem to be able to manage their intact dogs without having large numbers of unplanned litters.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

cookieface said:


> From what I've read, folks in (some) other countries seem to be able to manage their intact dogs without having large numbers of unplanned litters.


Possibly. BUT, I've heard from people who live in such countries that doing away with neonates is considered an acceptable option, so that there may be just as many unintended pregnancies, just fewer live babies .

So, yeah, still comes down to, what are the alternatives?


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

Willowy said:


> Possibly. BUT, I've heard from people who live in such countries that doing away with neonates is considered an acceptable option, so that there may be just as many unintended pregnancies, just fewer live babies .
> 
> So, yeah, still comes down to, what are the alternatives?


That may be true - I really don't know enough to make a general statement about altering animals in other countries. I was simply stating that my thoughts were based on an American perspective and the large number of posts here about "accidental" pregnancies.


----------



## BernerMax (Mar 15, 2013)

Just wanted to say that, like Doggle, the neuter at 17months of Berner Max, really did change his vitality level, he put on THIRTY pounds and we have not been able to get them off-- I just had 5weeks off and walked him DAILY-- results- zilch. He is still fat. (we have 2 other dogs and he is very conniving around ways to get extra tidbits etc...).... He does seem depressed though just fat and sedate but its a shame he was so active lean and vital before the neuter (well he was acting up a bit but now I feel like maybe we could have worked through it)...

We will try to leave our Pyr- Anatolian pup intact.... He seems to have a lot of testorone-- lots of protective behavior, and marking etc... though....


Also our last male dog (before these two) we had neutered at 5 months (didnt know any better) and he had 2 TPLOs....one at age 3 and then 5.


----------



## prntmkr (Jan 17, 2009)

JohnnyBandit said:


> DON'T Spay or Neuter Your Pets!
> We shouldn't be listening to the Bob Barkers of the world...
> Don't pretend you're spaying and neutering to keep your dog healthy....because, in most situations, you're NOT.


Don't try to confuse us with the facts, Johnny.
We know what we know ... besides which, 
Bob Barker would never have lied to us!

As for me, I'll keep our boy intact but,

I suspect that your average "Price is Right" viewers
:clap2: :rockon: :wave: :whoo: op2: :eyebrows: :bounce: :wave: :wink: :clap2: 

are better off spaying/neutering their dogs.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

prntmkr said:


> I suspect that your average "Price is Right" viewers
> :clap2: :rockon: :wave: :whoo: op2: :eyebrows: :bounce: :wave: :wink: :clap2:
> 
> are better off spaying/neutering their dogs.


My husband loves Price is Right for some odd reason. Not that he watches it anymore, but he loves it. lol It's the strangest thing.


----------



## dilbert (Nov 1, 2008)

Kayota said:


> i would rather get my dog spayed than risk pregnancy or pyometra or uterine cancer.


IMHO, from the extensive research I have done on this subject, the most ideal path/protocol that address both those concerns is:

Vasectomy/Tubal Ligation early (removes pregnancy concern, but owners of bitches still need to manage heat cycles)
Spade/Neuter late - such as age 3 (need to dig through my notes to recall what the most common recommendation was, but I think it was 3)

This seems to give a balance between the health risks of spaying/neutering too early and the health risks of not spaying neutering at all. And step 1 removes pregnancy concerns. 

A major hurdle in that protocol is that Vasectomy & Tubal Ligation procedures are not taught in vet schools and very few vets know how to do the procedure. But for truly responsible owners, step 1 could be replaced with "manage your dog and don't let him/her breed". But as a society, I think we need to move toward step 1 being available since too many owners let their dogs roam, or would take a bitch in heat to the dog park.

Also, for shelters, this is unfortunately impractical since given the close quarters they have, they can not have bitches in heat in the shelter.


----------



## Kyllobernese (Feb 5, 2008)

I had Susie spayed at six months and have fought with her weight ever since. I had never had a spayed female before her and just went along with the Vet when they said six months. She is ten years old now so I don't think it has shortened her life as Bernese are not noted for being too long lived. My two male Shih Tzu x Maltese are not neutered and won't be as I see no reason to do it. Remmy has competed in Agility with no problems being not neutered.

Kris, I went through one season with her, no problem but I did get her spayed at 13 months, more for my convenience as I want to compete with her in Agility and Rally and seasons always seem to come at the wrong time and I have never had any intention of breeding her.

I think for most people spaying the females is probably the smartest thing to do, males I do not see where there is a need to. My two males get along and they also got along with my sister's non-neutered male and other male dogs they have come in contact with.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> I had Susie spayed at six months and have fought with her weight ever since


I'm not sure if female hormones play a part in weight control. I mean, a dog in heat may go off her feed and of course pregnancy and nursing burn calories, but on average. The fattest dog I've ever known was an unspayed female. You could have rolled her . I know testosterone burns calories just sitting around but I'm just not sure about girls. . .


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs (Jun 3, 2007)

Willowy said:


> I'm not sure if female hormones play a part in weight control. I mean, a dog in heat may go off her feed and of course pregnancy and nursing burn calories, but on average. The fattest dog I've ever known was an unspayed female. You could have rolled her . I know testosterone burns calories just sitting around but I'm just not sure about girls. . .


I know plenty of females that had no weight problems until they were spayed. One of mine included, who was spayed at 4. Not sure why it happens.. but it sure does..

To get back to topic, I stand by what I said last time there was a spay/neuter topic. The average person is not responsible or educated enough to own an intact dog. Just imagining all of the U.S. having unfixed dogs everywhere... oh the chaos. I will always choose to have my girls spayed, but it's for convenience. I will not argue that it is healthier for a male dog to stay intact.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Heh, I've always had trouble keeping weight on my girls . Especially Willow, but she was a bad eater. I always figured the supposed weight gain was because spaying is usually done right around maturity when their metabolism changes. . .but I suppose at age 4 that's not a thing.

I did have to cut Moose's food in half after he was neutered. Which was not a bad thing; before that he was eating 8 cups a day! But I do know that neutering a male definitely lowers his metabolism and caloric needs. I just haven't personally seen it in girls. For females I think it's just an individual thing whether she keeps weight on or not, regardless of spay status.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

spotted nikes said:


> I think the problem with the studies is that they are using dogs where inbreeding/genetic issues are common. Isn't there something like a 65% chance that Golden Retrievers develop cancer? .


You are wrong about the problem... And cancer is high in Goldens.... But.... Separate out the intact dogs from the altered dogs..... Something amazing happens.... Cancer rates for intact dogs alone is less than 15 percent..... And cancer rates for the altered dogs pushes 90 percent.....


Look up the Rottweiler study..... Altering a Rottie is like saying yes I want my dog to get cancer...


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Kayota said:


> i would rather get my dog spayed than risk pregnancy or pyometra or uterine cancer.



That statement is about like saying, I am going to treat this person with mild asthma so I can run them over in my car.....


1) Your bitch will NOT get pregnant if you are responsible. 

2) I have been around intact and breeding dogs, hunting dogs etc for all of my 46 years. Yet I hear more about pyometra on a week on this forum than I have in my entire life.. . But in the off chance your dog got it, well it is treatable.

3) A minor risk on a treatable cancer.

Alter a bitch and your trade the above depending on the breed or mix, a VERY HIGH chance of.....

1) Osteo Sarcoma 

2) Sarcoma of the heart muscle.

Among other things....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

cookieface said:


> On a population level, I think altering is a beneficial policy.


What proof do you have that altering dogs reduces the population?


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> What proof do you have that altering dogs reduces the population?


 What proof do you have that it doesn't? 

That's kind of a weird position to take---remove the reproductive ability of a significant percentage of the population, but that doesn't affect birth rate/population? 

And I absolutely don't believe that 90% of the altered dog population gets cancer. That hasn't been my experience at all. Although if you live long enough I suppose something will happen. . .the cause of death on my grandpa's 98-year-old cousin's death certificate was listed as "uterine cancer" and "lung cancer" even though nobody knew she had either until the autopsy and she died of, um, being 98.


----------



## Adjecyca1 (Jul 25, 2010)

Breeding or not i personally do not want to fix anymore of my dogs at all, BUT i do not have an issue with others doing it if they feel they cannot prevent and unwanted pregnancy


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> What proof do you have that it doesn't?


I don't have any proof that it does not.... But I have plenty of proof it is BAD for the health of dogs. 


But those that advocate spay and neuter at a means of population control have no proof either. 

So they want you to do something that is unhealthy for your dog as a means of controlling the over all population, yet they cannot prove to you it, will reduce said population....





Willowy said:


> .the cause of death on my grandpa's 98-year-old cousin's death certificate was listed as "uterine cancer" and "lung cancer" even though nobody knew she had either until the autopsy and she died of, um, being 98.


You are going to use the death certificate of a woman that lived nearly 20 years past the average age for women as an example of what? That keeping her uterus allowed her to live 20 years longer than the life expectancy of women?


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> You are going to use the death certificate of a woman that lived nearly 20 years past the average age for women as an example of what? That keeping her uterus allowed her to live 20 years longer than the life expectancy of women?


 No. . .my only point on that was that if you live long enough, they're probably going to find cancer during your autopsy. Cancer is sort of ubiquitous.

Seriously, I know tons of dogs who would get pregnant or cause pregnancy if not altered. I'm thinking that would cause a bit of a population spike. Also that during the 50s, 60s, 70s, before altering pets was popular, shelters killed way more animals and a lot of people drowned puppies.


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs (Jun 3, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I don't have any proof that it does not.... But I have plenty of proof it is BAD for the health of dogs.
> 
> 
> But those that advocate spay and neuter at a means of population control have no proof either.
> ...


All I need is craigslist for proof. In a perfect world, nobody but super responsible people will have dogs and leave them intact. Currently, there are too many dogs floating around for that to be the case.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

ForTheLoveOfDogs said:


> All I need is craigslist for proof. In a perfect world, nobody but super responsible people will have dogs and leave them intact. Currently, there are too many dogs floating around for that to be the case.



All Craiglist proves is some people are irresponsible


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> Seriously, I know tons of dogs who would get pregnant or cause pregnancy if not altered. I'm thinking that would cause a bit of a population spike. Also that during the 50s, 60s, 70s, before altering pets was popular, shelters killed way more animals and a lot of people drowned puppies.



You do not know if a particular dog would become pregnant if it was intact.... Pure assumption to support your mindset.

I was hoping you would bring up the 50-60- and 70's

Aside from the speuter movement what else has changed in that time?


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

Willowy said:


> No. . .my only point on that was that if you live long enough, they're probably going to find cancer during your autopsy. Cancer is sort of ubiquitous.


Yes, you are right on that point....there are some kinds of cancer that are practically inevitable if the person lives long enough....likely true of dogs as well....



Willowy said:


> Seriously, I know tons of dogs who would get pregnant or cause pregnancy if not altered. I'm thinking that would cause a bit of a population spike. Also that during the 50s, 60s, 70s, before altering pets was popular, shelters killed way more animals and a lot of people drowned puppies.


You took the thought out of my mind. There are TONS of oops pregnancies because of inattentive (or ignorant) owners, I'm betting that without the push for spay/neuter there would be lots more....though no, I don't have any numbers on that, I don't think they exist, but the point about times prior to altering becoming common/popular is a very very solid point (I'd almost bet that dog ownership numbers have gone up too...which would also suggest that altering is preventing unwanted litters). 

I do agree with JohnnyBandit though, altering is not the most healthy thing for an animal.....I completely respect that point, though I don't think that once they are full grown it is the most detrimental thing in the world (especially the possibility of preventing pyometria in an unbred female). 

There is one rumor about altering, particularly neutering, that I wish would end. It seems that there are people out there (and I'm not talking about people here necessarily) that insist that it solves behavioral problems, if a dog is DA..."get him neutered, he'll calm down", if he is hyper "neuter", if he is nippy "neuter", if he guards toys "neuter". Sure, maybe it does mellow some dogs a little bit but really, I know of people who seem to consider surgery as a viable and acceptable alternative to training! I refused to neuter Dexter until we had dealt with some of his issues, and I was called irresponsible and ignorant for it, and accused of not caring for him. The fact that there are people out there that think surgery is a solution for behavior, or even a blanket solution for potential medical problems do need to shake their heads a bit. There are up and down sides to it, and it should be a personal and carefully weighed decision based on solid information not rumors and publicity campaigns. (ok, I'll stop ranting now lol)

Basically, I think what I'm trying to say is it isn't a black and white issue, while some can live well and responsibly with an intact dog, not everyone can (sure....maybe they should, but there are worse things a person can do to an animal than spay/neuter, it is far better than neglect IMO).


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Greater Swiss said:


> Yes, you are right on that point....there are some kinds of cancer that are practically inevitable if the person lives long enough....likely true of dogs as well....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



In my time as a trainer.... I feel that if you have an aggressive dog and alter it... IF it does anything it will ramp him up a bit....Will not calm him down that is for sure...

And aggression is a symptom of low testosterone in most mammals.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> You do not know if a particular dog would become pregnant if it was intact.... Pure assumption to support your mindset.
> 
> I was hoping you would bring up the 50-60- and 70's
> 
> Aside from the speuter movement what else has changed in that time?


When my mom's dog has escaped for the 10th time that week. . .I'm pretty sure they couldn't keep her in while in heat either. 

And, yeah, you've made the argument before about leash laws. Which, made evident from a zillion other posts on this forum, everybody breaks. No, dogs don't run loose as much as they did before, but they still aren't totally confined.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> When my mom's dog has escaped for the 10th time that week. . .I'm pretty sure they couldn't keep her in while in heat either.
> 
> And, yeah, you've made the argument before about leash laws. Which, made evident from a zillion other posts on this forum, everybody breaks. No, dogs don't run loose as much as they did before, but they still aren't totally confined.


So you are saying the cultural changes, changes in leash laws etc have not curtailed unwanted litters? But speutering has? 

You have nothing to support that.


If your mom's dog escapes 10 times in a week, she is not a responsible owner....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

As much as some would have us believe that it is a given that an intact bitch will get pregnant.... 

Let us look at facts a minute....

Lets say a bitch lives to be 11 years old.....She lives her entire life intact.... That is 4015 days of life...

IF she comes into heat the first time at 8 months....

She will have about 85 days in her ENTIRE that she could possibly get pregnant. 
Give or take 5 days or so...

That equals 2 percent of her life in which a bitch can become pregnant. And to do that she has to be around an intact male and they have to breed. 

So if someone tells me they cannot manage an intact bitch, they are telling me that they cannot manage the dog for 2 percent of her life. 
It is TWO PERCENT of their lives...


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

And yet. . .how many unwanted litters are there?

I won't make comments on my parents' responsibility levels on dogkeeping, but no pet of theirs has ever reproduced, they live indoors, and they get good food and vet care. Which is kind of a step above a lot of pet owners. And my mother is even more absent-minded than I am .

(and this dog escaped even more often with her previous owner. . .so not like everybody else is so much more responsible)


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> That equals 2 percent of her life in which a bitch can become pregnant. And to do that she has to be around an intact male and they have to breed.


 Wow, awesome point and awesome breakdown of it!!
Unfortunately, lots of people don't handle that 2 percent well....and on top of that, there is the intact male (and their owners) to worry about, the owner of a female dog can try to be responsible, but man, they can be quick! 

When Caeda was in her first heat there was a male that came from about 5km down the highway and was hanging around. We chased him off, talked to his owner even and asked him to keep him contained. We hadn't seen him for a while. We went to let her out (tether, to play in the yard with her, she wasn't about to be let off leash, but we still went out to play with her on the line), checked out the windows, coast was clear, opened the door, hooked her up. Turned to slide the door shut.........then there was the whimper from Caeda, he must have been in the woods, about 30 feet away from the back of the house when we checked. It wasn't even 5 seconds that she wasn't being actively stared at and there he was.......with about 8 inches of yellow rope tied to his collar. 

He got her another time too....she was IN THE HOUSE, behind a very heavy sliding glass door (our only one), our landlord never had a lock on the door (yep....seriously, we had asked, but he hadn't provided). We got home, the door was open and Caeda wasn't there. She did come when we called though, happily covered in doggie spoodge, followed by her huge chocolate lab "boyfriend". We got her spayed as soon as her heat was over, the vet said that he didn't see any obvious signs of pregnancy, though it may have been too early to tell. 

We tried, seriously.......as new dog owners maybe we should have been more careful, but we had no idea it was that quick! We're fairly responsible dog owners, but we can't (and would never) claim perfection, plus, accidents do happen......though if the irresponsible owner of that free roaming lab had neutered his dog we would have been able to wait until Caeda was of an age we were ready to spay (we were thinking at least a year and a half to two years minimum before actually doing it). We weren't about to let her have puppies....she was too young, and they would have been HUGE, plus we really didn't feel up to the challenge of dealing with a litter! That is why I do believe neutering is a good thing....but done with growth and health in mind as much as possible, I do personally think neutering at 6 months is wrong....and people need to be educated about that, but it shouldn't be demonized, because there are a TON of people whose only "responsible" act for their dog is to spay or neuter. 

Oh, and btw.....interesting point about the LACK of testosterone causing aggression....very cool.


----------



## Losech (Apr 5, 2011)

Don't "fix" what ain't broke. I will not alter my (current or future) dogs unless that is the ONLY way to save their life. Three of my four are altered, I really wish they weren't, but none were my choice. One has spay-caused incontinence, and thankfully it's very manageable. Another has really bad Luxating Patella and ligament problems, which could be caused by a host of things but the shelter's botch-job at 2 1/2 months certainly didn't help that any. I will not get another altered dog nor one that is required to be.
On a side note, if a dog had a bad genetic problem, I'd get a tubal ligation or vasectomy done, absolutely NOT spay or neuter.
I really see no logical reason to alter dogs on the scale it's done here in the U.S. The science that backs altering is just not there, and more and more studies are coming out that prove the exact opposite of what people think is true. Dogs being intact is not the problem, lack of education about canine reproduction is. 

I honestly think that if you "cannot handle" an intact dog that you shouldn't have one. But hey that's my opinion, you don't gotta like it, and everybody's got a different one.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> I honestly think that if you "cannot handle" an intact dog that you shouldn't have one. But hey that's my opinion, you don't gotta like it, and everybody's got a different one.


Anybody can think that all they want, but average dog owners are not going to stop owning dogs. 

Now, I do think vasectomy and alternative spay options (tubal ligation, ovary-sparing, etc.) should be more readily available. I plan to look for a vet who will do vasectomies if I ever end up with an unneutered male dog again. Not sure how hard it'll be but we'll see.


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs (Jun 3, 2007)

Losech said:


> I honestly think that if you "cannot handle" an intact dog that you shouldn't have one. But hey that's my opinion, you don't gotta like it, and everybody's got a different one.


Like I said, in a perfect world.. cool. That's not happening and tell that to the thousands of dogs in shelters who I'm sure don't mind getting fixed to get a halfway decent home.


----------



## Kyllobernese (Feb 5, 2008)

I know that not all spayed females put on weight but for some reason some do. Susie put on weight even though she was still getting lots of exercise as she was still going with me when I rode my horse. My sister's Rat Terrier has packed on some pounds since she was spayed even though she has been on way less food than before. I will have to see how it affects Kris in the next few months.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> Anybody can think that all they want, but average dog owners are not going to stop owning dogs.
> 
> Now, I do think vasectomy and alternative spay options (tubal ligation, ovary-sparing, etc.) should be more readily available. I plan to look for a vet who will do vasectomies if I ever end up with an unneutered male dog again. Not sure how hard it'll be but we'll see.


End of the day... You are talking 2 percent.... Even average can handle that.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

http://www.angryvet.com/spaying-and-neutering/
http://www.dogcancerblog.com/spaying-neutering-and-cancer-in-rottweilers/#.UuyIq_vBaeA


----------



## Losech (Apr 5, 2011)

New: http://www.caninesports.com/uploads/1/5/3/1/15319800/vizsla_javma_study.pdf


----------



## UpShift (Dec 29, 2013)

I would love to keep all my dogs intact but to have any sort of a social life around here (boarding, day care, day play and social groups including sporting groups) you HAVE to have an altered dog. There is a big social stigma, at least here in the US, about having an intact dog. If you don't you are basically cutting off the dogs social life. It's frustrating to say the least. We waited until after a first heat cycle and got her spayed at about 1 year. While not medical in nature there is something to be said for the societal pressure put on those of us more "in the know" about the pros/cons of altering a dog. I can only hope these research endeavours make it into current vet literature because I know when I was discussing spaying vs tubal ligation vs intact with the vets in my area NONE of them could understand why I wouldn't want a full spay.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

UpShift said:


> I would love to keep all my dogs intact but to have any sort of a social life around here (boarding, day care, day play and social groups including sporting groups) you HAVE to have an altered dog. There is a big social stigma, at least here in the US, about having an intact dog. If you don't you are basically cutting off the dogs social life. It's frustrating to say the least. We waited until after a first heat cycle and got her spayed at about 1 year. While not medical in nature there is something to be said for the societal pressure put on those of us more "in the know" about the pros/cons of altering a dog. I can only hope these research endeavours make it into current vet literature because I know when I was discussing spaying vs tubal ligation vs intact with the vets in my area NONE of them could understand why I wouldn't want a full spay.


You can do away with the social stigma by a slight shift in the dog community.


----------



## Bones (Sep 11, 2009)

I read all the articles and found them interesting and certainly worth considering. While the health benefits may not be there (and in fact may have a negative impact) I don't think any of this changes the importance of the practice for communities as a whole. I will always strongly support required altering laws in regards to stray/abandoned dogs from rescues and animal shelters. When weighed in my opinion I still think spaying and neutering animals is still legitimate and an important tool in population control especially in areas such as a the south where the current culture is not conducive to responsible pet ownership.


----------



## Losech (Apr 5, 2011)

UpShift said:


> I would love to keep all my dogs intact but to have any sort of a social life around here (boarding, day care, day play and social groups including sporting groups) you HAVE to have an altered dog. There is a big social stigma, at least here in the US, about having an intact dog. If you don't you are basically cutting off the dogs social life.


I don't do any of that with any of my dogs, they are not lacking in their social life at all. (If I wanted to do that stuff, there are at least three places in my town do not discriminate against intact dogs. It may be different in your area, but facilities do exist that welcome intact dogs.) Any "social activity" that requires such a thing is of zero interest to me. My dogs get plenty of interaction with people and other dogs by going for a hike, which is only one thing of many we do that does not require they be surgically mutilated first. Heck, just going to the feedstore is good for socialization, everyone brings their dogs there. I run into plenty of intact dogs out and about, and have only met a small few people who have annoyed me about Katana having balls.

I'm not one to care about social expectations anyways. I dress in mens clothing, my hair is 1 inch long or shorter, I often go to the bank wearing my work (farm) boots and then to the bar to get a drink. I hunt and fish, swear, am dirty all the time, sleep outside sometimes, pee in the bushes, and generally do not act like or look like a straight woman "should". I don't give a lick about what society considers acceptable for me or my dogs, it is not the least bit important to me.


----------



## UpShift (Dec 29, 2013)

That's cool that you have those options open to you. I live in a metro area and the best thing I have is either a pet store or a dog park. We get winter, this year is particularly bad, so dog parks and hiking are out of the question for around 4 months of the year. 
I don't care about social expectations when it comes to looks or mannerisms. Your description of yourself is very similar to my own description of myself (I'm a female mechanic, talk about being dirty and smelly). But someone side eyeing me because my hair is short is totally different from me not being able to socialize my dogs or give them exercise because of spay and neuter requirements. All of the places I'm visiting around here require a spay/neuter by 6 months. Daycare, play groups and training classes alike. It's irritating. 
Basically, the point I'm trying to make is that it's not just a health thing when it comes to the decision to spay or neuter. You have to think of both your lifestyle and the life you want for you pets.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> End of the day... You are talking 2 percent.... Even average can handle that.


We can call them below average if it makes you feel better. Either way, I know a lot of people who would end up with a litter if their dogs weren't altered.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> All Craiglist proves is some people are irresponsible


Um, yeah, that's the point here, isn't it? That's why their dogs should be spayed/neutered.


----------



## Dagger (Jan 23, 2014)

The groomer I take Pizza Paws buys into this. She doesn't neuter her dogs because she thinks it's healthier. While I'm not sure I agree with her, I haven't argued the point.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Oh man, Nikki's weight was awful once we spayed her. Mia was really thin till she was spayed. She's not overweight but it's only because I keep on her really close.

Summer on the other hand, is very fit but she was bred before being spayed. I am not sure if that changes anything.

Beau is another dog that got fat right after being neutered. It definitely happens. And he was not neutered until he was 7. On the flip side neutering did help some behavioral issues like marking with him.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

And I'm a woman with a hormonal imbalance that definitely is documented with affecting weight/caloric needs. Obviously you can be thin with the disorder but in studies they have shown women with the hormonal imbalance need around 1/3rd less calories to maintain weight than women without it.


----------



## SDRRanger (May 2, 2013)

Ranger was neutered between the age of 12 - 18 months. He gets average exercise, eats average food, and we haven't had any issues with weight gain so far. 

If I had him unaltered, there would be nowhere I would feel comfortable taking him off leash. There are far too many irresponsible people around that bring their female dogs (while in heat) out and about. I've been to three different off leash areas and had three different people ask if my dog is altered because their dog is in heat. 

He was an unwanted dog. I see no reason for him to produce unwanted dogs because of other people's irresponsibility. I also don't want him restricted to leashed walks and the occasional back-of-beyond isolated walks.


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs (Jun 3, 2007)

Johnny I respect your opinions and research, but I'm starting to wonder if you know anybody outside of your super savvy responsible dog people. I only have a handful of people I would trust to own an intact dog, and definitely not multiple intact dogs.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Walking around doing math in my head today . . .2% of your life is 28.8 minutes a day on average. That's really quite substantial. So, sure, I can manage to be responsible 98% of the time. Hey, if my mom's dog is out loose for 10 minutes a day, that's less than 1% so she's keeping her dog contained 99.1% of the time. Now, can I be responsible 100% of the time? I don't think it's statistically possible, though I suppose some people are better at it than others.So, say I'm super responsible 99.99% of the time, which means I have a lapse in responsibility 1 minute out of 10,000, about 7 days. It would be nice to know a lot of perfect people but I don't.


----------



## spotted nikes (Feb 7, 2008)

JohnnyBandit said:


> You can do away with the social stigma by a slight shift in the dog community.


Are you aware that on average about 90 % of dogs and cats in shelters are un altered? Since many there are strays, wouldn't it be pretty obvious that there aren't many responsible owners? Do you not acknowledge that any of those unaltered dogs could have bred while loose, and that the fact that they are strays that were picked up pretty much proves that there is a huge population of dog owners that aren't controlling their dogs?
And if you look on the CL of pretty much any area, you will see TONS of mixed breed puppies and BYB puppies. They don't have responsible owners either.


----------



## agility collie mom (Jan 26, 2008)

Statistic: http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/pet_overpopulation/facts/pet_ownership_statistics.html Working for a vet I see the results of pets owned by irresponsible or uneducated people. Who suffers, the pets do. For that reason I support spay/neuter.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

ForTheLoveOfDogs said:


> Johnny I respect your opinions and research, but I'm starting to wonder if you know anybody outside of your super savvy responsible dog people. I only have a handful of people I would trust to own an intact dog, and definitely not multiple intact dogs.



OF course I do.... I have been in charge of a breed specific rescue for going on ten years, been involved with several other rescues over the years. Have trained dogs on a professional basis for 26 years, been involved with dogs the came out of abuse, neglect, and criminal situations. 


Fact is... The mantra and stigma has been shouted so loud, folks believe keeping intact dogs is far more difficult than it is. 

Average does fine at it... Below average does okay.... You have to be really really really crappy.... To oops...


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> Walking around doing math in my head today . . .2% of your life is 28.8 minutes a day on average. That's really quite substantial. So, sure, I can manage to be responsible 98% of the time. Hey, if my mom's dog is out loose for 10 minutes a day, that's less than 1% so she's keeping her dog contained 99.1% of the time. Now, can I be responsible 100% of the time? I don't think it's statistically possible, though I suppose some people are better at it than others.So, say I'm super responsible 99.99% of the time, which means I have a lapse in responsibility 1 minute out of 10,000, about 7 days. It would be nice to know a lot of perfect people but I don't.


You can twist as you like... But.... your ten minute analogy is so full of holes I cannot really begin...

Aside from the fact this is NOT a daily thing.... you cannot measure it in 10 minute a day running loose...


----------



## nene (May 6, 2010)

Both our female Westies were spay at 5 months of age. One passed at Age15 of basically old age & one at 13 due to liver failure. Neither was ever overweight or had any prior health problems. We watched their calories & made sure they were active. Advising against spay & neuter IMO is irresponsible.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> You can twist as you like... But.... your ten minute analogy is so full of holes I cannot really begin...
> 
> Aside from the fact this is NOT a daily thing.... you cannot measure it in 10 minute a day running loose...


No, it's not a daily thing. But, if a female is fertile 7 days a year, then 99.99% success at keeping her away from males would still lead to a 1-minute lapse during her fertile time every year, statistically speaking. And maybe the circumstances don't lead to a pregnancy the first time, or the second, but getting through her entire life without an accident, especially with mixed genders in the same home? I'm not going to trust myself to try that and I don't think most people could. And the stakes are too high to gamble.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> Look up the Rottweiler study..... Altering a Rottie is like saying yes I want my dog to get cancer...


Huh, I better go tell Moose he needs to get cancer now to prove a point. . .nevermind he's already 2 years past average life span for a Rott.


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

SDRRanger said:


> Ranger was neutered between the age of 12 - 18 months. He gets average exercise, eats average food, and we haven't had any issues with weight gain so far.
> 
> If I had him unaltered, there would be nowhere I would feel comfortable taking him off leash. There are far too many irresponsible people around that bring their female dogs (while in heat) out and about. I've been to three different off leash areas and had three different people ask if my dog is altered because their dog is in heat.
> 
> He was an unwanted dog. I see no reason for him to produce unwanted dogs because of other people's irresponsibility. I also don't want him restricted to leashed walks and the occasional back-of-beyond isolated walks.


This is great issue to bring up. You might be very responsible about your intact male but there will almost always be some dumb dumb with a bitch in heat. Or vice versa. 

An off leash area with bitches in heat... I can't even fathom that.


----------



## Britmark1 (Dec 19, 2013)

I was told that neutering your dog stunts his growth. Is this correct?


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

Good post. There was a point in time where I was totally for spaying/neutering and thought anyone who didn't was stupid. But having a MUCH better understanding of it now, and seeing some of the bad effects it leaves (Charlotte's spay incontinence) I don't think I'll ever "fix" another dog again without a medical reason.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

Britmark1 said:


> I was told that neutering your dog stunts his growth. Is this correct?


I can't speak for dogs, but it does in rats.


----------



## Losech (Apr 5, 2011)

Britmark1 said:


> I was told that neutering your dog stunts his growth. Is this correct?


No it makes them taller and girly looking (due to lack of necessary testosterone for manly features) if neutered too young.


----------



## xoxluvablexox (Apr 10, 2007)

I think that there should be more of a movement towards doing tubal ligations and vasectomies in dogs within the Veterinary world. It's ridiculous how hard it is for people to find a vet that can do those procedures. 

I waited till my my dog was pretty much a year old (small dog, so full grown) and I don't regret it because I was younger and my parents were constantly letting him get out of the house when he was younger with leaving doors open and not paying attention to him running in between their legs on the way out. So, thankfully, he always stayed around the house but I'm sure he would have ran off for a bitch in heat if he was intact. Thankfully, he's moved past the "escape artist" phase and a door can be left open to let air in without him taking off like a runaway prisoner lol. 

I know a couple people with intact dogs that are great off leash and than one day they lift their nose up in the air, sniff for a min, and than they're off like a bat out of hell and not seen for a couple days. Um, no... When I have intact dogs in the future, which I will, off leash won't be an option unless I'm out in the middle of no where in the woods somewhere. It's like those dogs go into some primal, tunnel vision type stage when they smell a bitch in heat and their listening mechanism completely shuts down or something. Responsible ownership is definitely key.

Edit: I thought it was an issue with bone development also? (In reference to male dogs being neutered young.)


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

Not all intact dogs are sex crazed maniacs that take off after females in heat. Ma'ii is intact, and has been around females in heat with little to no care, and I've known other dogs that are the same.

Biggest issue he has is same gender aggression towards other intact males, which very well may be there weather he's snipped or not.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

spotted nikes said:


> Are you aware that on average about 90 % of dogs and cats in shelters are un altered? .


And you have data proving this? Other the HSUS figures which has holes you can drive a battle ship through.


----------



## Losech (Apr 5, 2011)

So far, the worst dog I've ever seen around a bitch in heat is... My neutered (early, 2 1/2 months by the "shelter") Shiba. He will literally try to kill any other dog (male or female, doesn't matter) in the vicinity, will try to rip things in the way apart, and will try to mount the bitch, and will howl and whine if he can't get to her. He's better about it now that he's had some training, but he's still a huge pain to deal with.

I worked at a sled dog kennel in Alaska for a few months a couple winters ago. My Shiba was worse than ANY of the intact (30 or so) males there, and very few of those dogs had much obedience training. The bitches all came into heat at the same time, that's a lot of temptation. The dogs were let loose to run about for a bit before a run or being loaded into the truck (females first, then males). No fights over the bitches in their pens or boxes on the truck, the males listened relatively well and came when called. Only one of them didn't. They got into fights over a bucket of poop, of all things.
It is possible to train an intact male to ignore a bitch in heat. I've met several people who have done it successfully.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

lol Charlotte tries to mount females in heat.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> And you have data proving this? Other the HSUS figures which has holes you can drive a battle ship through.


That little factoid is everywhere but I can't find the original source. One site said it was from the ASPCA but I couldn't find it on their site. Not that my search skills are so great, and I only looked for a few minutes. I have to say it seems about right when I look at the Humane Society's page, which animals came in already altered, but of course I have no idea which animals were killed or adopted before being put on the website. So what percentage of shelter animals do YOU think are surrendered already altered?


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

RCloud said:


> lol Charlotte tries to mount females in heat.


Toby tries to mount CATS in heat :/. 

I think that's largely individual. I've met both intact and neutered dogs who went brainless when sex came up, and both intact and neutered dogs who totally ignore it all.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

Willowy said:


> Toby tries to mount CATS in heat :/.
> 
> I think that's largely individual. I've met both intact and neutered dogs who went brainless when sex came up, and both intact and neutered dogs who totally ignore it all.


To me it just says a lot for people that claim un-neutered male dogs go batshit crazy for females in heat to the point of being uncontrollable. My intact male completely ignores females in heat. My spayed female flips her crap over them. 

People can debate the spay/neutering thing all they want, but THAT argument is kind of a joke to me lol


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs (Jun 3, 2007)

When America becomes more responsible/educated with their dogs as a whole, I will support the idea of less altered pets. I just don't think right now is the time for an anti-spay/neuter revolution.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> That little factoid is everywhere but I can't find the original source. One site said it was from the ASPCA but I couldn't find it on their site. Not that my search skills are so great, and I only looked for a few minutes. I have to say it seems about right when I look at the Humane Society's page, which animals came in already altered, but of course I have no idea which animals were killed or adopted before being put on the website. So what percentage of shelter animals do YOU think are surrendered already altered?



Without a source it is NOT a factoid.... 
It is merely an internet rumor. Because there is no state or national reporting systems...

Compliance with registration ordinances are woefully low in most parts of the country. No requirement of data being fowarded on......

There has been no effective study....... No government accounting... No credible college research project.. etc. 


IT is JUST a number that the HSUS threw out there without ANY support... 

And folks... try to pass it off as fact. 

I mean lets be real... The HSUS has no way of knowing whether my animals are intact or not. 

If you are going to battle on the basis of pet over population bring some facts... OF which there are woefully few...


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

Honestly, alternative altering procedures (vasectomies, zinc neuters, ovary-sparing spays) are a simple answer to sterilizing dogs without altering their hormone profiles (zinc neutering does reduce testosterone but not as much as a typical castration). More vets need to offer this. When a man doesn't want to neuter his dog because of either personal hang ups or cultural stigma, a vasectomy has the potential to be a simple solution. An ovary-sparing spay prevents pregnancy and pyometra, but leaves your dog with her important hormones. I am all for this. It needs to be explored, seriously, ASAP, and more vets need to offer it. There is a lot of potential in these procedures that can benefit dogs and satisfy and need/desire for sterilization. 

That said, living with an intact dog is not for everyone. Living with intact dogs of the opposite sex is DEFINITELY not for everyone. The intact male I live is really a good boy, but I will tell you struggles for a few days when the girls are at their peak. I would also suggest that if your intact male has not LIVED with a bitch in heat, you don't really know what his behavior would be like in that situation. Many have a harder time dealing with LIVING with a bitch in heat vs. just running into one. The two are not the same. I do not believe many pet owners are equipped to deal with separating an intact dog and bitch, and most do not want to. 

Spuetering... isn't my personal favorite but it has its place. Maybe everyone should be able to handle intact dogs but some can't and they'll keep owning dogs. And I do not think that ultimately dogs are better off intact but out of a home than altered and in a home. Working with the general public and their dogs, I don't see that most are necessarily incapable (in my area) but many are unwilling to manage unaltered dogs. It is reality. 

Re: 90% of dogs in shelters being intact... yeah, I strongly suspect that's correlation and not causation. They're in a shelter because their owner doesn't care; they're unaltered because their owner doesn't care; they also get hit by cars because their owner doesn't care. Most strays are intact too, but I suspect they're intact because they're strays, not strays because they're intact. My roommate's dog got turned into the pound for "being a runner." The staff all commented that, "Of COURSE, he was a runner, he wasn't fixed!" Well, folks, he was also significantly underweight (not being fed regularly) and HW positive. It probably wasn't his testicles that were the majority of the problem. I think a lack of basic care was to blame. It just so happens people who neglect dogs don't tend to have them altered. That doesn't mean they're abandoned BECAUSE they're intact, they're intact because no one cares.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

ForTheLoveOfDogs said:


> When America becomes more responsible/educated with their dogs as a whole, I will support the idea of less altered pets. I just don't think right now is the time for an anti-spay/neuter revolution.


Altering or not altering pets is not going to solve or make a dent in population numbers.

Because responsibility prevents unwanted litters. Not altering dogs. 


As far as an anti spay revolution.... .The tide has already turned. I would not call it a revolution.... But you will see numbers going down..


And what do you think is going to happen when vet's insurance carriers begin requiring vets to have patients sign liability waivers with a huge laundry list of health related issues many serious...? 

How is the person that is on fence going to react when they find out altering their dog GREATLY increases the chances of cancer? Or the first time dog owner that does not know a lot but is altering because of a friends advice? 
Do you think these people are going to sign?


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I think there will be more unwanted litters. Yay.

It's absolutely ridiculous to say that birth control does not prevent unwanted pregnancies.


----------



## So Cavalier (Jul 23, 2010)

> Because responsibility prevents unwanted litters. Not altering dogs.


Huh? Never heard once of an altered dog ever producing a unwanted litter.


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Altering or not altering pets is not going to solve or make a dent in population numbers.
> 
> Because responsibility prevents unwanted litters. Not altering dogs.


What? That just doesn't make any kind of sense. Of course altering dogs prevents pregnancies. Its kindof the most surefire way possible to do so. If 90% of the dog population was fixed you better believe there'd be a dent in the population, responsible ownership or not.

EDIT: The only way to make sense of Johnny's position is that in unfixed dogs responsibility is what prevents unwanted litters. Sure, that's true... but I don't think the average owner is up to nearly that level of responsibility.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

You can be responsible and STILL have an intact dog, contrary to what a large amount of rescue and AR people claim. They pretty much paint anyone who chooses not to "fix" their dog as some irresponsible d-bag who's going to have their dog produce 50 million litters. And they get HOSTILE about it! 

You can have an intact dog and be responsible. It's not that hard, and there are plenty of health reasons to. But not everyone wants that responsibility or is capable of it. 
Fair enough. I can understand that.

But don't feed people the BS lies that altering your dog is the healthier, more responsible choice as a way to make your job easier.


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

RCloud said:


> You can be responsible and STILL have an intact dog, contrary to what a large amount of rescue and AR people claim. They pretty much paint anyone who chooses not to "fix" their dog as some irresponsible d-bag who's going to have their dog produce 50 million litters. And they get HOSTILE about it!
> 
> You can have an intact dog and be responsible. It's not that hard, and there are plenty of health reasons to. But not everyone wants that responsibility or is capable of it.
> Fair enough. I can understand that.
> ...


Yeah for real. I have had people at my work, very much "average pet owners" (but good ones!) who always get the dog altered by 6 months, be like, "OMG KEEVA ISN'T SPAYED?! WHY?! You're so RESPONSIBLE, why wouldn't you SPAY her?! Aren't you worried about cancer????" lololol. They're clients, I can't be mad, I just explain I have reasons and can prevent her from breeding. No one has ever had an issue with that, I will say. But they are initially aghast.

I did ask one woman, "Well, which cancers?" 

She was really quiet and then said, "Well, I guess I don't know... I just always thought spaying prevented cancer." 

Hmmmm lol My assumption was she'd heard about mammary cancer but she honestly had no idea, she just assumed intact females got cancer more often.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

Emily1188 said:


> Yeah for real. I have had people at my work, very much "average pet owners" (but good ones!) who always get the dog altered by 6 months, be like, "OMG KEEVA ISN'T SPAYED?! WHY?! You're so RESPONSIBLE, why wouldn't you SPAY her?! Aren't you worried about cancer????" lololol. They're clients, I can't be mad, I just explain I have reasons and can prevent her from breeding. No one has ever had an issue with that, I will say. But they are initially aghast.
> 
> I did ask one woman, "Well, which cancers?"
> 
> ...


I've had a lot of people unfriend me on Facebook for keeping Ma'ii intact. Just so I know how cereal they are :V


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

RCloud said:


> You can be responsible and STILL have an intact dog,


Definitely. But its really disingenuous to claim that fixing dogs doesn't prevent pregnancies. That's just... straight up wrong. A lot more misleading than exaggerating health benefits, IMO. I really don't like how the article does exactly what you complain about against those who alter their pets.

Those who are responsible enough to keep intact dogs without oops litters are more than welcome to do so. As a general policy though I think spay/neuter has a big net benefit for welfare of the population. It might be nice if theoretically the average Joe could keep intact animals without mistakes, but we live in the world we live in and the evidence is pretty clear. They aren't. That's my two cents at least.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

aiw said:


> Definitely. But its really disingenuous to claim that fixing dogs doesn't prevent pregnancies. That's just... straight up wrong. A lot more misleading than exaggerating health benefits, IMO. I really don't like how the article does exactly what you complain about against those who alter their pets.


I understand the pros and cons in both, and don't feel the people who make either choice should be scrutinized against. It's a matter of what you're the most comfortable with. 

BUT. Altering your dog is NOT the healthier choice, and it doesn't make someone more responsible than someone who chooses to keep their dog intact. And in general, you tend to hear that. A LOT. It's extremely misguiding and paints people who do choose to keep their dogs intact as trashy, irresponsible, morons. And one article online VS CONSTANT judging, insults, and guilt trips from people everywhere, ALL THE TIME, be it people involved in rescues or those that believe what they're told doesn't compare. This isn't an exaggeration. I can't even walk into Petco with Ma'ii without people approaching us and wanting to know why he's intact like I didn't notice and it's some horrible mistake. 

Fixing your dog does one thing: it prevents dogs from being able to reproduce. But there are also long lasting negative effects it can have to a dog's health. People should be able to know the facts and make their decisions accordingly rather than being lied to and guilted about it.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> What? That just doesn't make any kind of sense. Of course altering dogs prevents pregnancies.


Of course it makes sense.....



And here is why.....
1)Responsible people are going to be responsible. They are going to ensure that their dogs are not responsible for unwanted litters.
a) Some will use spay neuter and that is fine..
b) Others will use assorted management methods and that is fine as well.

2) Irresponsible people are going to be irresponsible.
If they are not responsible enough to keep their animals from producing unwanted litters, do you really expect them to alter their pets?

Heck, merely registering dogs fails miserably. The best County in the state is believed to have less than a 30 percent compliance rate.

Add that to the fact that data is GROWING day by day..... That altering dogs significantly affects their health and longevity in a negative manner... Makes it time to look to something else......


----------



## JazzyTheSiberian (Feb 4, 2013)

Personally, If you can properly handle an intact dog,then you fixing a dog shouldn't be necessary.If your going to own a intact dog because you irresponsibly breed, or a few other reasons,then you should fix your dog. Also, you should feel comfortable about what your doing with your dog, if you feel that you wouldn't be able to handle intact dog. then don't.

I would much rather have an intact dog, than fixing my dogs.Mainly because of (as others have said),because of health issues.

While fixing your dog can prevent opps litters or breeding irresponsibly, it doesn't prevent health problems.

Bottom line, intact dogs are healthier. If you can handle a intact dog, I highly recommended keeping that dog intact.


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs (Jun 3, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> 2) Irresponsible people are going to be irresponsible.
> If they are not responsible enough to keep their animals from producing unwanted litters, do you really expect them to alter their pets?


Yes, irresponsible people absolutely can be convinced to get their animals fixed. My rescue will sometimes take a person's litter of puppies they don't want and have mom fixed as well. I have completely irresponsible neighbors in every way, but I still convinced them to get their animals fixed. There are a lot of irresponsible people that might, but they just can't afford it. I've had to direct people to low cost spueter clinics they had no idea existed. I'd feel much safer convincing them to spueter than to say "it's not healthy for them, it's easy, just keep them from having puppies" (when it's clearly not going to be for them) or "don't own a dog if you can't keep it from reproducing you irresponsible dumb dumb" (because that's not going to help either). 

I've heard stories from rescues of purebred pound dogs that are unaltered being adopted and then bred. No non-screening rescue should ever adopt out an unaltered dog in my opinion, but they just don't have the funding I guess. I'm pretty sure altering totally would have prevented quite a few dogs in those situations.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

http://www.ufaw.org.uk/OSTEOSARCOMASCOTTISHDEERHOUND.php


6. Genetics

Osteosarcoma in the Scottish deerhound was found to have a heritability of 0.69 ie 69% of the risk of developing the disease is due to genetic factors (Phillips et al 2007). The condition appears to be inherited as a single dominant gene (Phillips et al 2007). Dogs which have at least one copy of the mutant gene have a greater than 75% chance of developing the disease. Scottish deerhounds without the mutant gene have a less than 5% chance of developing the condition (Phillips et al 2007). 




7. How do you know if an animal is a carrier or likely to become affected?

There are no tests to determine which animals are likely to develop osteosarcoma. As indicated above, those with the mutant gene have a 75% chance of developing the disease. However, it may not occur until the dog has been bred from, so dogs that show no signs of the disease can pass the genetic predisposition for the disease on to offspring.

To reduce the prevalence of the disease, only dogs from lineages with little or no history of osteosarcoma should be used for breeding

When studies are done on other breeds of dogs it is a mutant gene to blame and not whether or not a dog is spayed or neutered. Scottish deerhounds have a greater rate of osteosarcoma than a Rottweiler. Humans are not known to have their hormone reproducing organs removed from them and yet they are at a great risk to have cancer sometime in their lifetime. Said an oncologist to me, "You get older, you're bound to get cancer."

Keeping an animal intact is no guarantee that it will be healthier. I have seen OLDER intact males have prostrates so enlarged they can not pee. Their bladder getting so enlarged the bladder coming close to rupturing. I have seen one dog have this happen too. The owners elected euthanasia due to cost. Another dog who would come in to have a catheter pass in order to relieve the dog of the massive amount of urine. the owner elected not to get the dog neutered because his dog was not going to be 'ball less' as he put it. The dog lived 3 days like this and the catheter could no longer be passed. Owner elected to take the dog home, the dog passed away at home. What a painful way to die. 
I have seen males get sertoli tumors. http://www.petplace.com/dogs/sertoli-cell-tumor/page1.aspx One on a golden retriever who was 7 or 8 years young. The young owner did not know about checking the testicles and by the time he brought in his dog, the dog was extremely sick. The tumor destroyed the dog's marrow where all the blood cells are made. Last week it was a mastiff with a perianal hernia and the dog was intact. The dog was neutered and the hernia was fixed. 
http://www.vetsurgerycentral.com/hernia.htm 
I will always have my animals spayed or neutered. It is not a guarantee that by keeping your animal intact it is going to be healthier. I can tell you one thing. That an animal that is spayed will not go into heat and will not get pregnant. I can trust myself in keeping my dogs apart but now throw in a spouse, kids, parents, house sitter, dog walker and those odds go down a lot. 

I agree with JB it is about responsibility of the owner. I do not think the answer is to keep an animal intact but to change the laws to make people more responsible. That the loopholes that exist are closed and pet ownership is taken serious. That is when we will see a change.


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Of course it makes sense.....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I don't really agree that people fall into discrete categories of 'responsible' and 'irresponsible'. Plus, there is a big discrepancy between the effort involved in sterilizing and lifelong management. A one-time appointment (and recovery) usually has better compliance than constant vigilance. Some people have the wherewithal to keep intact dogs for a lifetime without a mistake, but I'd argue that's a very high bar to set for average ownership. Much higher than the requirement for keeping altered dogs. Truthfully, I'd probably not make it - Pete has free run at our cottage property and while rarely gone long is sometimes out of sight.

Keeping intact dogs responsibly is way harder than keeping altered ones. As you say, a lot of people are failing at even the _basics_ of dog responsibility, no need to raise the bar higher. Plus, if you consider demographics its hard to argue with population control in areas with increased speutering rates. Truthfully, I'm not completely convinced that altering is categorically worse for dogs' health, but I am convinced that on a population level altering is better for welfare than unaltered, homeless dogs.

I really have no problems with people who are vigilant enough to keep dogs intact, that said I also think advocating for alteration for the average owner is a good thing.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

You know, I legitimately don't give a flying fart if people spay or neuter or advocate spaying and neutering.

I am however sick and tired of blatant lies, propaganda, and emotional manipulation being used to promote it to the degree that it is the default and that anyone not sterilizing, regardless of research, reason, or medical advice, has some sort of stigma attached to them. 

Am I defensive? Occasionally. Mostly I'm just sickened that drinking the kool-aide instead of going out and researching and deciding for themselves what is right is viewed as the 'more responsible' option.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> Plus, there is a big discrepancy between the effort involved in sterilizing and lifelong management. A one-time appointment (and recovery) usually has better compliance than constant vigilance. Some people have the wherewithal to keep intact dogs for a lifetime without a mistake, but I'd argue that's a very high bar to set for average ownership. Much higher than the requirement for keeping altered dogs. Truthfully, I'd probably not make it - Pete has free run at our cottage property and while rarely gone long is sometimes out of sight.
> 
> .


The thing is..... It is not a high bar....

And frankly this is not meant to offend anyone, but it is just not that hard. If someone can't do it, they probably can't remember to feed their dog... 

It is just not that hard....


----------



## KodiBarracuda (Jul 4, 2011)

CptJack said:


> You know, I legitimately don't give a flying fart if people spay or neuter or advocate spaying and neutering.
> 
> I am however sick and tired of blatant lies, propaganda, and emotional manipulation being used to promote it to the degree that it is the default and that anyone not sterilizing, regardless of research, reason, or medical advice, has some sort of stigma attached to them.
> 
> Am I defensive? Occasionally. Mostly I'm just sickened that drinking the kool-aide instead of going out and researching and deciding for themselves what is right is viewed as the 'more responsible' option.


This is exactly how I feel on the subject. 



Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

CptJack said:


> You know, I legitimately don't give a flying fart if people spay or neuter or advocate spaying and neutering.
> 
> I am however sick and tired of blatant lies, propaganda, and emotional manipulation being used to promote it to the degree that it is the default and that anyone not sterilizing, regardless of research, reason, or medical advice, has some sort of stigma attached to them.
> 
> Am I defensive? Occasionally. Mostly I'm just sickened that drinking the kool-aide instead of going out and researching and deciding for themselves what is right is viewed as the 'more responsible' option.


This on so many frickin levels


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> The thing is..... It is not a high bar....
> 
> And frankly this is not meant to offend anyone, but it is just not that hard. If someone can't do it, they probably can't remember to feed their dog...
> 
> It is just not that hard....


I mean... but accidents do happen. 

I'd count myself as a pretty vigilant owner and Bae Dog was a runner. He got out probably 10 times in the 4 months I had him. I chased after him like mad each time. But lets pretend Bae was a female. And I kept She-Bae intact because I'm weird, I don't know. We can also pretend that I am less of vigilant dog owner so maybe I just figured she'd come back. Well... She-Bae can roam far and wide in the span of 15-30 minutes, let me tell you. She-Bae can also encounter quite a few dogs on these romps. If She-Bae were to be in heat and there were other people like pretend me, She-Bae could easily get pregnant!

I work on the low end of the dog industry. I'm not doing shows or running a rescue or training for the big time leagues. I'm working with average people. And average people frickin' suck at being dog owners. There are people who don't know that female doggys have "periods".

Merlin is intact and he is easy to handle. But he's also small, a homebody, and a scaredy cat. He ain't running off anytime soon. He also interacts with dogs at daycare on a daily basis. No intact females are allowed in play group.

I don't think we should lie about what speutering does. I think we should lay out all the risks. I think that alternative speutering should be more popular. I do not think that the average dog owner can handle an intact dog. They just suck at owning animals. And even vigilant people can have their dogs door dash "that one time" or run through the screen door or open the door by themselves or jump out a window or the leash breaks or whatever.


----------



## Emmett (Feb 9, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> 2) Irresponsible people are going to be irresponsible.
> If they are not responsible enough to keep their animals from producing unwanted litters, do you really expect them to alter their pets?


I can point you to the blog of a local rescue whose daily interactions with hundreds of inner city dogs directly refutes this sentiment. Every owner they come in contact with is irresponsible to one degree or another, some willfully and some out of ignorance. They offer medical assistance, basic necessities and education with two requirements for their help. One, the existing pets are spayed or neutered (no cost to the owner) and two, the owners do not acquire any more pets. I'd guess 75% of the owners eventually agree and adhere to these conditions. 

Guess what? The dogs don't produce litters. The owners aren't suddenly transformed into responsible owners, less than a quarter of the time does the extensive education and support improve these dog's lives anything beyond marginally. Really, the best that can be hoped for is that the dog routinely has water and shelter and is brought inside in the most extreme weather. The dogs would go back to the *exact* same miserable existence if the volunteers weren't out 6 days a week, 8 hours a day checking in on them, delivering supplies and hounding their owners to do better. The one thing that has changed is that they *ARE NOT* having litter after litter at the end of their chain or in the crawlspace of an abandoned house. 

Because of the concerted effort by this rescue and others in the area KCMO is coming close to achieving its goal of being the first no-kill major metropolitan area in this country. KCK is already there, by extensive utilization of rescue networks and aggressively pushing speuter in the urban core where thousands of dogs are owned by irresponsible people, they have managed to become no-kill.

You can argue all you want about changing the dog keeping culture, but right now there are millions of dogs in this country spending 100% of their lives on the end of chain with an owner who occasionally tosses a handful of food out the back door and whose offspring, if they survive, are now free roaming stray dogs who certainly aren't going to be altered or monitored and who have free access to all those other chained dogs, their offspring and so on and so forth.

Kansas City Pet Project just received a large grant to provide free, no strings attached speuter in the urban core. Time will tell if this mass speuter in a specific area will have any impact on the city shelter intake of stray dogs and the hundreds of unwanted litters that occur yearly.


----------



## JazzyTheSiberian (Feb 4, 2013)

CptJack said:


> You know, I legitimately don't give a flying fart if people spay or neuter or advocate spaying and neutering.
> 
> I am however sick and tired of blatant lies, propaganda, and emotional manipulation being used to promote it to the degree that it is the default and that anyone not sterilizing, regardless of research, reason, or medical advice, has some sort of stigma attached to them.
> 
> Am I defensive? Occasionally. Mostly I'm just sickened that drinking the kool-aide instead of going out and researching and deciding for themselves what is right is viewed as the 'more responsible' option.


This,This, This. This how I exactly feel about it.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

RCloud said:


> I've had a lot of people unfriend me on Facebook for keeping Ma'ii intact. Just so they know how cereal they are :V


 I must live in the entirely wrong place. Some lady at the vet's office reamed me for "ruining" my dog by neutering him. I hear tons of anti-neuter stuff and veryvery little pro-neuter stuff (usually from the "weird" rescue people). We oughta trade places or something.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> If someone can't do it, they probably can't remember to feed their dog...


That's absurd. Most dogs are not going to let anyone forget mealtime. Some dogs make every possible effort to storm the doors, jump the fences, slip their collars, unlatch the gate, etc. even when they're not in heat. Jeez, I wonder how she'd be if she _were_ in heat, LOL.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> That's absurd. Most dogs are not going to let anyone forget mealtime. Some dogs make every possible effort to storm the doors, jump the fences, slip their collars, unlatch the gate, etc. even when they're not in heat. Jeez, I wonder how she'd be if she _were_ in heat, LOL.


I was HOPING someone would try to make this point. 

No it is not..... It works the same way... Just like a dog will tell you if you forget to feed it... The dogs are going to tell you when something sexual is going on.


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> The thing is..... It is not a high bar....
> 
> And frankly this is not meant to offend anyone, but it is just not that hard. If someone can't do it, they probably can't remember to feed their dog...
> 
> It is just not that hard....


Eh.... I've let Pete roam a bit at our cottage property on a dead end road. There are no dangers, but there are other dogs. Should someone be foolish enough to bring an unsupervised bitch in heat its conceivable there could be little Petes running around. Except that he's neutered.

I really have no trouble remembering to feed him.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> I must live in the entirely wrong place. Some lady at the vet's office reamed me for "ruining" my dog by neutering him. I hear tons of anti-neuter stuff and veryvery little pro-neuter stuff (usually from the "weird" rescue people). We oughta trade places or something.



I have been unfriended on social media, been cussed at in public, heckled, etc. Except that backfires on people. I am not the type of person that it is easy to publically chastise.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I was HOPING someone would try to make this point.
> 
> No it is not..... It works the same way... Just like a dog will tell you if you forget to feed it... The dogs are going to tell you when something sexual is going on.


Yeah, so they what? Try to escape? If someone can't keep their dog from escaping under normal circumstances I doubt they're going to get any better at it when the dog is even more motivated to get out.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

aiw said:


> Eh.... I've let Pete roam a bit at our cottage property on a dead end road. There are no dangers, but there are other dogs. Should someone be foolish enough to bring an unsupervised bitch in heat its conceivable there could be little Petes running around. Except that he's neutered.
> 
> I really have no trouble remembering to feed him.


I'm not going to address the neutered/not decision but if you know there are other dogs?

Yeah, there are dangers.

The other dogs.

And at his size? Birds of prey, but that's neither here nor there.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

Willowy said:


> I must live in the entirely wrong place. Some lady at the vet's office reamed me for "ruining" my dog by neutering him. I hear tons of anti-neuter stuff and veryvery little pro-neuter stuff (usually from the "weird" rescue people). We oughta trade places or something.


I travel all over the states, all the time, and I've heard anti-neutering stuff too, but the general consensus is the other way around, even before we got Ma'ii. Matter of fact, only reason we spayed Charlotte was because we were guilted into it by the vet my husband initially took her too. Was told it was the healthier choice and the "right thing to do" and because we were gullible as sin back in those days, we went ahead with it. She now has incontinence as the result of her spay. If we hadn't of gotten Charlotte spayed, we never would have adopted Ma'ii, but that's the only good thing that came out of it for us.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

I spayed Kylie and Bug because I'm lazy - and I have no shame about that. Intact males? pfft.

But anyway, I get most of the push-push-push-ram-it-down-your-throat spay/neuter propaganda (not pro, absolute propaganda) from people who are not directly involved in rescue themselves (though refusal to adopt to a house with an intact animal helps this impression), who are not actually educated, but who watched a commercial/own a rescue dog and think they know tons in spite of having done no actual research what-so-ever.

This is why it bothers me.

The vet said.
The rescue group said.
The shelter said.
The television said.
I heard.
It's Just What You Do.

And it's not just disagreement with your choice, it's "YOU"RE KILLING PUPPIES BECAUSE YOUR DOG IS INTACT." There's no room for reason in this.

Doesn't matter if the dog is a health tested, multiple titled dog who is deliberately being bred.

Doesn't matter if your vet said your dog shouldn't be altered.

Doesn't matter if it's a giant breed and you're waiting until two.

Doesn't matter if your dog never contributes to a litter, period: You're killing Puppies.

It's not lecturing, chiding, or yelling or cursing around me. It's quiet disbelief and OMGSHOCK that I love and support rescues and dogs and am educated and HOW CAN I NOT KNOW THAT I AM KILLING PUPPIES.

People. Please.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I was HOPING someone would try to make this point.
> 
> No it is not..... It works the same way... Just like a dog will tell you if you forget to feed it... The dogs are going to tell you when something sexual is going on.



Yes especially if a male and female are back to back. Then you get a phone call and have to tell the owner what is going on because they thought the dogs got into some glue and can not get apart and wonder if they can do anything to get the dogs unstuck from the glue. Responsible owners are developed and not born.


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

CptJack said:


> I'm not going to address the neutered/not decision but if you know there are other dogs?
> 
> Yeah, there are dangers.
> 
> ...


The dogs all know each other and are friendly. Theoretically I suppose they could fight, but we've been going up there my whole life (nearing 25 years) and the only fight was ironically under heavy supervision at the beach. And involving a visitors dog (remember the doodle I described in the other thread?) Maybe not the kind of situation dog people advocate, but then again some dog people are pretty judgmental about others choices if this thread is to be believed. 

Things have functioned safely and happily for a really long time. I'm not inclined to imagine a problem where there's no evidence of one.

For the predator issue, the property is pretty heavily wooded so not much bird of prey activity. Plus isn't 20 pounds rather large for a small hawk? Predators in general avoid the area during cottage season, much too populated.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

aiw said:


> The dogs all know each other and are friendly. Theoretically I suppose they could fight, but we've been going up there my whole life (nearing 25 years) and the only fight was ironically under heavy supervision at the beach. And involving a visitors dog (remember the doodle I described in the other thread?) Maybe not the kind of situation dog people advocate, but then again some dog people are pretty judgmental about others choices if this thread is to be believed.
> 
> Things have functioned safely and happily for a really long time. I'm not inclined to imagine a problem where there's no evidence of one.
> 
> For the predator issue, the property is pretty heavily wooded so not much bird of prey activity. Plus isn't 20 pounds rather large for a small hawk? Predators in general avoid the area during cottage season, much too populated.



Eh, I think recognizing the potential is there but minimal enough to find the payoff worth it is not the same as saying there is no risk. Which is about where the spay/neuter thing *SHOULD* come down to: The benefit of doing or not doing it is worth the risk of doing or not doing TO ME.

And yes. Why did I imagine he was like Kylie sized?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Emmett said:


> I can point you to the blog of a local rescue whose daily interactions with hundreds of inner city dogs directly refutes this sentiment. Every owner they come in contact with is irresponsible to one degree or another, some willfully and some out of ignorance. They offer medical assistance, basic necessities and education with two requirements for their help. One, the existing pets are spayed or neutered (no cost to the owner) and two, the owners do not acquire any more pets. I'd guess 75% of the owners eventually agree and adhere to these conditions.
> 
> Guess what? The dogs don't produce litters. The owners aren't suddenly transformed into responsible owners, less than a quarter of the time does the extensive education and support improve these dog's lives anything beyond marginally. Really, the best that can be hoped for is that the dog routinely has water and shelter and is brought inside in the most extreme weather. The dogs would go back to the *exact* same miserable existence if the volunteers weren't out 6 days a week, 8 hours a day checking in on them, delivering supplies and hounding their owners to do better. The one thing that has changed is that they *ARE NOT* having litter after litter at the end of their chain or in the crawlspace of an abandoned house.
> 
> ...


This is the koolaide type stuff Capt Jack was talking about.

I could look at the KC stuff. In fact I think I have.

But having been involved with dog rescue since about 1983, one blog is not going to change my position...


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> Yes especially if a male and female are back to back. Then you get a phone call and have to tell the owner what is going on because they thought the dogs got into some glue and can not get apart and wonder if they can do anything to get the dogs unstuck from the glue. Responsible owners are developed and not born.


They don't go back to back in an instant....

But a male dog will tell you your bitch comes into heat well before she shows any sign of coming in..... .


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

CptJack said:


> Eh, I think recognizing the potential is there but minimal enough to find the payoff worth it is not the same as saying there is no risk. Which is about where the spay/neuter thing *SHOULD* come down to: The benefit of doing or not doing it is worth the risk of doing or not doing TO ME.
> 
> And yes. Why did I imagine he was like Kylie sized?


I think I would swing the other way if the other dogs were unknown and/or Pete had a history of confrontation, if he were a wanderer, there was traffic etc. Lots of variables. Its an awesome atmosphere though, well worth the relatively small risk. I'm probably overstating the amount of time he's alone anyways, he's the type to panic if he hasn't seen me in a few minutes. Who knows how he would be intact though, He does show quite a bit of interest in unaltered dogs - especially males weirdly. I think he may be gay.... but that's neither here nor there!

When he first arrived at the rescue he was 14 lbs, but *way* underweight. He's about 18 now. I think I talk about him like he's tiny because I'm so used to 100+ lb dogs.


----------



## Emmett (Feb 9, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> This is the koolaide type stuff Capt Jack was talking about.
> 
> I could look at the KC stuff. In fact I think I have.
> 
> But having been involved with dog rescue since about 1983, one blog is not going to change my position...


What "koolaide type stuff" are you referring to?

Your contention is that increased speuter makes zero difference in pregnancy rates. That increased owner responsibility is what makes a difference. Here we have a perfect opportunity to see if this is born out. These dogs' daily existence is not going to change one iota pre and post speuter. The owners will go back to being just as irresponsible as they were before the mobile unit rolled into their neighborhood. If the shelter intake decreases noticeably or dramatically after 1000s of neuters are administered in the urban core what exactly could this decrease be due to other than speuter?


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

Emmett said:


> What "koolaide type stuff" are you referring to?
> 
> Your contention is that increased speuter makes zero difference in pregnancy rates. That increased owner responsibility is what makes a difference. Here we have a perfect opportunity to see if this is born out. These dogs' daily existence is not going to change one iota pre and post speuter. The owners will go back to being just as irresponsible as they were before the mobile unit rolled into their neighborhood. If the shelter intake decreases noticeably or dramatically after 1000s of neuters are administered in the urban core what exactly could this decrease be due to other than speuter?


The truth is once you get the dog speutered, responsibility ceases to be an issue where pregnancy is concerned.... Maybe its difficult to convince irresponsible people to speuter, but frankly I think that's _way_ easier than convincing them to supervise day in and day out.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Emmett said:


> What "koolaide type stuff" are you referring to?
> 
> Your contention is that increased speuter makes zero difference in pregnancy rates. That increased owner responsibility is what makes a difference. Here we have a perfect opportunity to see if this is born out. These dogs' daily existence is not going to change one iota pre and post speuter. The owners will go back to being just as irresponsible as they were before the mobile unit rolled into their neighborhood. If the shelter intake decreases noticeably or dramatically after 1000s of neuters are administered in the urban core what exactly could this decrease be due to other than speuter?




I think the issue here, and I am only providing translation, is that ultimately the people who see S/N as responsible are going to do it.

The people who aren't, don't care and aren't unless it comes to their doorstep. These people aren't being influenced by the S/N campaign. They're being influenced by not caring and not having ot pay for it or put any effort in at all. Yes, THAT will make a difference in the dog's lives - because 'responsible' people are taking responsibility FOR them. If these people also took responsibility for training the dogs and monitoring the security of their housing environments and kept track/paid attention of when they were coming into heat they would also not be reproducing.

So, yeah, S/N is making a difference, but it's not making more of a difference with irresponsible owners, exactly, it's just the method chosen by people who be responsible for dogs that are not their own. Which makes sense, because it's the easiest, cheapest, and least labor intensive. I also happen to think it's *RIGHT* and just donated a huge chunk of cash we came into, to our mobile spay/neuter place. 

But the difference is in the responsibility (someone is taking responsibility the best way they can for the dog's reproduction or lack of), not the surgery itself.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> They don't go back to back in an instant....
> 
> But a male dog will tell you your bitch comes into heat well before she shows any sign of coming in..... .


I know this but a client saw her dogs stuck together out in her yard and called to see what was going on. People just do not know and have not a clue when it comes to dogs. This client actually thought her dogs had gotten stuck together because the dogs must have gotten into glue. She had no idea this was a part of dogs breeding. 

Another phone call; Chihuahua pregnant. Owner did not know how many days into breeding. Asked if any discharge. No was the reply. The client had called because the dog was pacing, panting, and uncomfortable. When told the dog might have to have a C-section the owner said she could not afford a C-section. The owner was yelling at the vet because the owner believed the vet was going to be responsible for killing her dog because if her dog needed C-section and could not afford to have one done it was the vets fault. She did bring the dog in and the dog was covered in green discharge. When questioned about this, owner claims she woke up to find that on the dog and thought the dog must have gotten into the kid's markers. owner had somehow came up with the money and a C-section was performed. Two pups were delivered and owner left the clinic with a healthy mom and pups. She did leave mad because how was she going to make any money now that she had to pay for a surgery. The reason she bred the dog was to make some money.

Responsible dog owners are developed and not born.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Emmett said:


> What "koolaide type stuff" are you referring to?
> 
> Your contention is that increased speuter makes zero difference in pregnancy rates. That increased owner responsibility is what makes a difference. Here we have a perfect opportunity to see if this is born out. These dogs' daily existence is not going to change one iota pre and post speuter. The owners will go back to being just as irresponsible as they were before the mobile unit rolled into their neighborhood. If the shelter intake decreases noticeably or dramatically after 1000s of neuters are administered in the urban core what exactly could this decrease be due to other than speuter?


A couple of things.... 

I am still waiting on the link from you... Post it up. 

Second you say blog... I assume they have documentation to back up any successes they claim.... There are all kinds of blogs and all kinds of blog writers..There needs to be some hard facts to go with it. 


And you are taking what I said out of context.... 

I said...



JohnnyBandit said:


> Altering or not altering pets is not going to solve or make a dent in population numbers.
> 
> Because responsibility prevents unwanted litters. Not altering dogs.
> 
> ...



and....



JohnnyBandit said:


> Of course it makes sense.....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There are lots paths to responsibility.


----------



## Emmett (Feb 9, 2013)

CptJack said:


> I think the issue here, and I am only providing translation, is that ultimately the people who see S/N as responsible are going to do it.
> 
> The people who aren't, don't care and aren't unless it comes to their doorstep. These people aren't being influenced by the S/N campaign. They're being influenced by not caring and not having ot pay for it or put any effort in at all. Yes, THAT will make a difference in the dog's lives - because 'responsible' people are taking responsibility FOR them. If these people also took responsibility for training the dogs and monitoring the security of their housing environments and kept track/paid attention of when they were coming into heat they would also not be reproducing.
> 
> ...


Here's the thing, there are tons of dogs in this country that are owned by irresponsible people who will always remain irresponsible. As Aiw said it is much easier to convince those people to speuter than it is to convince them to improve their containment and supervision. There is no way to argue otherwise. And irresponsible owners are not the ones that rescue groups are spreading their "propaganda" to. I don't think sitting down with them and saying "your dog will be healthier, live longer, not be prone to all sorts of cancer, improve behaviorally if you would just speuter" has effectively swayed anybody's mind in the urban core. Instead, the pitch is usually "we won't help you, there won't be messy, pesky puppies running around, strange dogs won't be drawn into your yard, you won't be dealing with AC because of your neglect of these unwanted litters" and guess what? None of those things are propaganda or stretching the truth. They are all real consequences of sputtering dogs in the urban core.

So really you and I are looking at two different movements. I am speaking about the one movement that is addressing the very real dog population problems in areas with low speuter and high owner irresponsibility rates. You are speaking to the national mass push for speuter to every Tom, ****, Harry or Jane who owns a dog and does not take into consideration their level of responsibility or ability to manage an intact dog. One movement has indisputably tangible benefits, dogs aren't going to be responsibility cared for, at least they won't be reproducing. The other movement seems to have no net benefit. Yes, _some_ oops litters might be prevented, but at the potential cost of a large number of responsibly owned dogs health.

We can't evaluate both by the same criteria, because they are two hugely discrepant situations. As some are proposing an anti-speuter revolution of sorts we are basically throwing the baby out with the bath water. Yes, there are tons of responsible homes in this country who with some better education and better healthcare options could easily manage intact dogs. But there are also tons of irresponsible homes in this country who will never, ever be responsible enough to manage intact dogs.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Emmett said:


> Here's the thing, there are tons of dogs in this country that are owned by irresponsible people who will always remain irresponsible.


You cannot expect irresponsible people to act responsibly....


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Deleted - post below covers it more clearly.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> You cannot expect irresponsible people to act responsibly....


THIS!

THIS Is what I'm trying and failing to get around to.

The difference being made is not in the responsibility of the dog owners, and they do not become more responsible because their dogs are spayed and neutered. SOMEONE ELSE coming in and fixing the dog is AWESOME and absolutely prevents litters - but it doesn't make any difference in owner responsibility. They wouldn't have gone and spent money/time/effort to do it themselves. It would make zero difference if most RESPONSIBLE owners looked at it chose not to spay or neuter (or chose to, since I did, but given the angle...) RESPONSIBLE people aren't contributing to pet overpopulation anymore than responsible breeders are leading to puppies dying in shelters.

And yet the entire 'SPAY AND NEUTER' target audience is the minimally educated person who goes by rote and spays or neuters because it's touted as synonymous with responsibility and it never occurs to them to look further. That's not helping a THING. I don't want an anti-spay/neuter revolution. I want a stop to carpet bombing a half-assed message that isn't reaching its intended audience, anyway


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Don't pretend you're spaying and neutering to keep your dog healthy....because, in most situations, you're NOT.



this thread did not start out about responsibility of dog owners but that it is healthier to keep your dog intact. It evolved into responsibility of the dog owners of the world. JB believes that his dogs are going to healthier and live longer if he does not spay or neuter his dogs. I believe that my dogs will live and be healthier because I spay and neuter my dogs. We are both responsible dog owners. It is our neighbors we have to worry about their lack of responsibility


----------



## Emmett (Feb 9, 2013)

CptJack said:


> You're missing my point entirely.
> 
> I don't mind spay/neuter. I think it's the most effective way to address an immediate issue. That's the practical, concrete, and real. No argument from me.
> 
> ...


And I never argued that it was any better ("have someone in that dog's life who cared enough..."). And I think you're missing my point entirely as well. I thought we were talking about realistic examples and not hypotheticals? Finding "someone who cared enough..." for every dog is not something realistic. When I'm addressing an issue that requires facts and analysis I work with real world examples that can be categorized and measured, not abstract concepts. You're coming at this from a theoretical perspective and I'm coming at this from an experimental perspective. Same argument, different methods of analysis and evaluation.


----------



## Emmett (Feb 9, 2013)

CptJack said:


> And yet the entire 'SPAY AND NEUTER' target audience is the minimally educated person who goes by rote and spays or neuters because it's touted as synonymous with responsibility and it never occurs to them to look further. That's not helping a THING. I don't want an anti-spay/neuter revolution. I want a stop to carpet bombing a half-assed message that isn't reaching its intended audience, anyway


Which is precisely what I said in my previous post and PM. There are two speuter movements going on. The one that irks the hell out of you and preaches to/sways those pet owners that are not part of the problem. The one that plasters billboards, posts fliers in vet offices, dog parks and pet stores, that runs national ad companions urging owners to go out and get their dogs speutered. The other movement is the one that goes out and speuters the dog for the owner. One is effective, the other is addressing a non-existent problem and vilifying something that should be every responsible dog owner's personal choice.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Emmett said:


> And I never argued that it was any better ("have someone in that dog's life who cared enough..."). And I think you're missing my point entirely as well. I thought we were talking about realistic examples and not hypotheticals? Finding "someone who cared enough..." for every dog is not something realistic. When I'm addressing an issue that requires facts and analysis I work with real world examples that can be categorized and measured, not abstract concepts. You're coming at this from a theoretical perspective and I'm coming at this from an experimental perspective. Same argument, different methods of analysis and evaluation.


Except I went out of my way to say, repeatedly, that there was no way that could happen and it isn't practical and that I gave money to a mobile spay and neuter precisely for that reason? I've no idea where our crossed wires are, but there are obviously some. I'm going to blame the hour, get some sleep and come back tomorrow to see if I can figure out what's going on. Especially since I was attempting to translate for somebody else in the first place, in the earlier part of that post.


----------



## Emmett (Feb 9, 2013)

CptJack said:


> Except I went out of my way to say, repeatedly, that there was no way that could happen and it isn't practical and that I gave money to a mobile spay and neuter precisely for that reason? I've no idea where our crossed wires are, but there are obviously some. I'm going to blame the hour, get some sleep and come back tomorrow to see if I can figure out what's going on. Especially since I was attempting to translate for somebody else in the first place, in the earlier part of that post.


Yes, I suspect our wires are crossed most probably by the earlier translation, but also by the theoretical/experimental split. You did indeed clarify that you supported the practice, but were addressing the "theory", but that was after I was already knee deep in the debate. Not to mention that I am attempting to debate with two different posters at once so I probably crossed a few wires all by myself.


----------



## Emmett (Feb 9, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> A couple of things....
> 
> I am still waiting on the link from you... Post it up.
> 
> ...


This is the second time I've lost a reply, so bear with me if what I'm about to say is abridged.

I did not take anything out of context, because there is no context to statements like, "Altering or not altering pets is not going to solve or make a dent in population numbers." that is a stand alone statement of your opinion/position. If what you really meant to say was what CptJack explained in her posts than we are on similar pages. If however, you literally meant exactly what that statement says we do not agree. I for darn sure never expected anything I said to change your opinion, my only goal was to provide a different perspective. In my year on this board I have yet to see anything anybody has every said sway your thought processes one iota. 

This blog: http://chainofhope.wordpress.com was offered as real world refutation to your assertion that you cannot get irresponsible owners to speuter their pets. She and her volunteers do that on a daily basis. I'm not sure what "successes they claim" you are wanting evidence for. The KCPP grant has only recently been approved so there is no data to be collected, because AFAIK the operation has yet to begin. Which is precisely why I was careful to mention possible interpretations _should_ the numbers decrease and not state or imply that the numbers have actually decreased. If you'd like an outline of some of the plans and hoped for benefits/results this blog:
http://http://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/ generally contains up-to-date information and Brent is very good about including all sort of facts and statistics gleaned from reputable sources. He also has an old series of write ups about the successes of the KCK/Wyandotte Co no-kill push and the different steps they used to achieve their goal, including The Ray of Hope program and the local rescues doing speuter outreach. 

Is this the sort of information you're asking for? Or are you wanting some numbers on the Chain of Hope rescue operation and how many actual speuters they perform vs how many individuals they contact vs how many unwanted litters they see? In short are you wanting numbers specific to their operation to prove that her blog entires aren't just random stories and pictures that she went around snapping inorder to write an interesting blog?


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

> Don't pretend you're spaying and neutering to keep your dog healthy....because, in most situations, you're NOT.


this point is YOUR conclusion. other people can come to different conclusions based on THEIR experience and research and not be wrong. there is nothing absolute one way or the other. you are always going to believe leaving dogs intact is healthier. I will always spay/neuter because when I followed the intact = healthier advise my dog(breed with average lifespan of 12-15 years and very few breed health problems) got Pyo, and Mammary cancer(at 7 for both) and died of cancer at 10. my other dog of the same breed who was spayed young and a sport dog is healthy as a horse at almost 14 with no skeletal problems who's only sign of ageing is arthritis in one knee caused directly by a serious accident from her sport days. I am scared to friggen death of leaving a dog intact.*

*this obviously only applies to females, my views on neutering are unrelated. I didn't find dealing with intact females was difficult or even mildly inconvenient, I spay purely for health reasons.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Emmett said:


> TIn short are you wanting numbers specific to their operation to prove that her blog entires aren't just random stories and pictures that she went around snapping inorder to write an interesting blog?



I have read through a good bit of this blog.. And that is all it is....random stories... There is nothing in there to show any positive data concerning speuters.


----------



## spotted nikes (Feb 7, 2008)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I have read through a good bit of this blog.. And that is all it is....random stories... There is nothing in there to show any positive data concerning speuters.


And the study you posted in the OP was done on 759 Goldens that were treated in ONE facility. Generally a sample size that small, and in only one location would not be enough to make good conclusions. Again, I would suggest that most Show quality/good conformation dogs would be more likely to be intact, VS dogs that failed to meet breed standards and were sold on a spay/neuter contract, and poorly bred puppy mill dogs/rescues that were spayed or neutered to prevent passing on poor genetics. 

A possible reason for more cruciate lig injuries in neutered dogs would be that the dogs may have been overweight, since oftentimes, owners of altered dogs don't adjust food as needed to keep them at healthy weights.

As a dog ages, the likelihood of getting cancer increased. So if a neutered dogs lives to an older age than a non neutered dog, but then dies of cancer, vs an intact dog dying of an aneurism/something else, you are then going to be having statistics that could say, the intact dog didn't develop cancer, but the fixed dog did.

Anecdotally, I've had dogs since I was a kid, and have had at least 2-4 at once for the last 30 yrs...always fixed. Never had hip dysplasia/cancer in any of my dogs. Had 2 ACL surgeries (one in an overweight cocker-my fault for the weight issue. And one in a Chow mix.) As mentioned earlier in the thread, these dogs have lived to be 17/18 yrs old. My Cockers have generally lived to 13/14. 

Here is a good link to a site explaining cancer in Goldens that was really interesting.
http://www.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/CCAH/local-assets/pdfs/UnderstandingCancerinGoldenRetrievers2.pdf


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

spotted nikes said:


> A possible reason for more cruciate lig injuries in neutered dogs would be that the dogs may have been overweight, since oftentimes, owners of altered dogs don't adjust food as needed to keep them at healthy weights.
> 
> f[/url]


Altered dogs are finer of bone, growth rates change, lack of bone density, muscle mass...... Angles get changed, parts do not fit just right. 
Looking at a dog joint If the bones and angles are not just right the fit at the joint is not good. And when things do not fit properly something wears out. Whatever the weak link is. and in a dog's knee the weak link is the cruciate. Ask anyone involved in dog sports to name ten dogs that they know that have had cruciate injuries and whether the dog was intact or not. Your results will be staggering. 

I can see a day when altered dogs do not run against intact dogs in sports like agility. With course changes. 




spotted nikes said:


> As a dog ages, the likelihood of getting cancer increased. So if a neutered dogs lives to an older age than a non neutered dog, but then dies of cancer, vs an intact dog dying of an aneurism/something else, you are then going to be having statistics that could say, the intact dog didn't develop cancer, but the fixed dog did.
> 
> [/url]


We are not talking old age cancers here... If you read the Golden studies, including the one you posted. The Rottweiler studies... That Visla study that was posted. The UK sporting breed study, etc. These altered dogs are not getting old age cancers. We are talking cancer at 5 6 7 8 years old. 

When Buc had Osteo Sarcoma two other friends had sporting breeds with Osteo Sarcoma. All males, all altered and Buc was the old one of the bunch. He obviously got cancer in his eighth year. He was laid to rest shortly after he turned nine. 

My Rottweiler died of cancer shortly after he turned 4 years old. My friend whose Rottie is battling cancer right now is 5 and a half. Ironically this dog has run agility and had both its cruciates repaired.



spotted nikes said:


> Here is a good link to a site explaining cancer in Goldens that was really interesting.
> http://www.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/CCAH/local-assets/pdfs/UnderstandingCancerinGoldenRetrievers2.pdf



Even the study you posted points heavily to spay and neuter increasing cancer risks.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

When it is all said and done, it will not be about spaying and neutering but the genome your dog has. http://www.genome.gov/12511476 Humans are not neutered yet have a high rate of cancer. I have personally seen dogs that are intact have different cancers than their counterpart who was spayed and neutered. None of my dogs have ever have been diagnosed with breast cancer or testicular cancer.

http://www.vetcancersociety.org/pet-owners/frequently-asked-questions/

QUESTION: What are the most common types of cancer in pets?


Answer: The most common cancers in dogs is mammary tumor. Fortunately, this type can be prevented by spaying. Often, veterinary school or specialty referral hospital websites have information on some of the more common tumors that are seen (lymphoma, osteosarcoma, mast cell tumor, mammary cancer, bladder cancer, to name a few).

QUESTION: Are there environmental factors that contribute to cancer in dogs/cats?


Answer: (reference: Henry JH. “The Etiology of Cancer. Chemical, Physical, and Hormonal Factors” in Small Animal Clinical Oncology fifth ed. Editors Withrow S, Vail D, Page R. Elsevier, 2013)

The 2011 Report on Carcinogens released by the Secretary of the United States department of Health and Human services listed 240 potential carcinogens. Although there is no report for companion animals, it’s reasonable to assume an overlap in pets.

Environment tobacco smoke ETS (second hand smoke) has been studied in dogs and cats. There is mounting evidence suggesting that ETS increases risk of lymphoma in dogs and cats as well as oral squamous cell carcinoma in cats.

Pesticides, herbicides, and insecticides: Results on studies on herbicide 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and incidence of lymphoma in dogs have been mixed. Hayes et al indicated a relationship between disease incidence of lymphoma and number of lawn applications of 2,4-D per year (Environ Res 70:119, 1995). A study in Italy found that living in industrial areas and owner use of chemicals (paints and solvents) was significantly and independently associated with lymphoma (J Vet Intern Med 15:190, 2001). An increased risk of transitional cell carcinoma TCC of the urinary bladder was found in dogs treated with topical insecticides with enhanced risk in overweight dogs (J Toxical Environ Health 28:407, 1989). Bertone et al reported an increased risk of oral squamous cell carcinoma in cats wearing flea collars (J Vet Intern Med 17:557, 2003). In studies of Scottish terriers, exposure to lawn and garden products containing phenoxy herbicides is associated with increased risk of TCC (J Am Vet Med Asso, 224:1290, 2004). It’s recommended to limit exposure of pets to phenoxy herbicides.

Physical factors:

Sunlight: Light skin pigmentation and chronic sun exposure are associated with development of squamous cell carcinoma SCC on the face, ears, and nose of white or partial white cats. This may also be the case in some skin SCC in dogs. Pets are at greatest risk of exposure to ultraviolet light at midday and should be protected against sun exposure at this time especially if they are light pigmented breed.

Magnetic fields: Extremely low frequency (<60 Hz) magnetic fields are generated by household appliances, industrial machinery, and electric power lines. Potential link between chronic exposure and development of human childhood cancers has been studied extensively. In one study, the risk of development of lymphoma in dogs was found to be highest in dogs from homes with highest exposure to magnetic fields. Risk was related to both duration and intensity of exposure and was highest in dogs spending more than 25% of the day outdoors. The National Research Council reviewed over 500 studies on cancer risk and exposure to electromagnetic fields in humans and concluded that although there is a weak association between childhood leukemia and exposure to electromagnetic fields, there is no clear evidence of true threat to human health. NRC reported that other factors, including air quality and proximity to high traffic density are more likely to cause cancer than low frequency magnetic fields.

Asbestos: Asbestos exposure is a known risk factor for development of mesothelioma in people and a similar association has been found in dogs whose owners have an asbestos-related hobby or occupation. One study revealed more asbestos bodies were found in dogs with mesothelioma than in control dogs. Pericardial mesothelioma has also been reported in 5 Golden Retrievers unrelated to asbestos exposure.

here is another look at that golden study Rott study No where does it mention about spaying or neutering a dog but that a mutant gene or lack of a gene was the cause http://www.hindawi.com/isrn/veterinary.science/2013/941275/
As is the case in human osteosarcoma, the canine disease is characterised by an extremely complex karyotype indicating extensive genomic instability. Using two breeds of dog with different relative risk of osteosarcoma—rottweiler (12.5% incidence rate) and golden retriever (5% incident rate)—a recent study has shown that the individual genetic background, as defined by breed, influences the tumour karyotype in osteosarcoma [106]. Eleven loci (from 8 different chromosomes) showed a significant difference in the distribution of DNA copy number imbalances between tumours from golden retrievers compared with those from rottweilers; the most significant of these was the deletion of the WT1 gene which occurred in 48% of the rottweiler cases (14/29) but which was not observed in any of the 9 golden retrievers. Genomic loss of TP53 and CDKN2A suppressor genes were also restricted to rottweilers (7/29 (24%) and 5.29 (17%), resp.). Overall 15/29 rottweilers in this study showed genomic deletion of at least one of the WT1, TP53, CDKN2A, PTEN, or RB1 tumour suppressor genes. These breed-associated imbalances may contribute to or result from heritable risk factors. A larger study which profiled 123 cases of canine osteosarcoma by 1 Mb aCGH also demonstrated a high occurrence of genetic imbalances similar to human osteosarcoma and identified several new candidate genes in regions of the canine genome that had highly recurrent copy number abnormalities s responsible. 

I believe it will be the ability to map these genes will determine whether or not a dog will get cancer

For now an owner has to pick their own poison.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Personally for me, I could keep males intact (responsibly speaking of course) but any females I have will always be spayed because I just don have the facilities to ensure that another male dog won't be able to get to her. 

That being said, if I had a choice I would wait until eighteen month of age or after the female goes through one heat cycle before i "snip" them.


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Personally for me, I could keep males intact (responsibly speaking of course) but any females I have will always be spayed because I just don have the facilities to ensure that another male dog won't be able to get to her.
> 
> That being said, if I had a choice I would wait until eighteen month of age or after the female goes through one heat cycle before i "snip" them.


^^This! I completely agree, males aren't too hard to take care of, you just have to keep track of your own, with females you have to worry about every single male out there (well, males owned by more inattentive owners). And again I agree....wait as long as is feasible to wait for the dog to be full grown.


----------



## SDRRanger (May 2, 2013)

Greater Swiss said:


> ^^This! I completely agree, males aren't too hard to take care of, you just have to keep track of your own, with females you have to worry about every single male out there (well, males owned by more inattentive owners). And again I agree....wait as long as is feasible to wait for the dog to be full grown.


See, I would have an easier time with an unaltered female as opposed to a male...I would be able to keep my female away from others while in heat and watch her carefully. With an intact male you have to worry about all the morons who are bringing their IN HEAT females out in public to wander around. Like I said earlier, I would have to keep Ranger on a leash at all times if he was intact.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Greater Swiss said:


> ^^This! I completely agree, males aren't too hard to take care of, you just have to keep track of your own, with females you have to worry about every single male out there (well, males owned by more inattentive owners). And again I agree....wait as long as is feasible to wait for the dog to be full grown.


Well, like my friend said, (it was about human teenagers but I think it has some truth here too lol) when you have a male (if any species for that matter) you only have to worry about one d**k in the world, when females you have to worry about ALL of them :/ lol and I think the same is true with dogs.

I do Agree with Johnny bandit on that dogs altered later, for example, after maturity are healthier. But I can understand why shelters do pediatric spay and neuter surgeries.


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

You have a good point SDRRanger. It just seems that intact males tend to seek out a female in heat more intensely than the other way around, so with a male, you have to worry about one dog escaping, vs with a female you have to worry about several dogs getting to you. I guess it really is a 50/50 thing....depends on what a person finds easier to deal with, with their lifestyle. Its just been my experience having both intact male and intact female (not at the same time though) that the males have been easier to deal with. I've pulled an intact male (on leash) away from what I believe was an intact female in heat (also on leash THANKFULLY!) and that was easier than my experience having the random unleashed males wandering from miles around onto our property. 

Honestly, IMO, if all dog owners were even just a little bit responsible (ie: at least exhibiting some awareness, and basic restraint of their pets) dealing with intact animals, it would be SO much easier....the way things are in reality though (intact males and females left off leash or roaming free), the degree of vigilance needed to deal with an intact pet over the long term is just a bit too much for many (me included!) to be willing/able to deal with.


----------



## SDRRanger (May 2, 2013)

It seems like a different world in England. When we go visit family it seems EVERYONE has intact dogs and they bring them everywhere with them (tied outside the Tesco while shopping, outdoor yard sales, etc) and from what I've heard they don't have nearly the problem with pet overpopulation that the US (and Canada) does.


----------



## Kyllobernese (Feb 5, 2008)

I had no problem keeping my two males away from Kris when she was in season and would have left her intact longer (spayed at 13 months after having one season) but as I wanted to be able to have her out and around with me and training in Obedience and Agility, I had her spayed. When I had Monty, who is 8 years old in to the Vet to have his teeth done, they phoned up and asked if I wanted him neutered while he was asleep and I said a definite NO. Both he and Remmy are intact and I see no reason to change that. Neither of them has ever wanted to go running off and did not go nuts trying to get to Kris when she was in season. I will probably have other females spayed for my convenience but no males neutered.


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

Kyllobernese said:


> When I had Monty, who is 8 years old in to the Vet to have his teeth done, they phoned up and asked if I wanted him neutered while he was asleep and I said a definite NO.


I wish it didn't seem like many vets think anytime a dog goes under, reproductive organs should come out. I know so many people who have had this pushed on them. One man went to have a benign lump removed from his 8 yr old Doberman, and the estimate for the surgery included castration! No one had even discussed it with him! He told them he didn't want the dog neutered and they were like... flabbergasted that he would put the dog under and NOT want his balls gone. I actually once had a dream that Keeva had to go under at a clinic that wasn't our usual place. I didn't like the vet or the staff, and then they spayed her without asking, LOL.

My mom's intact male had a stomach virus a few months ago that presented somewhat like a blockage. I told her, "If he has to go under... don't let them take his balls! They might try." lololol


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

I really like my vet. They asked me once way back when I first brought Ma'ii in if we wanted him neutered. They went over the health risks of keeping him intact, and I still refused, so they dropped it and never brought it up again.


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

RCloud said:


> I really like my vet. They asked me once way back when I first brought Ma'ii in if we wanted him neutered. They went over the health risks of keeping him intact, and I still refused, so they dropped it and never brought it up again.


Yes, both the primary clinics I've used have never had an issue, they didn't even carry on about health risks, just said ok, that's fine. I was only worried because he was at the local e-clinic and they're um... not great.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

SDRRanger said:


> It seems like a different world in England. When we go visit family it seems EVERYONE has intact dogs and they bring them everywhere with them (tied outside the Tesco while shopping, outdoor yard sales, etc) and from what I've heard they don't have nearly the problem with pet overpopulation that the US (and Canada) does.


England has very similar shelter intake/kill rate as the US. A much smaller population all around, of course, but similar ratios. I also thought they had similar spay/neuter rates. Though maybe their intact dogs actually go places with their owners vs being tied in the backyard.


----------



## xoxluvablexox (Apr 10, 2007)

Dogs in Europe live longer... They don't s/n the same amount as in the US. A lot less.

Oh, and less vaccines too apparently. 


http://healthypets.mercola.com/site...sible-reasons-dogs-live-longer-in-europe.aspx

Honestly, it's a year difference between dogs in Europe vs N. America, and that apparently has something to do with the whole less s/n & less vaccines. Not sure about England specifically, compared to other European countries.


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

SDRRanger said:


> It seems like a different world in England. When we go visit family it seems EVERYONE has intact dogs and they bring them everywhere with them (tied outside the Tesco while shopping, outdoor yard sales, etc) and from what I've heard they don't have nearly the problem with pet overpopulation that the US (and Canada) does.


I'm not surprised it is different.....here in Canada (and the US) there is a ton more rural scenario going on and there seems to be a pervasive mentality that if someone has a large property, the idea is to let the dog just run free.....and a lot of people who do that seem to think "that's how dogs are supposed to be". I have a feeling that mentality isn't quite as pervasive in the UK. Sure, in some rural areas dogs do just fine like that, but that mentality seems to pervade in the more populated areas too, where people think "well my dog needs some freedom, dogs have to get the chance to roam free". It puts the responsibility of preventing these free roaming dogs from breeding onto others....like those who try to be responsible, but get rushed by these offleash dogs. I do think that the "free roam" attitude (which extends to those who INSIST that their dog is ALWAYS fine in their unfenced non-rural yard, with minimal or no supervision) has a huge impact on the ability to responsibly take care of an intact pet without major irritation. Some people can do it, others (yes myself included), just aren't willing to deal with the potential of free roaming/uncontrolled intact dogs causing issues.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

The UK is not really the same as other European countries. I was trying to find statistics on their shelter intake/kill rates and spay/neuter rates but all the info I Google comes back with US results even if I type "in the UK" :/. But I found a few. This organization apparently did a big survey (I can't vouch for their methods) that indicated that 34% of dogs and 11% of pet cats in the UK are not neutered: http://www.pdsa.org.uk/pet-health-advice/puppies-and-dogs/health and one thing I found said that the RCPSA kills about 46% of the animals they take in. Those statistics seem pretty similar to the US.


----------



## Whistlejacket (Jul 26, 2012)

I don't know if it significantly affects life expectancy, but a major difference between European countries and North America is that in Europe, pediatric spay/neuter is rare and generally frowned upon (at least in the countries I've lived in, which are France and the UK). I've never heard of a dog breeder that sold their puppies already neutered at 2 months old, and even rescue puppies and sometimes adult dogs are adopted out intact. 

I have no statistics for the UK but in France, according to this source http://www.facco.fr/-Population-animale-, 25,2% of male and 48,3% of female dogs are neutered - on average, 37% of all dogs are neutered. A few years ago the media talked a lot about the fact that the French came first when it came to abandoning their cats and dogs, with an estimate of 100 000 pets abandoned every year, but I haven't been able to find any reliable sources for that number. Shelters are very much full, though, and they are often forced to run of very little money because of the lack of funds. 

That said, Europe is comprised of so many countries with so many different customs regarding neutering pets that I don't want to generalise my observations to the whole continent.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

I don't really like pediatric spay and neutering but I can understand what they do it


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

Whistlejacket said:


> I don't know if it significantly affects life expectancy, but a major difference between European countries and North America is that* in Europe, pediatric spay/neuter is rare and generally frowned upon* (at least in the countries I've lived in, which are France and the UK). I've never heard of a dog breeder that sold their puppies already neutered at 2 months old, and even rescue puppies and sometimes adult dogs are adopted out intact.


That suggests to me some kind of knowledge on the subject....as a whole I mean, not just the "dog savvy". Otherwise it would only be the dog savvy people frowning upon it and the RSPCA, shelters, etc pushing the duty of controlling animal populations and pushing for altering of all dogs, regardless of age (though I did notice the RPCA page from willowy says that they s/n every animal that is adopted out). Really, logically speaking, I can understand why the SPCA and even vets here in North Amercia would push for altering of all dogs, when the general assumption has to be that people, no matter how loving they may be of their pets, will be irresponsible at some point. 

Just anecdotally I'm seeing a major cultural difference between how dogs are handled on either side of "The Pond". I wonder if there is any way to quantitatively see if there is an actual difference? I do think that (and I think Johnny Bandit touched on this), a change in mentality around responsible pet ownership would make as much, if not more of a dent in the incidence of unwanted litters as the current (possibly North American) s/n model of responsibility. It would lend itself to healthier pets too (IMO), at very least a change against pediatric s/n....as for the super long term effects of adult s/n, I dunno, I'll stay on the fence there, because I see potential benefits in both directions (especially unbred females....pyometria etc). 

I do wish people here were more responsible, I don't think I was ever quite so angry as when that big chocolate lab kept hanging around our place when Caeda was in her first heat, especially after he showed up with a piece of twine attached to his collar (a misguided and pathetic attempt to restrain the 100+lb dog). The jerkoff of an owner just laughed about it and (thankfully) came and picked his dog up each time (for all the good it did). Never mind having to spay Caeda way earlier than intended, just in case it DID take (the cost of which was not assisted with), but that dog, when it showed up was filthy, bleeding from a major cut in his leg (limping), and, I found out, had crossed a busy highway to get to us...at least half a dozen times during her heat. A sweet lovey huge lumbering guy who just didn't deserve to be left to cross roads and hurt himself on all of the hazards. Ugh...I'll stop ranting, I get angry every time I think of that guy. He was the model of responsible looking irresponsible pet ownership. Healthy, well fed, well exercised dog who was allowed to roam and get himself hurt like that. I will admit though....it did cross our minds to let the litter happen....because WOW those would have been some cute puppies with some awesome temperaments (Swiss Chocolate puppies lol), but we weren't about to become "those" people....and besides, Caeda (IMO) was too young to have made it through delivering a litter she got impregnated with at 9-10 months.


----------



## fourdogs (Feb 3, 2014)

This is always a fascinating topic to me.
In the past I showed bichons and toy poodles. I had one intact male, one neutered male (who absolutely despised ALL intact males)and 5 intact bitches. I NEVER once had an unintended pregnancy and that was with the male living in the same house as the females. I was diligent and kept them apart as needed. 
My male was also a gentleman and although interested and flirty, he was not one to break out of a crate (well, kind of hard for a bichon to do) or scream or whine or stop eating. Yup. girls were interesting. But he was a very nice male to live around. 

Now that I have human kids, I've stopped showing and breeding. My girls all go through at least one season before spaying. I have an intact mini poodle, who at 10 months, is behaving himself. He had a little bit of a naughty boy issue and started marking in the house but with the tethering method, we nipped that in the bud.

I don't plan to neuter him. I do NOT have any intentions of breeding him. He tends to be afraid of people/new situations and we are doing a good job working him through those fears. I worry if I neuter, that testosterone will suddenly be cut off and he will lose whatever confidence he's worked for (and found, good boy, Jack!)
He also behaves himself indoors, which is completely important to me.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> That suggests to me some kind of knowledge on the subject....as a whole I mean, not just the "dog savvy"


Eh, I dunno. A lot of the old farm vets are the same way (my vet won't spay cats until 5 months. . .ugh, do you know how many kittens I've had go into heat? Some times I tell him younger (3 1/2 months old or older) kittens are 5 months old just so he'll do it and he's never called me on it.) (I think he tells people 9 months for dogs) and I don't know if it's any real knowledge/informed opinion on the subject or just habit from when anesthetics were too dangerous for young animals.

I think the arguments that all unneutered animals are adding to the homeless pet population is because, well, they COULD. There's always a chance that something ridiculous could happen and there's the _potential_. My dad won't let an unspayed cat (well, or dog either, but they don't tend to just show up like cats) into/around their house because he doesn't mind ONE cat but danged if he wants one cat and her potential many offspring hanging around. I guess it's kind of not really a big deal if the owner is responsible but I can see why they make that argument. And if I spent all day killing other people's pet mistakes I'd be real bitter.


----------



## spotted nikes (Feb 7, 2008)

In parts of Europe, it's not just spaying/neutering being rare, but they also do not allow you to crop ears/dock tails. So is everyone that is against spay/neuter here ok with outlawing ear cropping/tail docking here in the US?


----------



## fourdogs (Feb 3, 2014)

For me and my dogs? Yes, absolutely. My mini poodle came to me with tail already docked, but I would have been perfectly happy with a natural tail. 
My minpin (RIP) had natural ears and a docked tail (also done by breeder) but I would've been happy with a natural tail as well. 

Dogs are gorgeous just as they are, cutting parts off of them to make them "pretty" or "macho" to me is terrible. JMO


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

spotted nikes said:


> In parts of Europe, it's not just spaying/neutering being rare, but they also do not allow you to crop ears/dock tails. So is everyone that is against spay/neuter here ok with outlawing ear cropping/tail docking here in the US?


I'm not ok with outlawing any of it, at all. However, I will say that I find a ban on all non-therapuetic surgeries more logical than the "cropping is cruel!!1!!1" in conjunction with "I don't want to look at dog balls so I cut them off" - which is an attitude I've seen first hand in someone from the UK. She sincerely believed cropping and docking was cruel, but did not see the hypocrisy in neutering her dog because she "didn't want to to look at danglies." 

But for what it's worth, I don't favor a ban on any of those things.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

some numbers about the strays in the UK. Interesting to see about how many dogs were euthed due to being considered a dangerous dog.
http://www.dogstrust.org.uk/az/s/straydogsurvey/straydogsurveysummaryreport2011.pdf


here is the first page I saw on this article http://www.humaneresearch.org/content/stray-dog-survey-2011


http://www.cardifpinnacle.com/content/press-release.php?release=pinnacle&id=371
The facts
* In 2010 there were around 8 million dogs in the UK – Pet Food Manufacturers Association Jan 2011
* 45.7% of households in the UK own a dog – Data monitor Industry Insight Interviews 2009
* In 2009, the RSPCA neutered 87,189 abandoned dogs - RSPCA 2010
* In December 2010 the RSPCA received 2,112 calls about abandoned animals - RSPCA Jan 2011
* The risk of testicular cancer is completely removed by neutering - Celiah Hammond Animal charity 2011

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090023313004486
Of deceased dogs with information available, 3961 (77.9%) were purebred, 2386 (47.0%) were female, 2528 (49.8%) were neutered and 1105 (21.7%) were insured. The overall median longevity was 12.0 years (IQR 8.9–14.2
The current findings highlight major breed differences for longevity and support the concept of hybrid vigour in dogs

about 50% of the dogs are neutered in England. Maybe it is a myth dogs are not neutered. maybe it is because they do not over vaccinate the dogs. Or maybe it is because the dogs are not exposed to all the chemicals dogs in America are exposed to

Looking at a sample of 40,139 death records from the Veterinary Medical Database from 1984-2004, researchers determined the average age at death for intact dogs - dogs that had not been spayed or neutered - was 7.9 years versus 9.4 years for sterilized dogs. http://www.mypetonline.co.uk/news-and-features/news/study-says-neutered-dogs-live-longer


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

spotted nikes said:


> In parts of Europe, it's not just spaying/neutering being rare, but they also do not allow you to crop ears/dock tails. So is everyone that is against spay/neuter here ok with outlawing ear cropping/tail docking here in the US?



I would give up docking and cropping if people would give up on altering dogs at least until their growth plates are closed.....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Personally for me, I could keep males intact (responsibly speaking of course) but any females I have will always be spayed because I just don have the facilities to ensure that another male dog won't be able to get to her.
> 
> That being said, if I had a choice I would wait until eighteen month of age or after the female goes through one heat cycle before i "snip" them.


Its really easy.... I do it with crates..... I have a bitch in heat, the bitches can be loose together inside or out.... Merlin is the opposite.... 

Okay the bitches are outside and Merlin in. Time for Merlin to have some outside time, I crate him, let the bitches in, put the bitch in heat in a crate, let Merlin outside, close door let the bitches out.. or if the not in heat bitch wants to go out with Merlin she can. 

No one gets condemned to a crate or a back room. All get time outside, exercise and inside time with us. 

And my back yard is ft knox.... No strange dog getting in...


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Not everyone has the luxury of being able to crate and rotate that many dogs and my back yard is most decidedly not Fort Knox lol. It's just rolled wire and at posts . I already have two dogs that can't be out unsupervised, I can't have anymore.


----------



## spotted nikes (Feb 7, 2008)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I would give up docking and cropping if people would give up on altering dogs at least until their growth plates are closed.....


Sounds good to me!


----------



## Pasarella (May 30, 2013)

I live in Europe,Latvia if we talk closer.I can say I know just few neutered dogs,actually just 3 from about...umm I dont know,more than 30.I would like to say we don't have any breed overpulation.It is very rare to meet any purebreed dog in shelter,but if there is one it is pulled out by ours.But we have problems with mutt overpopulation.Mostly GSD mixes and just big GSD type dogs,it seems like noone avtually wants dogs like that so they live in shelters for years(we don't have many kill shelters) perhaps some of them dies there from age.But at the same time I haven't had any problems with my intact females even if they went in heat all by once.Well,yes,I thought it would be a great idea to go for a small walk outside our yard with two females in heat.The walk was great,no dog bothered us,but soon after we came home there was one GSD,one GSD type dog and one caucasian ovcharca behind my gates fighting. There have been one huge mutt hanging by his leg in my fence,some small dogs inside my yard,but I would say it is easy to deal with intact female here.I just will never ever again go for a walk with them while they ate in heat  That was scary thinking that they might get inside and attack me.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> But we have problems with mutt overpopulation.Mostly GSD mixes and just big GSD type dogs


Which I'll point out were certainly the result of someone's GSD not being neutered. . .


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

I would like to say that I am not suggesting or demanding that everyone spay or neuter their dogs, what other people do with their dogs is their business. We don't really know how sterilization effects dogs and for some dogs and owners sterilization isn't the best choice for owner or dog. 

But sometimes it is, so I don't judge either way, whether they neuter or spay or not.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Lol the thought of Nard being hard to handle because he's intact.... He didn't pay one lick of attention to the in heat female we found. We kept Nikki and Trey both intact for years with no issues.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Laurelin said:


> Lol the thought of Nard being hard to handle because he's intact.... He didn't pay one lick of attention to the in heat female we found. We kept Nikki and Trey both intact for years with no issues.


You know, our females are spayed but I've been around Jack and Frost around bitches in heat (and they've been around bitches in heat their whole lives) and neither one of them *cares*. I mean yeah, obviously Jack made Frost and Frost has made puppies but unless they're given 'permission' as it were? Pffft. Whatever. I'm sure breed has something to do with this, but it's just another environmental distraction. That those two don't find particularly distracting.


----------



## Emmett (Feb 9, 2013)

CptJack said:


> You know, our females are spayed but I've been around Jack and Frost around bitches in heat (*and they've been around bitches in heat their whole lives*) and neither one of them *cares*. I mean yeah, obviously Jack made Frost and Frost has made puppies but unless they're given 'permission' as it were? Pffft. Whatever. I'm sure breed has something to do with this, but it's just another environmental distraction. That those two don't find particularly distracting.


Maybe the bolded part is something important to note. I've been in breeder's homes and their dogs have no problem ignoring bitches in heat. Breeder's posting here, or those closely connected with breeders, are all saying "no big deal". At the same token, I've seen tons of average dogs, those that weren't raised around bitches in heat and aren't being handled by breeders, go bananas when a bitch is in heat..._somewhere_. They'll travel forever and go to all manner of lengths to get to that bitch. Whereas for dogs who live in an environment where in heat bitches are expected and common...it's no big deal.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Emmett said:


> Maybe the bolded part is something important to note. I've been in breeder's homes and their dogs have no problem ignoring bitches in heat. Breeder's posting here, or those closely connected with breeders, are all saying "no big deal". At the same token, I've seen tons of average dogs, those that weren't raised around bitches in heat and aren't being handled by breeders, go bananas when a bitch is in heat..._somewhere_. They'll travel forever and go to all manner of lengths to get to that bitch. Whereas for dogs who live in an environment where in heat bitches are expected and common...it's no big deal.


I very much suspect this is the case. It's not just an environmental distraction to those dogs - it's a novelty that they haven't learned to live and work around. And it's a pretty danged enticing one.

Plus, you know what they say about controlling hte resource/distraction? Hard to do that when you don't have an intact female! (Not suggesting that someone have intact females to practice this, just that it's going to stay 'high value' as far as that goes.)


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Nard hadn't been around bitches in heat before Ada unless we're counting prior to 5-6 months old.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

spotted nikes said:


> In parts of Europe, it's not just spaying/neutering being rare, but they also do not allow you to crop ears/dock tails. So is everyone that is against spay/neuter here ok with outlawing ear cropping/tail docking here in the US?


I don't see how those are related in any way?

Crop/dock is a cosmetic procedure and it's not removing any vital hormones - just changing the way a dog looks.

I don't care if people crop/dock. I wouldn't personally crop a dog, though I own (and have always owned) a docked breed without an issue.

Also, nobody here is recommending that we outlaw spay/neuter, just that people get correct information and make an informed decision for their dog and their lifestyle.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

CptJack said:


> You know, our females are spayed but I've been around Jack and Frost around bitches in heat (and they've been around bitches in heat their whole lives) and neither one of them *cares*. I mean yeah, obviously Jack made Frost and Frost has made puppies but unless they're given 'permission' as it were? Pffft. Whatever. I'm sure breed has something to do with this, but it's just another environmental distraction. That those two don't find particularly distracting.


I think it depends a lot on the dog. I know a woman with male and female catahoulas and she had to send the in-heat female to her sister's house for a couple weeks (who luckily lives only a couple miles away), because her male was just ridiculous. She wouldn't even put him in the a car that the female had recently ridden in. He just has a very strong reaction to females in heat.

I know another woman with huskies and her one boy couldn't care less when females are in heat, but the other goes nuts (and even takes it out on the laid back boy). She generally has a "no males" policy because she finds them annoying to live with around the girls, and sends her best male show prospects off to a friend to raise. She's a very experienced breeder, fwiw.

Watson has been around a female in heat once (that I know of) while gaiting behind her at a show. Once he realized she was in heat, he lost his little head. lol Knowing his personality that's not surprising. I can imagine him being a general PITA in a house with an intact female, at least until he's old and much more settled.


----------



## BernerMax (Mar 15, 2013)

Yes I am hoping no one has an intact bitch around here (dont think so, as far as I can tell)... I think my intact pup would go nuts.... So far he hasnt tested the fence though....


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

The whole "I can't manage my male if it isn't neutered thing" drives me nuts. Training is training and testicles are not going to change that. Sure hormones can get reved up but train your dog, manage your dog. I don't know, my unaltered males are no worse then my altered ones. I will be the first to admit that I don't want a bitch in heat in my house. I spay females but I admit, it is for my convenience, not just because I don't want puppies. My males are not out creating puppies around the neighborhood because I manage them. 

I have had female Rotties live in the 13-14 and even one that was 15 year range. Those were all fixed. I guess we all have to determine what is right for our situations. I wish stupid people would fix their dogs though if they are not going to manage the situation. No need for more oops liters out there.


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

elrohwen said:


> I don't see how those are related in any way?
> 
> Crop/dock is a cosmetic procedure and it's not removing any vital hormones - just changing the way a dog looks.
> 
> ...


I do see how they are related...and to me it is one crucial fact. Both crop/docking and neutering/spaying are technically unnecessary. One affects cosmetics, one affects necessary levels of responsibility (if you exclude pro-altering medical arguments). 

As for outlawing spay/neuter...yeah, not a good idea, but I REALLY wish that people made a more educated decision about it, I know many people who expected me to get Caeda spayed practically right after I got her home! Of course this may be something that needs to start with vets, and even with the shelters/SPCA organizations, explaining that it isn't just a pregnancy preventative, and that a dog CAN (by most people) be managed if they are intact, and at very least educate people that it is a MEDICAL procedure that affects more than simply reproductive ability. 

Of course here in NA (maybe the same elsewhere, I dunno), responsibility is generally enforced and understood through leash laws, which aren't really enforced that often or strictly, plus they are generally obeyed because they are the law, not because of the responsible dog ownership that it confers to those who obey them....


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Greater Swiss said:


> I do see how they are related...and to me it is one crucial fact. Both crop/docking and neutering/spaying are technically unnecessary. One affects cosmetics, one affects necessary levels of responsibility (if you exclude pro-altering medical arguments).


Other than being unnecessary, I still don't see any relation between them, or why someone would have the same views on them. One involves altering a dog's hormones and ability to reproduce. The other is cosmetic. The arguments in favor of them are completely different, even if you can make one argument against them (that they're unnecessary). My reasons against spay/neuter don't have anything to do with it being a pointless surgery and are all about health.

Also, typically the people I know who are most anti-crop/dock are also very pro-spay/neuter. The opposite is also true, since it's the breeders who are for keeping crop/dock legal and also keep intact dogs. Those two things just don't go together for me.


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

I don't think cropping/docking and speuter ing have much in common besides that they are surgical procedures. Speuter is debatable about whether it's "unnecessary". Some would deem it necessary!

I also agree that many people who are anti-crop/dock are pro speuter. Why? Because they are rescue people (generally). They seem the oops litters and the botched crops all too often. They've it hammered into their heads that nobody is responsible enough. 

Neuter can be done for cosmetic reasons. I don't really like the look of Merlin's nuts. But we're keeping them anyhow.


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

RabbleFox said:


> Speuter is debatable about whether it's "unnecessary". Some would deem it necessary!


And medically speaking, they'd be dead wrong unless the dog had a life-threatening condition, like pyometra or testicular cancer. 

Hey, I don't really care. Blossom had a hysterectomy because the Mal rescue wanted her too and it also made her eligible for AKC performance events. The sterilization, lack of bleeding during heats, and pyometra prevention were convenient bonuses. It was an unnecessary surgery on a healthy young dog. I did it because it was more convenient for her to be sterile in many ways. I have reconciled myself with that. I still believe it was ultimately in her best interest. I am sure people feel the same at times about traditional spaying/neutering and that's just fine. 

But I'm not going to kid myself into "necessary." Cropping, docking, dew claw removal, and gonadectomies are all completely medically unnecessary for normal healthy dogs. I think anyone who choses those procedures shouldn't kid themselves over it, frankly.

ETA: Add hysterectomies (ovary-sparing spays) and vasectomies to that list as well.


----------



## reynosa_k9's (Dec 14, 2007)

cookieface said:


> On a population level, I think altering is a beneficial policy. The more people I meet, the more I realize most people can't handle intact dogs (or many other things). On an individual level, I think each person should make a decision based on a realistic evaluation of their specific situation.


I totally agree with this. I am VERY pro-spay/neuter for the general public. Working in rescue I see every single day the results of letting random dogs breed and it's heartbreaking.
As for my own: if my boys don't come to me already neutered they will not be neutered. As for my girls: I do spay all my females. Frankly it's just easier not to deal with an in heat female. I've had some in the past that weren't spayed and was able to keep them from the boys with little problem/effort, however, that was when my husband was still alive and able to help me. He was home with the dogs while I was at work. On my own - it's simply one more issue that I don't want to have to deal with. I don't trust them unsupervised and am not willing to chance it.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Yes, I have met people who owns intact animals and believe that just because their dog can reproduce don't need to reproduce to make a better animal. It is too bad that these owners are a minority. I hear all the time how nice their dog is and how beautiful the puppies would be. The last one was concerning a pit bull. How nice of a male they own and what a good dog he was. The owner was disappointed when the dogs did not hook up. It seemed that the male did not know which end to hump. The owner said they tried a couple of times and will try again when the female goes into heat again. My thoughts thank god! We do not need anymore pit bulls brought in this world.

Same feelings with the lady who purposely bred her Cavalier and Bichon for the second time. The first time an 'oops' litter and she had such good results and comments she repeated the breeding. WHY? 

I know of intact males who get more excited seeing the doctor than they do about the in-heat female in front of them. Artificial insemination to some dogs seem better than the real thing.

I have changed my view dramatically since entering the vet profession. I do not plan on breeding or showing my dogs. I will continue to have them neutered. I will not do pedi spay/neuters on them but I will not keep intact animals either because I have seen the health benefits and ease to own a neutered pet On average a neutered animal will live longer than an intact animal.


----------



## BernerMax (Mar 15, 2013)

Inga said:


> The whole "I can't manage my male if it isn't neutered thing" drives me nuts. Training is training and testicles are not going to change that. Sure hormones can get reved up but train your dog, manage your dog. I don't know, my unaltered males are no worse then my altered ones. I will be the first to admit that I don't want a bitch in heat in my house. I spay females but I admit, it is for my convenience, not just because I don't want puppies. My males are not out creating puppies around the neighborhood because I manage them.
> .
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

BernerMax said:


> Inga said:
> 
> 
> > And managing your intact male (so as to not reproduce?) thats containment over training right? There is no "training" that is gonna stop a male from mating a bitch in heat...
> ...


----------



## BernerMax (Mar 15, 2013)

Emily1188 said:


> BernerMax said:
> 
> 
> > ? I can show you pictures of intact males in down stays directly beside bitches in season. You can absolutely train them to obey around a bitch in heat. In Europe, dog sport events do not ban bitches in season and the boys are expected to take the field right after a bitch in heat runs, etc.
> ...


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

elrohwen said:


> I think it depends a lot on the dog. I know a woman with male and female catahoulas and she had to send the in-heat female to her sister's house for a couple weeks (who luckily lives only a couple miles away), because her male was just ridiculous. She wouldn't even put him in the a car that the female had recently ridden in. He just has a very strong reaction to females in heat.


This is easily fixed.....I could fix this in a few days.


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

BernerMax said:


> Emily1188 said:
> 
> 
> > Of course I know males can be obedient to ignore a bitch in heat! But I think we all agree that containment is best if you are not around to directly supervise.
> ...


----------



## BernerMax (Mar 15, 2013)

Emily1188 said:


> BernerMax said:
> 
> 
> > Yep, absolutely, that's just not what you said in the initial post. There definitely IS training that can stop a male from breeding a bitch in heat, is my point.
> ...


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

I think for most owners taking the time to train their dog is out of the question. Good God! some clients can not even walk their dogs without being pulled from spot A to spot B. Plus watch the street dogs of Russia and you will see what is really happening on the streets of America also. A dog I finally caught with a live animal trap was on the street for 6 months before we got her. She was running with a small pack of dogs about 6-8 in the bunch. A couple of dogs we recognized and told the owners to keep them contained in their yard. Excuse after excuse came out of their mouth. Finally we just started ticketing them every time we saw their dogs out running loose. A couple of dogs we were able to tranq. The dogs got to the point they would see our vehicles and take off. 

I love the owners who take the time to train their animals but those owners are far and few between. The owner who watches to make sure their intact dog does not impregnate another dog even less. Youtube is just full of joe average recording the matings of their average should not be bred dogs.

The dog that was live trapped- I took home and worked with her. She had some fear issues.my brother ended up with her and she became a great loving trusting dog.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Think about this..... Spay and neuter is pushed HARDER in the US than any other first World Country. 
In fact a good number of first world countries outlaw or at least discourage the practice. 

And we FAIL at the number of animals in our shelters by a LARGE margin. 

Spay and Neuter is not the answer....


Its funny how people are made to feel guilty about NOT altering their animals. 

IF anyone should feel guilty, it is the owner of an 8 year old dog that they had altered, that got Osteo Sarcoma..... Cushings etc


----------



## Shaina (Oct 28, 2007)

Inga said:


> The whole "I can't manage my male if it isn't neutered thing" drives me nuts. Training is training and testicles are not going to change that. Sure hormones can get reved up but train your dog, manage your dog. I don't know, my unaltered males are no worse then my altered ones. I will be the first to admit that I don't want a bitch in heat in my house. I spay females but I admit, it is for my convenience, not just because I don't want puppies. My males are not out creating puppies around the neighborhood because I manage them


Well said, Inga


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Think about this..... Spay and neuter is pushed HARDER in the US than any other first World Country.
> In fact a good number of first world countries outlaw or at least discourage the practice.
> 
> And we FAIL at the number of animals in our shelters by a LARGE margin.


 I don't know. . .do you have numbers on that? Like, which first-world countries have lower shelter numbers (relative to population), etc.? It seems to me that a lot of those that do seem to have fewer homeless animals also have extremely strict pet-keeping laws, that Americans would never put up with. And those that don't have those really strict laws have a lot of homeless animals.


----------



## Trillian (Jan 17, 2011)

I trust 5% of owners to manage their intact animals properly and not have litters. I don't want intact animals simply because I don't. Until the humans can be responsible for their animals and contain and manage them properly then spay and neuter should happen and happen more often then not. So no over population is not a spay/ neuter issue, it's a people issue and until we can fix that spay/ neuter needs to happen.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

A good blog from a vet.


Why I've Had a Change of Heart About Neutering Pets
September 30, 2013 | 88,048 views
Spread the Word to
Friends And Family
By Sharing this Article. 4,707 
31
50 
679
Email to a friend Email

Print



Download Interview Transcript
Visit the Pet Video Library

By Dr. Becker

Whenever I discuss scientific evidence related to the health risks of spaying and neutering here at Mercola Healthy Pets or on my Facebook page, I receive a lot of negative feedback from people who are absolutely certain I’m encouraging pet overpopulation and irresponsible pet ownership. So, I decided to make a video to explain to those who are standing in judgment why nothing could be further from the truth.

I Was Once a Huge Advocate of Spaying or Neutering Every Dog at an Early Age

I started volunteering at an animal shelter when I was 13 years old. I started working there when I was 14. I cleaned cages. By the time I was 17, I had become certified as a euthanasia technician by the Iowa State College of Veterinary Medicine. The ten years I spent working at a kill shelter and the exposure to certain clients and cases in my veterinary practice over the years have taught me more than I ever wanted to know or could share in this video about abused, neglected, and unwanted pets.

When I first opened my animal hospital, I was so adamant about my clients spaying their female pets before the first heat cycle, that if they didn’t follow my advice, I really became upset. I tried not to show it outwardly, but I suggested that those clients might be more ethically aligned with another veterinarian who didn’t feel as strongly about the subject as I did.

That was my politically correct way of saying, “Maybe you should go to another vet,” because I would literally lose sleep over having intact patients in my practice. I spayed and neutered thousands of my patients when they were very, very young, assuming I was completing my moral task as an ethical veterinarian.

Five Years into Private Practice, Many of My Canine Patients Began to Develop Endocrine Imbalances and Related Diseases

About five years after my practice opened, many of my patients started to develop endocrine issues. This was obviously very concerning to me, as these animals were not over-vaccinated. They were all eating biologically appropriate, fresh food diets.

The first light bulb went off in my head when I started researching why up to 90 percent of ferrets die of endocrine imbalance, specifically adrenal disease or Cushing's disease. Mass-bred ferrets that enter the pet trade are desexed at about three weeks of age. The theory behind why most ferrets develop endocrine imbalance is that juvenile desexing creates a sex hormone deficiency, which ultimately taxes the last remaining tissues of the body capable of producing a small amount of sex hormone – the adrenal glands. So I began to wonder… could the same phenomenon be happening with my dog patients?

By 2006, the number of dogs I was diagnosing with hypothyroidism was at an all-time high. Diagnosing low thyroid levels is very easy compared to the complex adrenal testing required to show that a dog has adrenal disease. I started to wonder if hypothyroidism was just a symptom of a deeper hormonal imbalance in many of my patients. Because even after we got those thyroid levels balanced, the dogs still didn’t appear to be vibrantly healthy or entirely well.

I contacted Dr. Jack Oliver, who ran the University of Tennessee’s adrenal lab, and posed my theory to him. I was stunned when he told me that indeed adrenal disease was occurring at epidemic proportions in dogs in the U.S. and was certainly tied to sex hormone imbalance. Now, whether veterinarians were testing and identifying the epidemic was a whole different story.

In a Flash of Recognition, I Knew My Insistence on Desexing All My Patients at a Young Age Had Created Serious Health Problems for Many of Them

At this point, I became overwhelmed with guilt. For many years, I insisted my clients follow my advice to spay or neuter their pets at or before six months of age. It hit me like a lightning bolt that I was making this suggestion not based on what was physiologically best for my patients, but rather what I felt was morally best for their owners.

As all of the patients that I desexed at a young age cycled through, many of them with irreversible metabolic diseases, I started apologizing to my clients. I apologized to my patients as well. Through my blanket recommendation that all pets be desexed because humans may be irresponsible with an intact animal, I had inadvertently made many of my patients very ill. As a doctor, this revelation was devastating.

I began changing my recommendations on spaying and neutering. I advised my clients to leave their pets intact. Now, you must realize my veterinary practice is filled with wildly committed owners. I am not dealing with uneducated, uncaring, or unreliable clients.

Of course, there were and are exceptions to my advice against desexing. But in general, my recommendation as a holistic vet is to perform any surgery – including spaying and neutering – only when it’s a medical necessity and not an elective procedure.

I recently adopted a stray Dachshund who is intact, and I plan to leave him intact. I am an intact female myself. I am proud to say that I have not experienced a single unplanned pregnancy in my personal life or in my career at my practice as a holistic vet catering to thousands of intact animals.

If you are an irresponsible pet owner who allows your intact pet outside without a leash and direct supervision, this video is not for you. Please sterilize your pet before allowing him or her outside again, as you are contributing to the overpopulation problem. Please rethink how you care for your pet, or consider not having pets.

My Views on Sterilization of Shelter Pets

The subject of spay/neuter is a huge one, and if I were to attempt to cover every aspect of it, this video would be three hours long. Suffice it to say that until we get our nation’s shelter systems revamped, animals will continue to be spayed as juveniles. For now, that’s that. We won’t change anything with this video. Are we pushing for shelter vets to learn ovary-sparing techniques that allow for sterilization without sex hormone obliteration? Yes. But for now, that isn’t happening.

I could have made a dozen different choices in my professional career that would have been satisfying, including being a shelter vet. If I were a shelter vet right now, I would be pushing for sterilization techniques that preserve normal endocrine function. I chose the path of a wellness veterinarian because that resonated the most with my personal goals in life. As I’ve explained, I’ve made many mistakes. I’ve apologized directly to the owners and the dogs that I desexed as puppies before I knew any better.

I am as committed as ever to preventing and treating illness in individual family pets. I’m not, however, advocating the adoption of intact animals to people who may or may not be responsible pet owners. Shelter vets don’t have the luxury of building relationships with their adoptive families, so all the animals in their care must be sterilized prior to adoption. I totally agree with this. I don’t necessarily agree with the method of sterilization being used.

Why I Believe Sterilization, Not Desexing, Is the Better Option

As a proactive veterinarian, I have dedicated my life to keeping animals well. I have learned and continue to learn the best ways to help pets stay healthy and the reasons disease occurs. I am also a holistically oriented vet, which means I view animals as a whole – not just a collection of body parts or symptoms.

I believe there is a purpose for each organ we are born with, and that organ systems are interdependent. I believe removing any organ – certainly including all the organs of reproduction – will have health consequences. It’s inevitable. It’s simply common sense.

There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that desexing dogs, especially at an early age, can create health and behavior problems. When I use the term “desexing,” I’m referring to the traditional spay and neuter surgery where all the sex hormone-secreting tissues are removed. When I use the term “sterilization,” I’m referring to animals that can no longer reproduce, but maintain their sex hormone-secreting tissues.

In my view, I would not be fulfilling my obligation as an animal healthcare professional if I chose to ignore the scientific evidence and not pass it on to Healthy Pets readers and the clients at my practice who entrust me with the well being of their animals.

Health Issues Linked to Spaying and Neutering Dogs

Before I discuss some of the health issues now associated with desexing dogs, first let me point out that there are two medical conditions that actually can be totally eliminated by desexing: benign prostatic hypertrophy or BPH (enlarged prostate), and pyometra (a disease of the uterus). However, a wealth of information is mounting that preserving innate sex hormones, especially in the first years of life, may be beneficial to pets, whereas the risk of pyometra or BPH in an animal’s first year of life is incredibly low.

Recent research has also discredited a couple of myths about the supposed benefits of early spays and neuters, including:

A study from the U.K. suggests there isn’t much scientific evidence at all to support the idea that early spaying of female dogs decreases or eliminates future risk of mammary tumors or breast cancer. This has been a much promoted supposed benefit of early spays for decades. But as it turns out, it’s based on theory rather than scientific evidence.
Similar to the situation with early spaying and mammary tumors, there’s a common belief that neutering a male dog prevents prostate cancer. However, a small study conducted at Michigan State University’s College of Veterinary Medicine suggests that neutering – no matter the age – has no effect on the development of prostate cancer.

And now for some of the disorders and diseases linked to spaying/neutering:

Shortened lifespan. A study conducted and published in 2009 by the Gerald P. Murphy Cancer Foundation established a link between the age at which female Rottweilers are spayed and how long they live. Researchers compared long-lived Rotties that lived for 13 years or more with those who lived a normal lifespan of about 9 years. They discovered that while females live longer than males, removing the ovaries of female Rottweilers before five years of age evened the score. Females who kept their ovaries until at least 6 years of age were four times more likely to reach an exceptional age compared to Rotties who were spayed at a younger age.

I spayed my rescued Rottie, Isabelle, when I adopted her at seven years of age. She lived to be 17, and she was still unbelievably vibrant at 17. She slipped on the floor in a freak accident and became paralyzed, which ultimately led to her euthanasia. But she was the oldest and healthiest Rottweiler I have ever met.

With Isabelle, I provided literally no medical care because she didn’t need it. Her body naturally thrived throughout her life. I fed her a balanced raw diet. I checked her bloodwork every six months, which was perfect until the day she died. Isabelle was a great example of a thriving pet that lived above the level of disease. I believe her sex hormones greatly contributed to her longevity and her abundantly healthy life.

Atypical Cushing’s disease. It’s my professional opinion that early spaying and neutering plays a role in the development of atypical Cushing's disease as well. Typical Cushing’s means the middle layer of the adrenal gland is over-secreting cortisol. Atypical Cushing’s involves the outer and innermost layers of the adrenal glands and occurs when other types of hormones are over-produced, usually estrogen and progesterone.

When a dog is spayed or neutered before puberty, the endocrine, glandular and hormonal systems have not yet fully developed. A complete removal of the gonads, resulting in stopping production of all the body’s sex hormones (which is what happens during castration or the traditional spay), can force the adrenal glands to produce sex hormones because they’re the only remaining tissue in the body that can secrete them.

Over time, the adrenal glands become taxed from doing their own work plus the work of the missing gonads. It’s very difficult for these tiny little glands to keep up with the body’s demand for sex hormones. This is the condition of atypical Cushing’s. Hormone disruption is a central feature in Cushing’s disease. Any substance or procedure that affects the body’s hormonal balance should be absolutely evaluated as a potential root cause.

Cardiac tumors. A Veterinary Medical Database search of the years 1982 to 1985 revealed that in dogs with tumors of the heart, the relative risk for spayed females was over four times that of intact females. For the most common type of cardiac tumor, hemangiosarcoma, spayed females had a greater than five times risk vs. their intact counterparts. Neutered males had a slightly higher risk than intact males as well.

Bone cancer. In another Rottweiler study published 10 years ago for both males and females spayed or neutered before one year of age, there was a one in four lifetime risk of developing bone cancer. Desexed Rotties were significantly more likely to acquire the disease than intact dogs. In another study using the Veterinary Medical Database for 1980 to 1984, the risk of bone cancer in large-breed, purebred dogs increased two-fold for those dogs that were also desexed.

Abnormal bone growth and development. Studies done in the 1990s concluded dogs spayed or neutered under one year of age grew significantly taller than non-sterilized dogs or those dogs spayed or neutered after puberty. The earlier the spay or neuter procedure, the taller the dog. Research published in 2000 may explain why: it appears that the removal of estrogen-producing organs in immature dogs – both females and males – can cause growth plates to remain open. These animals continue to grow and wind up with abnormal growth patterns and bone structure. This results in irregular body proportions, possible cartilage issues, and joint conformation issues.

Higher rate of CCL ruptures. A study conducted at Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center on cranial cruciate ligament injuries concluded that spayed and neutered dogs had a significantly higher incidence of rupture than their intact counterparts. While large-breed dogs had more CCL injuries, sterilized or desexed dogs of all breeds and sizes had an increased rupture rate.

Hip dysplasia. In a retrospective cohort study conducted at Cornell University’s College of Veterinary Medicine, results showed that both male and female dogs sterilized at an early age were more prone to hip dysplasia.

Breed-specific effects of spay/neuter. A recent study conducted at the University of California Davis involving several hundred Golden Retrievers revealed that for the incidence of hip dysplasia, CCL tears, lymphosarcoma, hemangiosarcoma, and mast cell tumors, the rates were significantly higher in both males and females that were neutered or spayed compared with intact dogs.

Other health concerns. Early spaying or neutering is commonly associated with urinary incontinence in female dogs and has been linked to increased incidence of urethral sphincter incontinence in males.

Spayed or neutered Golden Retrievers are much more likely to develop hypothyroidism.

A cohort study of shelter dogs conducted by the College of Veterinary Medicine at Texas A&M University concluded that infectious diseases were more common in dogs that were spayed and neutered at under 24 weeks of age.

The AKC’s Canine Health Foundation issued a report pointing to higher incidence of adverse reactions to vaccines in spayed and neutered dogs as well.

Among the reports and studies pointing to health concerns associated with early spaying and neutering, we also find mention of increased incidence of behavior problems, including noise phobias, fear behavior, aggression, and undesirable sexual behaviors.

Options to Traditional Spaying and Neutering

Veterinarians in the U.S. and Canada are trained only to spay and neuter, which is unfortunate since there are less invasive alternatives, such as tubal ligation, hysterectomy, and vasectomy. These techniques are quick and easy and certainly effective. In fact, commonly, once the technique is mastered, they’re faster, less risky and potentially less costly than a full spay or neuter.

But unfortunately, nobody knows how to do them in this country. The reason they’re hard to come by is because U.S. veterinary schools simply don’t teach these alternative procedures. They’ve never had a reason to. And until pet owners start demanding sterilization options beyond spaying and neutering, the status quo will remain.

As author Ted Kerasote and I have discussed on numerous occasions, in many European countries, there are intact free-roaming dogs running about under voice control of their owners. When female dogs go into heat, owners simply manage the situation by removing them from group social events until their heat cycle is complete. They’re kept at home, sequestered away from males. They’re walked on a leash.

Ted tells the story of a British veterinarian he interviewed who said most of the requests he gets to neuter dogs come from U.S. and Canadian citizens who are living in London. Rather than immediately complying with the request, the veterinarian talks with the pet owner about the actual necessity to desex the dog. For example, if the dog is always on a leash and always under the owner’s control, then how exactly would the dog become pregnant (or mate with a female) if it’s constantly with the owner and never off leash? The veterinarian says that he rarely has a British pet owner request a spay or neuter procedure.

Most Americans can’t even comprehend that it’s possible to keep intact pet dogs and not have millions of litters of unwanted puppies. That’s because we’ve been conditioned to believe that a responsible pet owner means spaying and neutering your dog. I was taught to believe the same thing -- that keeping an intact pet was considered irresponsible even if the owner is meticulously careful about not allowing the pet to breed.

Of course, our dependence on spaying and neutering as the only form of birth control is the result of generations of irresponsible pet owners and millions of unwanted dogs and cats that are killed annually in our animal shelters.

It is a vicious cycle, and it’s a very frustrating cycle to witness. Irresponsible people need to have sterilized pets. No one’s going to argue that point. Unfortunately, spaying and neutering responsible people’s pets doesn’t make irresponsible people any more responsible. They remain the root cause of the overpopulation crisis in this country.

My problem with the spaying and neutering issue is it’s the only current solution to the overpopulation problem. We’re not just halting the animal’s ability to reproduce, we are also removing incredibly valuable sex hormone-secreting tissues like the ovaries and the testes. These organs serve a purpose.

We’re slowly waking up to the fact that in our rush to spay or neuter every possible animal we can get our hands on – the younger, the better – we are creating health problems, sometimes life-threatening health problems, that are non-existent or significantly less prevalent in intact pets.

Responsible Ownership of an Intact Female Dog

First of all, you should know that not everyone is cut out to be the owner of an intact male or female dog. Part of the popularity of full spays and neuters vs. other means of sterilization is that it’s just plain convenient for pet owners. Not only do spays and neuters render the animal unable to reproduce, but they also remove all of the messiness of female heat cycles and most of the pet’s key mating behaviors for both sexes.

Female dogs don’t have monthly periods like humans do. They have one, or usually two heats a year. You can typically tell a female heat cycle is on its way when your intact female’s vulva begins to enlarge. Just like humans there’s bleeding involved, but unlike human females who are not fertile during menstruation, dogs are just the opposite. Female dogs can get pregnant only during heats for about three to four days as unfertilized eggs ripen in their bodies.

Some dogs will signal during this time by flagging, which means lifting the tail base up and to the side. Some females will stand and can be mounted at any time during their heat cycle, including before and after they’re pregnant or fertile. Others show no behavior signs whatsoever. Owners of intact female dogs must be certain of the signs of heat in their pets, so that they can separate them from male dogs during this important time.

Never underestimate the determination of an intact male dog that wants to mate with a female dog in heat. I’m telling you, if you have a female dog, male dogs will come visit her from across a tri-state area because she’s putting out some very attractive pheromones.

With proper training, reinforcement, and constant supervision, however, male dogs can learn to be in the presence of a female while supervised, even when she’s in heat, without mating. Some people with both an intact male and female don’t want to put the effort into managing male dogs around cycling females and simply ship them off to a friend or relative’s house until the heat cycle is over.

If you have a female dog in heat, you should never leave her outside alone even for a second. It doesn’t matter if you have a fenced-in yard. If there’s an unsupervised male around, there’s absolutely a risk of impregnation through the fence (or over the fence, or under the fence).

The heat cycle of a female dog lasts about three weeks, but the menstrual bleeding can be unpredictable during that time. It’s neither consistently heavy nor is it every day, all day. Many owners of intact female dogs invest in special diapers or panties that can hold a sanitary napkin to contain the discharge.

At my house we just get a baby gate, and we gate our special lady of the month in the kitchen area. We put a dog bed in there, and then we just mop a couple of times a day. Typically, female dogs are incredibly good at keeping themselves very clean. Most of the time, there’s very little mess.

Responsible Ownership of an Intact Male Dog

Intact males should receive positive reinforcement behavior training to stop urine marking in the house as well as any humping behavior that may occur.

The intact, male, adult Dachsie we just rescued – his name is Lenny – became Lenny Loincloth after a few days in our house for obvious reasons. He acquired his last name because he marked absolutely every corner of every piece of furniture we own. To reduce this totally undesirable behavior and reinforce healthy housebreaking, we put a belly band on him. We call it his loincloth. It’s a little diaper that holds his penis to his abdomen. Dogs innately do not want to urinate on themselves; they want to pee and mark on objects. By belly banding him, we reinforce good behavior like going potty outside and not marking in the house. I’m proud to say that in one month’s time, we’ve really helped him kick his marking habit for the most part.

Constant positive reinforcement was really necessary with Lenny, as it is with all dogs. We also discovered the first day Lenny was in our house that he liked to hump everything in sight. He preferred humping pillows and dog beds. We simply picked those pillows and dog beds up. We didn’t give him access to objects that tempted his undesirable behavior. He hasn’t humped anything in three weeks. So there are ways to positively reinforce good behavior and extinguish negative intact male dog behaviors if you put in the effort.

Your unneutered male should never be off-leash unless you are absolutely sure you won’t run into an intact female dog or he’s under constant voice control around all dogs. You also need to be in control of your dog while he’s leashed. If your intact male or female dog is able to jerk away from you when he or she gets excited, then your dog is not under your control despite the leash.

I recommend positive reinforcement behavior training for all dogs, especially intact dogs. And it’s an absolute necessity for powerfully built, intact male dogs. Remaining in obedience class for a dog’s first 16 months of life is an excellent foundation for good manners for the rest of his life.

If your dog becomes assertive, desexing (a full neuter) can be an important part of managing long-term behavior issues. Again, in this instance, if you have an aggressive dog, we must evaluate the risks vs. benefits. The health benefits of leaving a temperamental dog intact do not outweigh the greater risk of this aggressive animal being re-homed, dumped, or abused – or hurting another animal or human. With behavior issues, spaying or neutering can be a logical choice. It’s better to have endocrine disease but be in a loving home, than be disease-free but dumped at a kill shelter for a behavior problem.

Keep in mind that out in the world, at least in North America, you and your intact dog will not have a whole lot of company in this day and age. You won’t be able to take your dog everywhere a spayed or neutered dog is allowed to go. If your dog is a male, prepare to deal with plenty of prying questions and even anger from people who will pre-judge you as totally irresponsible.

When Lenny sees people, he flops on his back and says, “Hello, hello, hello!” Everyone’s comment is, “What are those?” And then “When are those coming off,” pointing to his testicles.

What About My Cat?

Luckily, thus far, research has shown that our feline companions don’t have the same negative long-term physiologic consequences associated with desexing that plague our canine population. We may identify potential links in the future, but thus far, it appears our canine companions are more negatively affected by spaying or neutering.

I made this video so you could understand why I no longer take a cookie-cutter approach to desexing all juvenile pets. The decision to sterilize, spay, or neuter your pet, at what age, and with what technique is a very personal decision that is based on your dog’s breed, temperament, personality, and your commitment to training, lifestyle management, and responsible pet ownership.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Sounds like a lot of work for most dog owners. Keeping a female on a leash, away from other dogs, can not be outside alone. No sleeping in the bed, out in the kitchen away from the family That sounds like a night of howling, whining and no sleep for the owner or dog. Not only will intact males come a calling on that bitch but a bitch in heat can become a great escape artist herself. 

For males keeping on a leash at all times just in case he should run into a female that is in heat. Obedience class for the first 16 months of its life. Belly bands and picking up all the pillows and beds to solve a problem of humping and marking his territory. 

I do not expect people to do all this when most owners can not even get vaccinations that are required by law. Nope for me it will be spayed and neutered pets. At least if they do get off leash or get out I do not have to worry about an oops litter. Too much work when I can let my females sleep with me at all times and my males can be off leash. I will not do pedi neuters nor encourage it but I will do the neutering of my animals and recommend neutering to others. It is the easy route but good golly I have way too much to do than worry about my dogs creating 'welfare pups' that will clog a system that is already exploding at the brim.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

As pointed out by our "veterinary insights" friend in the health section, it's nearly illegal for US vets to do alternative sterilizations (not technically illegal, but leaves them open to civil penalties in case something goes wrong). So until that's fixed in the medical system I don't know what can be done. 

If I were to keep both genders fully intact I would not keep both genders. That's a serious quality-of-life issue, and I don't have a friend I could ship one of them off to. And being that I kinda prefer types that tend toward same-sex aggression. . .hmm. Doesn't leave a lot of options for taking in homeless dogs :/.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> Sounds like a lot of work for most dog owners. Keeping a female on a leash, away from other dogs, can not be outside alone. No sleeping in the bed, out in the kitchen away from the family That sounds like a night of howling, whining and no sleep for the owner or dog. Not only will intact males come a calling on that bitch but a bitch in heat can become a great escape artist herself.
> 
> For males keeping on a leash at all times just in case he should run into a female that is in heat. Obedience class for the first 16 months of its life. Belly bands and picking up all the pillows and beds to solve a problem of humping and marking his territory.
> 
> I do not expect people to do all this when most owners can not even get vaccinations that are required by law. Nope for me it will be spayed and neutered pets. At least if they do get off leash or get out I do not have to worry about an oops litter. Too much work when I can let my females sleep with me at all times and my males can be off leash. I will not do pedi neuters nor encourage it but I will do the neutering of my animals and recommend neutering to others. It is the easy route but good golly I have way too much to do than worry about my dogs creating 'welfare pups' that will clog a system that is already exploding at the brim.



Its not NEARLY as much work as she makes it out to be.

I have not had a strange male in my yard in over 20 years. I have not had a dog or a bitch get loose. I let my in heat bitches out alone. I do not tolerate howling, whining etc. 

Unless you have a sloppy, lazy bitch, the blood is nearly a non issue. I do not isolate my bitches, I do not allow my dogs on the furniture so that is not a problem. 

We taught my buddie's 13 month old ACD some in heat manners today. We used the hell bitch who is not in heat.

He left her alone pretty quick.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> As pointed out by our "veterinary insights" friend in the health section, it's nearly illegal for US vets to do alternative sterilizations (not technically illegal, but leaves them open to civil penalties in case something goes wrong). So until that's fixed in the medical system I don't know what can be done.
> 
> :/.


Where do you get this stuff? No its not illegal or nearly illegal. 

Only thing is they do not teach vascecomies and tubal ligations in US Vet Schools. But that means nothing. 

My young friends girl friend is in vet school in the Carribean. St Kitts. They teach it there. 

All we need to do is demand the service as dog owners and it will happen. And that is ALREADY well in the works. 





Willowy said:


> If I were to keep both genders fully intact I would not keep both genders. That's a serious quality-of-life issue, and I don't have a friend I could ship one of them off to. And being that I kinda prefer types that tend toward same-sex aggression. . .hmm. Doesn't leave a lot of options for taking in homeless dogs :/.


There is not really a serious quality of life issue..... And it is ONLY a FEW days a year.

There is NO NEED to ship a dog off a friend. Simply do what dog owners are supposed to do in the first place. I have never sent a dog off. I have on a few occasions kept a friends dog while a bitch is in heat, ONE time. If they agree to let me teach them some manners. 

Last dog I kept, the folks bitch was in heat. Wanted me to keep the dog. I discussed it with them. I kept the dog. But the Hell Bitch was in heat as well. The dog stayed here. He was a bit of a butthead for a day but got the message.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Its really easy.... I do it with crates..... I have a bitch in heat, the bitches can be loose together inside or out.... Merlin is the opposite....
> 
> Okay the bitches are outside and Merlin in. Time for Merlin to have some outside time, I crate him, let the bitches in, put the bitch in heat in a crate, let Merlin outside, close door let the bitches out.. or if the not in heat bitch wants to go out with Merlin she can.
> 
> ...


This is all I do....

The blood thing is over stated... But unless the bitch is lazy...... They usually keep themselves clean. 
I get VERY LITTLE spotting.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Yes, but you said yourself your yard is Ft Knox and apparently you have a home setup conducive to how you do things. Very few people have a Ft Knox yard, or the training skillz to "not tolerate" whining and howling.

The "veterinary insights" guy said in the health forum that any vet who does things that are not the norm is open to civil liability issues. He cited a case in which a vet did a neuter slightly differently and something went wrong, and he was successfully sued for not sticking to the usual way of doing it. If you have evidence to the contrary you could go argue it with him .

And why do you post a thing making keeping intact dogs sound like a real chore if you don't agree with it?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> Yes, but you said yourself your yard is Ft Knox and apparently you have a home setup conducive to how you do things. Very few people have a Ft Knox yard, or the training skillz to "not tolerate" whining and howling.


I have a 3/2 ranch. NOTHING special. Just like every other 3/2 ranch style. 

My yard is fort knox..... I have 6 foot privacy with 6 foot chain link right behind it. I have buried field fence. 
I did it all myself. Not difficult. 

Getting a dog to be non reactive or at least not lose his mind is easy. If you can teach sit, down and stay you can do it. 




Willowy said:


> The "veterinary insights" guy said in the health forum that any vet who does things that are not the norm is open to civil liability issues. He cited a case in which a vet did a neuter slightly differently and something went wrong, and he was successfully sued for not sticking to the usual way of doing it. If you have evidence to the contrary you could go argue it with him .
> 
> And why do you post a thing making keeping intact dogs sound like a real chore if you don't agree with it?



I posted the blog because it was interesting.... I said it was interesting.... I NEVER said I agreed with it all. 


And I do not need to argue with the vet.... There is NOTHING about it that would increase liability. 

And both are SIMPLE procedures. Much easier and simple than spay and neuter. If someone does not trust their vet to do it, they should not trust the vet at all. Less to it than virtually any procedure they do. 

I have done enough castrations on cattle, horses, goats, sheep,etc. I am sure I could do the vasectomy. A tubal, I would have to see it done.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I have taught my dogs sit and down and stay (they may not be super reliable though. . .) but I can't manage to teach them to not bark if left alone away from the other dogs or me (if they know I'm around. They're OK when I leave the house). So I guess that's not entirely true.

Having recently put up a regular fence, I don't know that a double 6-foot fence with extra buried fencing is financially doable for many people. 

I imagine any vet could do a vasectomy. It comes down to how liability works if they do stuff they aren't taught in vet school. I don't know how veterinary liability works but I'm sort of inclined to believe a vet :/.


----------



## BernerMax (Mar 15, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> This is all I do....
> 
> The blood thing is over stated... But unless the bitch is lazy...... They usually keep themselves clean.
> I get VERY LITTLE spotting.


Yes that was our experience, knowing what I do now, I would chose a bitch for my next dog, and not spay her.....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> I imagine any vet could do a vasectomy. It comes down to how liability works if they do stuff they aren't taught in vet school. I don't know how veterinary liability works but I'm sort of inclined to believe a vet :/.


There is NO issue.... Vac and Tubals.... Are already used in the Veterinary world. Zoos use it. 
It is used in the sport dog world..... Not uncommon there. 

It is USED a TON in Florida. We have established troops of monkeys. The do vac and tubals as a population control. You CANNOT castrate a monkey and put it back in a wild troop. The other monkeys will kill it. 


I see that behaviors in packs of hounds. If you put a neutered dog in the pack. The intact dogs will beat the hell out of it. Does not work.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

I mentioned we tuned up my friends young male today. 

I do not tend to keep those panties on my bitches. But I do put one on for one day in each stage of heat. Then I put it in a big zip lock. Goes in the freezer for such occasions. 

So I have two bitches neither in heat at the moment. But I pulled out a pad from Keely when she was in standing heat. 

I put the panties on my old bitch. The hell bitch. For safety I put a sport muzzle on . 

Buddy brought his dog over. Took them out in the back yard. Let them run around. He was all sniffing up her backside. She was not having it. He sniffed a couple of times. She backed him off.... He finally tried to mount.... Ended up on his back with her standing over him telling him she was going to eat him. He got the message. 

then we did some obedience work.


----------



## Little Wise Owl (Nov 12, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> This is all I do....
> 
> The blood thing is over stated... But unless the bitch is lazy...... They usually keep themselves clean.
> I get VERY LITTLE spotting.


3 of our 4 dogs that were kept intact for a couple heats left blood EVERY WHERE. Our late maltese was intact her whole life and spotted next to never. Charlie, my previous Boston Terrier and my Mom's GSD, however, left blobs of blood all over. Smears all over the kitchen tiles, drippy drops all over the house (especially from our GSD)... The GSD would just drip as she walked. I wish I could say it was an easy fix with diapers/panties but they always somehow found a way to rub them off their butts.

I'd like to leave a bitch intact but I just haven't had any good experiences with heats.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Little Wise Owl said:


> 3 of our 4 dogs that were kept intact for a couple heats left blood EVERY WHERE. Our late maltese was intact her whole life and spotted next to never. Charlie, my previous Boston Terrier and my Mom's GSD, however, left blobs of blood all over. Smears all over the kitchen tiles, drippy drops all over the house (especially from our GSD)... The GSD would just drip as she walked. I wish I could say it was an easy fix with diapers/panties but they always somehow found a way to rub them off their butts.
> 
> I'd like to leave a bitch intact but I just haven't had any good experiences with heats.


I have heard.... Small dogs are worse.... But I don't do small dogs. 

Other than that, I have not had a bitch that did not keep herself clean. A dozen or so bitches.


----------



## Little Wise Owl (Nov 12, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I have heard.... Small dogs are worse.... But I don't do small dogs.
> 
> Other than that, I have not had a bitch that did not keep herself clean. A dozen or so bitches.


Our German Shepherd was the worst and our Maltese spotted almost never. haha I think it really depends on the individual dog.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> The blood thing is over stated... But unless the bitch is lazy...... They usually keep themselves clean.


It really depends. Mirada did her best to keep herself clean, but she would stand up and leave puddles of blood. Wesson isn't as heavy a bleeder as Mirada was, but she does drip a lot, and a bitch can't throw herself down and lick every 10 seconds 

Personally, the thing that bothers me most about bitches in season is that their genitals "wink" at you (No, seriously).


----------



## Little Wise Owl (Nov 12, 2011)

Xeph said:


> Personally, the thing that bothers me most about bitches in season is that their genitals "wink" at you (No, seriously).


HAHA Oh wow. lmao


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Xeph said:


> It really depends. Mirada did her best to keep herself clean, but she would stand up and leave puddles of blood. Wesson isn't as heavy a bleeder as Mirada was, but she does drip a lot, and a bitch can't throw herself down and lick every 10 seconds
> 
> Personally, the thing that bothers me most about bitches in season is that their genitals "wink" at you (No, seriously).


I never thought of that one


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> HAHA Oh wow. lmao


It's actually viewed as a sign by many that a bitch is ready to stand and be bred. They'll also do it after the tie has been completed and they're separated from the male. The best guess is that this contraction that causes the "winking" pulls the semen upwards and increases chances of fertilization.

/repro lesson


----------



## mjfromga (May 24, 2011)

I find that some people here are failing to be realistic. YES, if you are responsible enough, you can prevent unwanted litters. But are most people REALLY that responsible? Will they ever be? No and no. This is why it's really ridiculous IMO to stand against spaying and neutering for reasons like "if you're responsible, it's pointless". The world is loaded with unwanted dogs. Breeders often add to the problem by making even MORE dogs on purpose to help overpopulate the world. LAST thing we need is tons more accidents. Many dogs live perfectly healthy lives without their "bits". And many dogs live the same way with them. 

My current dog is an early neuter and he has not a single behavioral issue to be found. He has a weak hip which I link to the early neutering, but he was likely born with it anyway. Yes there are health problems linked to spaying and neutering, especially if it was done too early... but pyo has killed a LOT of bitches and I truly can't see myself owning a bitch in the future and not spaying. I prefer males and won't be owning a bitch again period most likely, but if I do... I am spaying outright.

I have an 11 year old intact female who has always had weight problems, has many, many behavioral problems, and also gets recurring mammary tumors. I prefer males intact really. My last male Lab cross lived to be 15 and though he disliked pit bulls, he really had no other behavioral issues and stayed fit and healthy until the end. My bitch has a lot of problems being intact, and I think spaying would have done her a lot of good, but she is too old now for it. 

I will chance the health problems and have all my bitches spayed. No bleeding, no pyo, no horrid recurring mammary tumors, no frustrating heats, no humping, no going off their feed for days at a time. I KNOW spayed females can have some of these problems, but it hasn't happened with me so I stand by spaying. I won't neuter males unless I have no choice... but I'll gladly have them done if needed or required for something such as boarding or a job. 

I also spay and neuter ALL cats. Their heats are very frustrating for them and they do so much better altered. To me, the adverse effects of spaying and neutering are outweighed by the benefits. Owners go by personal experience often... so it all comes down to choice.


----------



## Pasarella (May 30, 2013)

I guess something is wrong with me,I am not bothered by blood on the floor,also they keep sleeping with me in bed on heat too,just need to change blankets more often.I don't see that hard work here.It is not hard to go outside with them and hang out there for 5-10 minutes while they do their thing.Well ok,I show my dogs,take them to hunting lessons and breed them,but...meh...it is easy.You have to be blind,paralytic,drunk or just stupid to not be able to keep your female away from males.Really not a big deal.The only problem is no walks for 3 weeks.

Oh yeah,that "winking". That bum is everywhere,I mean EVERYWHERE you look.One of my females shows my other female what is happening to her week before she goes in heat.It is her 3rd day on heat and she puts her bum in front of her sister showing what's going on,if she moves away she jumps in front of her,puts her bum right in her face,like saying-you see?Do you SEE what is happening? The other usually goes in heat week later,so when it is the right time to breed they breed to each other.Jumps on,humps, then they change and they do that till they can't stand up anymore and fall asleep exhausted.And yes this is pretty weird to bee seeing this for a month


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> The only problem is no walks for 3 weeks.


And this is a serious quality-of-life issue for some people/dogs. Certain very high-energy dogs NEED their exercise every day or will eat your house. Having strange males hang around your place for 6 weeks a year. . .yeah that's great. It's really just not realistic for the majority of dog owners.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Willowy said:


> And this is a serious quality-of-life issue for some people/dogs. Certain very high-energy dogs NEED their exercise every day or will eat your house. Having strange males hang around your place for 6 weeks a year. . .yeah that's great. It's really just not realistic for the majority of dog owners.


That's pretty dependent on region though. There aren't any loose dogs in my area, so there's almost no risk of males hanging around your house with a female in heat, and no issues taking the dog for a walk. Of course I'd avoid the dog park, and maybe off leash hikes if the dog is going to get out of sight, but otherwise it's not a big deal here. In other parts of the country, I could see it being a nightmare.

ETA: I'm much more worried about owning intact females and males in the same house and dealing with that drama, vs dealing with only females. If I had one dog and it was female, not sure I would spay. With an intact male around, I'm leaning towards spay for my convenience more than anything.


----------



## Pasarella (May 30, 2013)

Actually there is just some neighbor dogs that comes to our fence,pees there,sees that no one is out and goes away.As they really can't get in I'm not bothered by them running on the other side of fence and thinking that they will get something.An about exercises-it is possible to play inside,and as it was very cold and windy last week and is very wet and muddy outside now we did play inside even before their season started.So no big deal at all.Nothing really changes. We actually could go for walks(and when we used to live in flat we did),but it is not nice to other dog owners to draw their dogs crazy.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

You have small dogs . Not so easy to exercise a big monster dog indoors .

For people whose dogs are their hobby, I can see it being thought of as "easy". For regular pet owners. . .not so much. I do believe the article Johnny posted is very close to the truth in how difficult it is for most people to handle a dog in heat. Some people read that and say "meh, not so hard" and others (like me) read that and go "OMG, there is no possible way I could live like that!".


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

elrohwen said:


> That's pretty dependent on region though. There aren't any loose dogs in my area, so there's almost no risk of males hanging around your house with a female in heat, and no issues taking the dog for a walk. Of course I'd avoid the dog park, and maybe off leash hikes if the dog is going to get out of sight, but otherwise it's not a big deal here. In other parts of the country, I could see it being a nightmare.
> 
> ETA: I'm much more worried about owning intact females and males in the same house and dealing with that drama, vs dealing with only females. If I had one dog and it was female, not sure I would spay. With an intact male around, I'm leaning towards spay for my convenience more than anything.


We don't have actual loose dogs in our neighborhood, but we do have a number of dogs "contained" by invisible fences (and some with faith and good thoughts?). I have no idea if most of them are male or female, intact or altered, but I do know that simply walking down the street will draw them out of their yards. I, personally, wouldn't feel comfortable walking an in-season bitch or allowing her to be loose in our fenced yard. I certainly wouldn't trust my husband to pay close enough attention to her when necessary.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> And this is a serious quality-of-life issue for some people/dogs. Certain very high-energy dogs NEED their exercise every day or will eat your house. Having strange males hang around your place for 6 weeks a year. . .yeah that's great. It's really just not realistic for the majority of dog owners.


That is NOT a serious quality of life issue there. 

And that being said, I have never NOT walked a bitch because she is in heat. I have NEVER not taken a bitch to a competition because she wi in heat. 
I have never had strange males hanging around. 

Merlin's breeder has someone in heat most the time. I am at her place all the time and have been for years. And she is in a country setting. I drive by loose dogs in yards on the way to her place. Never seen a strange dog at her fence. 

I have seen coyotes at her fence but they are there for the sheep. 


So far Keely has had two heats. My wife walks her alone twice a day and does not miss a day. It is part of my wife's exercise routine. 

And it is not like, a may approaches and BOOM it is done. There is foreplay etc involved. And if your bitch is not in standing heat (which is five days) She AIN"T going to let him mount her anyway. And you will be amazed at how easily your sweet littler loving bitch can convince a male suiter she ain't in the mood.


And here is the big things.... IF there are loose dogs or even the possibility of loose dogs where you walk your dog....

IF YOU CANNOT KEEP YOUR DOG FROM BEING BRED BY A RANDOM DOG ON A WALK, YOU CANNOT PROTECT YOUR DOG FROM BEING ATTACKED BY A RANDON DOG DURING A WALK. 
So if this is the case you need to be looking at alternative exercise anyway. 


And you keep talking about quality of life issues. None of them have had any merit to them. But if you want to talk about real quality of life issues. How about Cushings, thyroid issues, joint issues, early life cancers, diabeted, auto immune issues...... 

Those are serious quality of life issues. Issues that owners of intact very rarely face. But the same cannot be said for owners of altered dogs......



Willowy said:


> You have small dogs . Not so easy to exercise a big monster dog indoors .
> 
> For people whose dogs are their hobby, I can see it being thought of as "easy". For regular pet owners. . .not so much. I do believe the article Johnny posted is very close to the truth in how difficult it is for most people to handle a dog in heat. Some people read that and say "meh, not so hard" and others (like me) read that and go "OMG, there is no possible way I could live like that!".


No her statements are WAY over stated.....


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

Meh, for me the most obnoxious thing about owning intact animals isn't the girls in season. It's the boys that hate each other. Strauss and Loch are not friends with each other, but they're both fine with other dogs. Though if Strauss had his way, he'd never socialize with another dog at all.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

mjfromga said:


> I find that some people here are failing to be realistic. .


Yes they are... Keeping intact dogs is just not that big of a deal. 


I have said it before. IT ticks people off... But I am going to say it again.

If you are not responsible enough to keep an intact dog from breeding. You are probably not responsible enough to remember to feed them. And CERTAINLY not responsible enough to protect them from all the other perils they may face in their lives.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Xeph said:


> Meh, for me the most obnoxious thing about owning intact animals isn't the girls in season. It's the boys that hate each other. Strauss and Loch are not friends with each other, but they're both fine with other dogs. Though if Strauss had his way, he'd never socialize with another dog at all.


Yea.... that can be tedious. But I tend to get the opposite.... I have had more trouble with bitches not getting along. 

I have had males squabble but have always been able to work them back to where they get along again. I have had bitches get along for years then something clicks and they go after each other. then it is a blood fued for the rest of their lives.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Willowy said:


> And this is a serious quality-of-life issue for some people/dogs. Certain very high-energy dogs NEED their exercise every day or will eat your house. Having strange males hang around your place for 6 weeks a year. . .yeah that's great. It's really just not realistic for the majority of dog owners.


This. Without a yard, no walking a dog like Josefina would go very badly for three weeks lol. Besides, I don't like the mess xD


----------



## Pasarella (May 30, 2013)

*JohnnyBandit*,I agre.
Even my grandma did watch after her female on heat for 7 years.now the dog is spayed because she got pyometra(by the way not a big deal too,she lived with it from February to June when I came to visit them and she told me that the dog looks like in heat for several months,I noticed pus form her genitals and we took her to vet immediately,the surgery went fine and she recovered as fast as she would if it would have been just a spay).I would take my females for walks even in heat,but last time I did I had 3 big dogs fighting behind my fence,so I am a little bit afraid I might have to deal with aggressive,huge mutt with no fence between us.But heat isn't reason to no to go to our club show this weekend.Being intact is natural,this is how dogs are made.I even find sadistic to want to put dog under,make it feel bad,feel pain just so people could get away some responsibility from them and maybe have an easier life.The poor grandmas dog was in real pain after surgery,she didn't eat for 3 days,so we need to give her IV nutrition,she whined for 3 days and nights.How could someone want his dog to feel that way for no good reason?She lived perfectly normal life for 7 years being intact,she got sick and had to have surgery,and this is the only reason to put dog under pain-to save his life,not to make someones life easier.


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

Willowy said:


> For people whose dogs are their hobby, I can see it being thought of as "easy". For regular pet owners. . .not so much. I do believe the article Johnny posted is very close to the truth in how difficult it is for most people to handle a dog in heat. Some people read that and say "meh, not so hard" and others (like me) read that and go "OMG, there is no possible way I could live like that!".


I agree with you to a point....for people whose dogs are their hobby, absolutely much easier. For regular pet owners it shouldn't be considered an "OMG", but I can see (and I'm on this page) that it is a bit of a relatively minor pain in the butt (moreso if you can't afford a fort-knox fence). I wouldn't have minded going through heats with Caeda though if we hadn't needed to get her spayed, though the original intention was to have her go through a few heats, reach full adulthood (we were told for a swissy 1 1/2-2 years), then weigh the options then...Unfortunately we weren't able to. She didn't leave THAT much blood spotting (and we didn't have carpet, so not a big deal anyway), and there is always the doggy-diaper option if it is THAT annoying to people. I can see why a person wouldn't want to deal with it for the entire lifetime of the animal, but my stance is that anybody can deal with it a couple of times at least so the foundations of their dog's growth isn't damaged by removal of the hormones.



JohnnyBandit said:


> I have never had strange males hanging around.


 Well, you've been lucky. Might you have males hanging around already that may be deterring other strange males from hanging around? That might be affecting the presence of "strangers". Either that or you live in a place where there are FAR more responsible dog owners than places I've been. If you think it is a myth that strange I've got to say that you are completely wrong on that count. It does happen. 



> And it is not like, a may approaches and BOOM it is done. There is foreplay etc involved. And if your bitch is not in standing heat (which is five days) She AIN"T going to let him mount her anyway. And you will be amazed at how easily your sweet littler loving bitch can convince a male suiter she ain't in the mood.


Well, I know that my little loving bitch can tell a male she isn't interested....I've watched her do it with a MUCH larger dog, she'll do it all right, and she can get quite violent if a male is TOO persistent, but it can happen fast. Perhaps Caeda was in standing heat that day, but my DH turned and closed the door, and right after the door slid to, he heard the whine. TOPS 20 seconds, probably more like 10, and we looked outside and didn't see the big guy roaming around. Maybe we missed seeing him, maybe he was in a blind spot, or behind the landlord's bushes, but we were careful and it was fast (not to mention the time she got out of a door she shouldn't have been able to open). 



> If you are not responsible enough to keep an intact dog from breeding. You are probably not responsible enough to remember to feed them. And CERTAINLY not responsible enough to protect them from all the other perils they may face in their lives.


I don't want to consider this a personal attack, but seriously, I find it insulting. There are tons of people on this forum who do not feel equipped to deal with an intact dog (whether they are correct in their assessment of themselves or not, is besides the point), but they certainly feed their dogs, and I'm pretty darn sure they protect them pretty well, short of covering them in bubble-wrap. I'm just getting the feeling that if people had to meet your criteria for being a responsible owner there would only be about 10% of dogs that had homes. It is unfortunate that tubal ligation and vasectomy isn't a common option. I had asked about it and was looked at like I had three heads! The only reason Caeda stayed intact for as long as she did was my doing based on my research, if the vet had their way she would have been altered at about 4-6 months....and this is the advice from the medical professional I first turned to in my efforts to be a responsible owner of a healthy pet. 

Don't get me wrong, I agree that spaying and neutering is FAR less necessary than it is portrayed by most, and that most people CAN handle an unaltered dog, even though they may not realize it since the concept of spaying/neutering = responsible is so shoved down their throats (especially pediatric spay/neuter, which I find disturbing and wrong, but I understand the reasons behind it). Yes, as a whole, dog owners and society (including veterinary practice) need to reassess the entire issue and treat it differently, discuss it more effectively and promote training and supervision rather than surgery as the route to responsibility. That doesn't mean there is any reason to be demeaning to those on the forum who do not feel comfortable with an unaltered pet, they are getting medical advice from medical professionals like the one I first went to with Caeda, and the one who wrote the article above, who went on about how hard it can be. Educating us would likely make us listen more.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Even people who DO have oops litters obviously have managed to feed their dogs and protect them to a reasonable degree, or they wouldn't still be alive to get pregnant . And if there are mixed genders in the home, they could be perfectly safe and secure at all times and still manage to mate.

Loose dogs do not come looking for you unless there's a female in heat. I once took in a stray who happened to be in heat. There was a yellow Lab who hung around the entire time. We had never seen him before, never saw him again. Never knew where he came from. He was no attack danger but he certainly knew where to find the ladies.

Many of the intact females I've met have issues. One Lab wouldn't eat while in heat, lost like 10 pounds every time. Looked horrible about half her life. Fun times! 2 others I've known got MEAN for about a month every heat. Yeah, I'd love to live with a nasty dog 2 months out of the year. Another needed a pyo spay at age 8 and took a month to recover. If I can have a young healthy dog spayed and have her try to go for a jog the next day, I think that's more humane. But whatever people want to put their dogs through, I guess.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Greater Swiss said:


> I agree with you to a point....for people whose dogs are their hobby, absolutely much easier. For regular pet owners it shouldn't be considered an "OMG", but I can see (and I'm on this page) that it is a bit of a relatively minor pain in the butt (moreso if you can't afford a fort-knox fence). I wouldn't have minded going through heats with Caeda though if we hadn't needed to get her spayed, though the original intention was to have her go through a few heats, reach full adulthood (we were told for a swissy 1 1/2-2 years), then weigh the options then...Unfortunately we weren't able to. She didn't leave THAT much blood spotting (and we didn't have carpet, so not a big deal anyway), and there is always the doggy-diaper option if it is THAT annoying to people. I can see why a person wouldn't want to deal with it for the entire lifetime of the animal, but my stance is that anybody can deal with it a couple of times at least so the foundations of their dog's growth isn't damaged by removal of the hormones.
> 
> 
> Well, you've been lucky. Might you have males hanging around already that may be deterring other strange males from hanging around? That might be affecting the presence of "strangers". Either that or you live in a place where there are FAR more responsible dog owners than places I've been. If you think it is a myth that strange I've got to say that you are completely wrong on that count. It does happen.
> ...


My comments are not meant to offend or demean ANYONE..

But lets be real here……..
Think of the things and hazards we have protect our dogs from when they live in the home. 
1)	Puppies and dogs chewing power cords
2)	Swallowing lead curtain weights.
3)	Getting into household cleaners and poisons. 
4)	Running out the front door and into the street
5)	Swallowing a foreign object, such as a sock and having it lodge in the stomach.
6)	Poisonous plants in the yard. 

That is just a short list. And granted every dog is different. Some dogs outgrow the need to worry about such things. Some never do. 

But the fact is….. If a person cannot maintain an intact dog, Frankly I see no way they will successfully accomplish any of the above items. 

With a few exceptions…. People that think it is a big deal to keep and maintain an intact dog have limited exposure to living with intact dogs. And I am quite sure that I know the source of those feelings. 

I am a bit of an anomaly. I grew up the son, grandson, and great grandson of fairly serious dog men. All three at one time or another had breeding programs. Intact dogs were the way it was and part of the deal. (Suzy is a figurative dog) I understood at an extremely young age that when “Suzy” starting winking at you from the back side or dripping back there, or one of the boys started showing a lot of interest or being extra frisky, that it was time to stop running “Suzy” with boy dogs for a while. Until Grandaddy or Dad said different. Probably by ten, I knew when it was safe to let “Suzy” have yard time with boys again. It did not mean that “Suzy” was isolated, ignored, or kept in a vault. You just made sure all the boys were locked up before “Suzy” got turned out. I also knew that finding pups was a serious matter. Only our proven dogs found pups, and the daddy of those pups was always a proven dog. And there were reasons, that Grandaddy, Dad, Etc only wanted certain boys and certain girls to find pups together. 

Then in High School I started helping in shelters, etc. I was a dream to them. I had a TON of experience for my age. I started hearing their mantra of spay and neuter. I heard what they told people would happen. Yet I had years of experience (more experience than many of those I was assisting) 
I knew from experience that what people were told about intact dogs was incorrect. Basically a down right lie in many cases. And frankly I am of the opinion MOST of those that spread the mantra, actually believe it. Because it is what they have been told and they have no first hand experience to counter it. 

I still work with shelters and run a breed specific rescue. And I largely go with the status quo. And most of the rescues and those I am involved with know my personal feelings on the matter. The rescue I run still alters everything. I have not worked up the energy to fight that with the other directors. But they are well aware of my feelings on the matter. 

Last year I did go to bat for and was successful in getting a rescue to allow someone to take a dog and leave him intact. The dog in question was a gonzo drive obnoxious BC mix. He was off the hook. They were never going to find a home for him. A lady I know that does agility, flyball, Frisbee, etc at a highly competitive level was looking to add a dog. She is not too breed specific if she likes the dog. I got her to come look at him. She played with him five minutes and was drooling over him. She was ready to take him on the spot. IF he could remain intact. The shelter refused. She explained she was going to push him hard and was not inclined to deal with acl issues, did not want to take the chance of it mellowing him, etc. They still refused…. Took me a week, and another week of that dog going stir crazy and being unmanageable in his kennel, etc. They finally agreed.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> Many of the intact females I've met have issues. One Lab wouldn't eat while in heat, lost like 10 pounds every time. Looked horrible about half her life. Fun times! 2 others I've known got MEAN for about a month every heat. Yeah, I'd love to live with a nasty dog 2 months out of the year. Another needed a pyo spay at age 8 and took a month to recover. If I can have a young healthy dog spayed and have her try to go for a jog the next day, I think that's more humane. But whatever people want to put their dogs through, I guess.


If she was dropping weight like that something else was going on.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

We'll see what happens when Grey goes into heat in the next few months. I have a feeling that the tiny intact AKK male that lives nextdoor (and constantly escapes into our yard) is going to be scouting out our house like the FBI, in which case I'll wish very much that she could be spayed.

For me, its just a convenience thing. I don't really want to have to alter my routine 1-2x a year for a few weeks. Does that make me irresponsible? I guess so.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rescued said:


> We'll see what happens when Grey goes into heat in the next few months. I have a feeling that the tiny intact AKK male that lives nextdoor (and constantly escapes into our yard) is going to be scouting out our house like the FBI, in which case I'll wish very much that she could be spayed.


Why not just improve the fence?




Rescued said:


> For me, its just a convenience thing. I don't really want to have to alter my routine 1-2x a year for a few weeks. Does that make me irresponsible? I guess so.


No one is saying that.


----------



## mjfromga (May 24, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> If she was dropping weight like that something else was going on.


No, that's not always correct. We have a cat that this happened to, as well. She went off her feed for nearly an entire week when she was in heat and always lost lots of weight and got super skinny. She'd put the weight back on once the heat was over, but she lost it because she stopped eating during heats. Vet said it was somewhat normal, even though not all females in heat go off their feed like this. She was spayed and is much happier and all of these issues are gone.

Before you advocate not spaying, you need to look at the harm it has done many people. That is where I think you're truly wrong. You won't ever agree that in some cases, spaying and neutering is the best thing to do. If you can't agree that sometimes altering is a good thing, then there isn't a point in even bothering to comment any further. I don't tell EVERYONE to alter their dogs, but I think that in general, it's a good thing to do.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

Reminder folks, swearing is NOT permitted on this forum. Replacing key letters with asterisks is STILL considered swearing. The offending post has been deleted, but this will be the only warning. Carry on.


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

It's fascinating to me that non-medical professionals can advocate for surgeries. Where do you get the veterinary training and the dog's medical background from that make you qualified to recommend a medical procedure? I have to admit that does bemuse me. I don't advocate for crap because it's none of my business. If I'm asked I will give an opinion but recommending a surgery to a specific dog and owner? I'm not a vet, sorry. I don't recommend medications or surgeries because it's none of my business and I don't have the training to do so. Nor do I recommend that people keep their dogs intact. I am more than happy to share personal information and whatever research I'm aware of, but it really takes some cajones to know what surgery a dog needs. 

I am not against spay/neuter at all, really. For my personal pets, it's a big no, but I do understand its place in the world. I hope that we continue to alleviate the emotional baggage associated with spay/neuter, examine it with critical eyes, and consider alternative procedures, but I understand and even appreciate its role in humans keeping domestic dogs. I know people who are lovely pet owners who just don't want intact dogs. It's reality.

But I am NOT a vet and spay/neuter is a medical procedure that I am IN NO WAY qualified to recommend. And yes, I know it's a common procedure and yes I know "everyone does it" when it comes to recommending it, but that doesn't make it right. Can we at least settle for telling people to discuss it with their vets? I think a little more respect for what we're doing to dogs when we have them altered is prudent. It's SURGERY, not a new toy or even a brand of food. People are so quick to say you should do it, it's no big deal! A little respect for the dog's body and some acknowledgement that it's a choice to be made is warranted IMO.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> Can we at least settle for telling people to discuss it with their vets?


A person can't get their pet spayed/neutered _without_ discussing it with their vet . It's not like you can pop down to Walmart and get a DIY spay kit. I will recommend birth control whenever it's needed and unfortunately that's the only form of birth control that's widely available in this country for animals at this point.


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

Willowy said:


> A person can't get their pet spayed/neutered _without_ discussing it with their vet . It's not like you can pop down to Walmart and get a DIY spay kit. I will recommend birth control whenever it's needed and unfortunately that's the only form of birth control that's widely available in this country for animals at this point.


Nor can they get antibiotics or any other number of prescriptions medications, but do you go around telling people they need cephalexin, acepromazine, Xanax, Tramadol? I sure don't. I'm pretty sure that's not my business and I don't have the training or the dog's medical history necessary to do so.

Listen, I'm not deluded and I realize that people advocating for routine spay/neuter happens all the time and will continue to happen. However, if you can look at man and his dog, and know immediately that she "needs" to be spayed or "should" be spayed, and that it poses no significant health risk, AND you're comfortable giving medical advice like that, then you've got a level of nerve I will never have - thankfully.

A little bit of respect for the medical nature of these procedures is just something I'd like to see.


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

this is how stupid people are:

we have a dog that comes to daycare, she was found as a stray, she is not fixed because "it costs money"(yet they have $230 a month for daycare...) they are doing NOTHING about it, they are not watching her, they are doing nothing different, they don't even know how long her season is going to last and don't care. there are still bringing her to daycare every day for heavens sakes, which while I think is stupid, I am grateful for as we at least have the facilities to separate her and we can make sure she is OK, we are tracking her season and can make sure she is supervised at least 90% of the time and hope luck will take care of the other 10%. 

I will say again tho for myself as I keep seeing this over and over on this thread about spay/neuter being for convenience nd no other reason.. I do neuter for convenience, I just hate intact males. however spaying? I don't think taking care of intact females is even remotely difficult, I could not care less about the blood, I have even had 2 intact females at the same time as an intact male, wasn't difficult. I choose to spay all my dogs for HEALTH reasons, I really could not care less what someone's research on the matter is, my *experience* with intact is Pyo, mammary cancer and death by 10. my experience in spaying is healthy, long lived dogs with no problems whatsoever. hmm based on that track record which would I choose? Spay, obviously.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Why not just improve the fence?


Because I rent, its a "fence" thats just chicken wire (not even on 4 sides) and I can't alter it :/

The dogs potty in an xpen or on a tieout, they are only loose when I'm out there with them. But I know her going into heat is going to make me unable to use the tieout for a few weeks because of the neighbors stupid dog (and yes, I have called AC with the dog being loose and AC has come and talked to them before. Don't want to do more because I would be scared of them poisoning/harming my dogs or property)

Also, I guess the logical response to this would be WALK YOUR DANG DOG but neighborhood is sketchy enough that I do not walk the dogs after dusk. Which is a good portion of the day in winter.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Emily1188 said:


> Nor can they get antibiotics or any other number of prescriptions medications, but do you go around telling people they need cephalexin, acepromazine, Xanax, Tramadol? I sure don't. I'm pretty sure that's not my business and I don't have the training or the dog's medical history necessary to do so.
> 
> Listen, I'm not deluded and I realize that people advocating for routine spay/neuter happens all the time and will continue to happen. However, if you can look at man and his dog, and know immediately that she "needs" to be spayed or "should" be spayed, and that it poses no significant health risk, AND you're comfortable giving medical advice like that, then you've got a level of nerve I will never have - thankfully.
> 
> A little bit of respect for the medical nature of these procedures is just something I'd like to see.


 If I see a dog who clearly has an infection I am going to say "that dog needs antibiotics! Get him to the vet!". I don't know which antibiotics the vet will use but it's clear that infections need antibiotics. If a dog is in chronic pain I'm going to say "that dog needs painkillers! Get him to the vet!". I don't know what painkillers the vet will prescribe but a dog in chronic pain needs painkillers. Maybe those drugs will cause side effects; I have no way of knowing. But those are preferable to the fatal infection or chonic pain. Similarly, if a dog is in need of birth control, that's what i'll recommend. Possible side effects are preferable to an unwanted litter.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

mjfromga said:


> You won't ever agree that in some cases, spaying and neutering is the best thing to do. If you can't agree that sometimes altering is a good thing, then there isn't a point in even bothering to comment any further.


I have NEVER said it should never be done.


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

Miss Bugs said:


> we have a dog that comes to daycare, she was found as a stray, she is not fixed because "it costs money"(yet they have $230 a month for daycare...) they are doing NOTHING about it, they are not watching her, they are doing nothing different, they don't even know how long her season is going to last and don't care. there are still bringing her to daycare every day for heavens sakes, which while I think is stupid, I am grateful for as we at least have the facilities to separate her and we can make sure she is OK, we are tracking her season and can make sure she is supervised at least 90% of the time and hope luck will take care of the other 10%.


Yup, people can be REALLY dumb. To be fair though, I wouldn't call them responsible in any capacity, lol. It's hilarious they're spending money on DC but don't want to pay for spaying. Gotta love it. Ugh.

In my area we definitely have a population of pet owners who *could* care for an intact dog but don't want to. Or who would have to own fewer dogs because of household dynamics (sorry, but I do not believe that keeping opposite sex intact dogs in one household is something most pet owners want to do. I do it and it's not torture but it's not a picnic, and our house is pretty decently set up for separation...) I honestly don't think these people shouldn't own dogs just because they don't want intact ones. That's crazy. These are great people who provide great care to their pets, and it's not like they "hate" intact dogs but longterm it just wouldn't be feasible or pleasant for them. Again, it's reality.

That said, my area is pretty well off regarding animal welfare; we do not have roaming dogs at all, most dogs are routinely altered and vaccinated, etc. (When my girls are in heat I *never* see a stray male.) I think we're at the point in our welfare progression where it's ok for owners to be told they can consider at least delaying altering or considering alternative procedures. I've known some owners who delayed altering (wisely, given the breed they owned) and it went off without a hitch. 

That being the case, as I said, I think the reality is that many people will simply opt to alter their pets and I'm perfectly alright with that.


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

Willowy said:


> If I see a dog who clearly has an infection I am going to say "that dog needs antibiotics! Get him to the vet!". I don't know which antibiotics the vet will use but it's clear that infections need antibiotics. If a dog is in chronic pain I'm going to say "that dog needs painkillers! Get him to the vet!". I don't know what painkillers the vet will prescribe but a dog in chronic pain needs painkillers. Maybe those drugs will cause side effects; I have no way of knowing. But those are preferable to the fatal infection or chonic pain. Similarly, if a dog is in need of birth control, that's what i'll recommend. Possible side effects are preferable to an unwanted litter.


Sure, you can tell them to consider having the dog sterilized. But you don't prescribe a surgery. 

It's not a small difference, actually. Not to me at least.


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> If a person cannot maintain an intact dog, Frankly I see no way they will successfully accomplish any of the above items.


There is a very distinct reason that you can't see how a person can accomplish the basic safety of a dog, but not be able to keep an intact animal, you even stated the reason you can't see it:


JohnnyBandit said:


> I am a bit of an anomaly. I grew up the son, grandson, and great grandson of fairly serious dog men. All three at one time or another had breeding programs. Intact dogs were the way it was and part of the deal.


 You grew up around it, which is a major anomaly compared to the majority of the dog-owning public. A lot of the hazards you mentioned are ones that many of us, during our "first time dog owner" period had close brushes with....lots of OMG moments, and panics, and pulling things out of a puppy's mouth. First time owners, or even owners who have gone a long time without a puppy can easily miss some of those. There are a couple of things, like household cleaners that people think about right off the bat, but a lot of the other things everyone has struggled with, haven't had them as part of everyday life. I don't think you have ever had (at least not the same way that most of us have) those uncomfortable overwhelming moments where you are learning how to deal with a new dog or puppy, getting contradictory advice on health, training, welfare, etc from the internet, forums, vets, trainers, all contradicting one another, not to mention the generic North American culture of basic dog ownership (which in its worst incarnation has gone from lawn ornament to alpha roll). The surprise at how truly difficult a puppy can be was huge for me, as I'm sure it was for many....for you it was something you grew up around, perhaps not daily, but you were a part of it to some degree many times more than the rest of us due to your upbringing and family culture. Your learning curve, when you got your first dog of your very own was probably far less steep than the learning wall that some of us ran into when we were years, if not decades older. You make statements quite simply, like "improve the fence". This is one heck of a financial and physical challenge for some of us.... especially those of us who didn't realize how darn weaselly a dog can be when it wants to get out (or in). 

I definitely have huge respect and give big kudos to you for advocating for a dog to be able to leave a rescue intact. I think that is an awesome accomplishment and something to continue doing (for the right dog/owner combos) I don't think that spaying/neutering should be absolutely mandatory, nor should it be the cultural baseline for responsible pet ownership (dogs or cats! has any consideration been made towards what altering does to a cat's growth?), deep down I wish it were logistically possible to abolish pediatric s/n. I'm just saying that you, JohnnyBandit, don't seem to realize that the dog-associated culture you grew up in is VERY alien to 90% of the dog owning population, as is the amount of knowledge you grew up with.....so many of us have had it shoved down our throats by so many that the grail of responsibility is to alter the dog. Some of us have also made mistakes, or had accidents happen. You many not have been meaning to demean or insult, but fact is, on this forum we all know you as a very experienced individual, and have a fair amount of respect for your opinions and knowledge. Suggesting (actually, it was a statement, not a suggestion) that the lack of ability or comfort in managing an intact dog equates with a lack of an ability to tend to the necessity of feeding a dog is a pretty insulting thing if you put it in the context of the degree of weight many of us know your statements can carry. Many of us come here for help and advice, putting some of us down because we aren't the perfect shining example that you hold yourself to be can be pretty tough for some that are trying hard to do the best by our dogs. 

I for one tried to put more time in before spaying Caeda, and knowing what I know now, an in-heat female will never be more than 3 feet away from me. I'm happy that Dexter is neutered, but wasn't until almost 3 years old, his soon to be new family is great, and I have confidence they will keep him safe (especially since the puppy-phase is dealt with), but I wouldn't guarantee that they'd be stringent, or educated enough (no offence meant) to prevent an unwanted litter. Diesel is intact, and is with an excellent owner who will have no problems with him, as he closely monitors Diesel's interactions anyway, and keeps him very well contained. When I meet people with puppies, if they mention altering I ask for them to be careful with their pup and consider at least waiting until it is full grown before they do surgery. Any future dog I have, I will be waiting until they are full grown, then I will weigh the pros and cons at that time (who knows, there may be more research by then!). I figure that is the best I can do....if considering altering as an option makes me irresponsible, so be it, but it doesn't mean I don't take darn good care of my dogs well being.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Greater Swiss said:


> There is a very distinct reason that you can't see how a person can accomplish the basic safety of a dog, but not be able to keep an intact animal, you even stated the reason you can't see it:
> 
> * You grew up around it, which is a major anomaly compared to the majority of the dog-owning public. A lot of the hazards you mentioned are ones that many of us, during our "first time dog owner" period had close brushes with....lots of OMG moments, and panics, and pulling things out of a puppy's mouth. First time owners, or even owners who have gone a long time without a puppy can easily miss some of those. There are a couple of things, like household cleaners that people think about right off the bat, but a lot of the other things everyone has struggled with, haven't had them as part of everyday life. I don't think you have ever had (at least not the same way that most of us have) those uncomfortable overwhelming moments where you are learning how to deal with a new dog or puppy, getting contradictory advice on health, training, welfare, etc from the internet, forums, vets, trainers, all contradicting one another, not to mention the generic North American culture of basic dog ownership (which in its worst incarnation has gone from lawn ornament to alpha roll). The surprise at how truly difficult a puppy can be was huge for me, as I'm sure it was for many....for you it was something you grew up around, perhaps not daily, but you were a part of it to some degree many times more than the rest of us due to your upbringing and family culture. Your learning curve, when you got your first dog of your very own was probably far less steep than the learning wall that some of us ran into when we were years, if not decades older. You make statements quite simply, like "improve the fence". This is one heck of a financial and physical challenge for some of us.... especially those of us who didn't realize how darn weaselly a dog can be when it wants to get out (or in).
> 
> ...


I wanted to second this. I've been reading the thread and it seems like, Johnny, because it wouldn't be a problem for *you*, you infer that it shouldn't be a problem for *anyone*, ever. Even when others are telling you that it *is* a problem for them, you seem to insist that they just aren't trying hard enough and/or are irresponsible. 

Everyone's family situation is different, everyone's financial situation is different, everyone's living situation is different and, maybe most importantly, every DOG is different. Just because it works for you (be it to speuter or not to speuter) doesn't mean it is inherently the right choice for everyone, heck *anyone*, else.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Emily1188 said:


> Sure, you can tell them to consider having the dog sterilized. But you don't prescribe a surgery.
> 
> It's not a small difference, actually. Not to me at least.


I'm. . .not even sure how a random person can prescribe a surgery. Or what difference it would make if they tried.

And yes on people being raised around proper management. Super duper for them. For the rest of us it's just not that easy. My mom was raised with intact dogs, and her experience was that it's "impossible!" to keep male dogs away from females in heat; her childhood dogs had many puppies. When we had that in-heat stray she totally freaked out thinking we were going to end up with puppies, so we kept the dog in the garage for an entire month, not even letting her out to potty, just cleaning the concrete, only using the door into the house, with the outside door safely bolted and the garage-door opener disabled. Not a thing anyone would want to do to their pet dog twice a year .


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

Willowy said:


> I'm. . .not even sure how a random person can prescribe a surgery. Or what difference it would make if they tried.


Forgive me for using "prescribe" in the colloquial sense, as in "to lay down as a guide, direction, or rule of action." But thanks for the attitude!


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

Yep also thirding the management statement.

Also curious as to if there is anything to do in my situation (close neighbors, rental properties that cant be altered) partly because my situation is not rare (and thats why more people dont have intact bitches) and partly because I would love to not dread her going into heat!


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

*Greater Swiss* & *Ireth0*, nicely stated. You've put into words what I've been thinking for quite some time.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Emily1188 said:


> Forgive me for using "prescribe" in the colloquial sense, as in "to lay down as a guide, direction, or rule of action." But thanks for the attitude!


Sorry, I really wasn't trying to be attitudinous . What I mean is, what difference does it make if I say to someone "I recommend having your dog spayed" or "you _should_ have your dog spayed"? My opinion only means to them what they want it to mean.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

ireth0 said:


> I wanted to second this. I've been reading the thread and it seems like, Johnny, because it wouldn't be a problem for *you*, you infer that it shouldn't be a problem for *anyone*, ever. Even when others are telling you that it *is* a problem for them, you seem to insist that they just aren't trying hard enough and/or are irresponsible.
> 
> Everyone's family situation is different, everyone's financial situation is different, everyone's living situation is different and, maybe most importantly, every DOG is different. Just because it works for you (be it to speuter or not to speuter) doesn't mean it is inherently the right choice for everyone, heck *anyone*, else.


It really should not be a problem for anyone..... This is not something I just came up with on a whim. This is after pushing thirty years involvement with rescue. Over 25 years of training, etc. And I stand by my statement.... Of all the perils your dog faces and all the challenges an owner must face, keeping it from becoming pregnant or causing a pregnancy is far and away among the easiest...

I am saying two things here and two things only....

1) IF you leave your dog intact you GREATLY reduce chance of a number of nasty aggressive cancers, chronic serious health issues, and joint, ligament issues. 

2) MOST owners can easily manage an intact dog. IF they cannot. They are not going to be successful with managing other perils. 

Remember we are talking about 2 percent of a bitches life. In the realm of things.... The amount of time worrying about this falls somewhere between the best food choice and should I get plastic or stainless bowls. 

I am not saying people SHOULD..... I am saying they can... Without stress and a bunch of extra work. 

You mentioned finances... well cheaper all around to leave them intact. Things like improving fencing, etc is not about money either. It is about being resourceful. 

So many people find themselves sucked in to what the Speuter propaganda police say.....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rescued said:


> Yep also thirding the management statement.
> 
> Also curious as to if there is anything to do in my situation (close neighbors, rental properties that cant be altered) partly because my situation is not rare (and thats why more people dont have intact bitches) and partly because I would love to not dread her going into heat!


My back yard touches four other yards...I have not done a recent dog count but it is usually runs about 9 dogs... I have never dreaded it...

Can you put up temparary fencing? There are ways to get fencing CHEAP


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> My back yard touches four other yards...I have not done a recent dog count but it is usually runs about 9 dogs... I have never dreaded it...
> 
> Can you put up temparary fencing? There are ways to get fencing CHEAP


I have a feeling we don't have the same idea of cheap- not sure if I can, probably not since we have a backyard neighbor (its almost like a duplex, but the other unit is in the backyard) who we can't fence in.

And yeah, the reason why I'm dreading it is because I don't have secure fencing like you do  Having intact bitches in an area where there are loose, unneutered dogs and you have no fenced in yard is quite different from your situation.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Greater Swiss said:


> You grew up around it, which is a major anomaly compared to the majority of the dog-owning public. A lot of the hazards you mentioned are ones that many of us, during our "first time dog owner" period had close brushes with....lots of OMG moments, and panics, and pulling things out of a puppy's mouth. First time owners, or even owners who have gone a long time without a puppy can easily miss some of those. There are a couple of things, like household cleaners that people think about right off the bat, but a lot of the other things everyone has struggled with, haven't had them as part of everyday life. I don't think you have ever had (at least not the same way that most of us have) those uncomfortable overwhelming moments where you are learning how to deal with a new dog or puppy, getting contradictory advice on health, training, welfare, etc from the internet, forums, vets, trainers, all contradicting one another, not to mention the generic North American culture of basic dog ownership (which in its worst incarnation has gone from lawn ornament to alpha roll). .


Oh I know I am an anomaly..... In more than just dogs.... I don't have kids... (Had mis carriages with two different wives) But I doubt I could raise a kid the way I was raised. And I certainly could not battle my wife the my father and even more so my Grandfather battled my mother. I was CONSTANTLY pushed towards responsibility and adult hood. I witnessed things taken as a matter of fact that many parents would put their kids in therapy for seeing. 

And maybe I am more of an anomaly than I thought. Because I LOVE puppyhood. Its like a blank slate I can paint. I get to watch and help a tiny puppy grow into a fine dog. Its like a work of art. 

But I regular work with first time owners. In fact if you were on my fb page I have a bunch of young adult dog owner friends. Jokingly called my proteges. 

A first time owner can keep an intact dog well and without a bunch of stress or worry. 

This young man is a first time dog owner. The dog is Duke... A half Brother to Merlin. He not only owns an intact dog, he owns an intact DRIVEY ACD. And is doing it successfully. He owns that dog because of my word and recommendation. It only took me three months.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Oh I know I am an anomaly..... In more than just dogs.... I don't have kids... (Had mis carriages with two different wives) But I doubt I could raise a kid the way I was raised. And I certainly could not battle my wife the my father and even more so my Grandfather battled my mother. I was CONSTANTLY pushed towards responsibility and adult hood. I witnessed things taken as a matter of fact that many parents would put their kids in therapy for seeing.
> 
> And maybe I am more of an anomaly than I thought. Because I LOVE puppyhood. Its like a blank slate I can paint. I get to watch and help a tiny puppy grow into a fine dog. Its like a work of art.
> 
> ...


BIG DIFFERENCE. Duke CANNOT get pregnant.

Intact males? no big deal. Intact bitches aren't the same [IMO]


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rescued said:


> I have a feeling we don't have the same idea of cheap- not sure if I can, probably not since we have a backyard neighbor (its almost like a duplex, but the other unit is in the backyard) who we can't fence in.
> 
> And yeah, the reason why I'm dreading it is because I don't have secure fencing like you do  Having intact bitches in an area where there are loose, unneutered dogs and you have no fenced in yard is quite different from your situation.



I have about 80 bucks in the entire chain link fence in my back yard..... I got the fencing free and bought the posts at an auction. I could have got the posts free too but did not want to mess with digging them up and they were poured in concrete. Just cost me time and sweat.

Chain link is temporary. Ask your land lord permission to put down chain link and take it with out when you leave.



Rescued said:


> BIG DIFFERENCE. Duke CANNOT get pregnant.
> 
> Intact males? no big deal. Intact bitches aren't the same [IMO]



He wanted Duke.... I originally had him lined up for a bitch.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

And if you want bitches.... This is FIFI..... owned by a 20 year old young lady... I am not posting a photo of a young lady.. and this is her third intact bitch. She has been associated with me for years.


----------



## Avery (Nov 22, 2011)

I don't think anyone's arguing that it's impossible to keep intact animals without ending up with puppies. Or even that it's impossible for a first time owner. Just that there are a lot of dog owners out there who can't/won't keep a dog responsibly and for them spay/neuter might be a better option.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Rescued said:


> We'll see what happens when Grey goes into heat in the next few months. I have a feeling that the tiny intact AKK male that lives nextdoor (and constantly escapes into our yard) is going to be scouting out our house like the FBI, in which case I'll wish very much that she could be spayed.
> 
> For me, its just a convenience thing. I don't really want to have to alter my routine 1-2x a year for a few weeks. Does that make me irresponsible? I guess so.


But do you remember to feed them?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> But do you remember to feed them?


facetious anyone?


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Emily1188 said:


> Nor can they get antibiotics or any other number of prescriptions medications, but do you go around telling people they need cephalexin, acepromazine, Xanax, Tramadol? I sure don't. I'm pretty sure that's not my business and I don't have the training or the dog's medical history necessary to do so.
> 
> Listen, I'm not deluded and I realize that people advocating for routine spay/neuter happens all the time and will continue to happen. However, if you can look at man and his dog, and know immediately that she "needs" to be spayed or "should" be spayed, and that it poses no significant health risk, AND you're comfortable giving medical advice like that, then you've got a level of nerve I will never have - thankfully.
> 
> A little bit of respect for the medical nature of these procedures is just something I'd like to see.


Just to let you know you can get penicillin and lincocin both antibiotics without a prescription. I can go to the local farm store and pick these up and use them on my dogs/cats. Many farmers do; http://www.jefferspet.com/product.asp?pn=11520&green=608A0503-963A-54D5-A53F-6ED449F64A6C http://www.jefferspet.com/lincomycin-injectable/camid/LIV/cp/A2-L8/


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

It is no guarantee that keeping a dog intact is the safest road to take. Today a female who presented on Friday for protuse bleeding from the vagina was recommended for spaying due to the excessive bleeding. She was passing clots. The dog had presented 8 months ago with the same problem and was told to spay the dog. Owner did not want to spay the dog. The owner again did not want to spay the dog due to limited funds. For what it cost him for care he could have spayed the dog and had money left over if he did it the last time. He must have had a change of heart or mind today. Dog was spayed. She will never go in heat again, need a blood transfusion.

Friday an intact male pit bull was in for an ACL surgery. Of course it probably did not help that he had rolls of fat on him. Contrary to popular belief intact animals can be obese. That would probably be more of the cause of his ACL tear. 

For me I really hate the big ugly anus intact males get. Friday we also removed and sent for biopsy growths around the anus of an intact animal. The owner spent money for the biopsy and surgery. She did not want the animal neutered till after the biopsy reports get back so she can see if the tumors are caused by his testosterone. So more than likely the dog will have to have two surgeries within a month. 

Pyos are a serious matter and I have seen it kill dogs before. One dog DIC right afterwards because of the sepsis to her body. Open pyos better but a closed pyo can kill a dog quietly and fast. That ruptures inside and all that pus enters the body causing one sick possibly dead dog. 

My dogs usually are right back to their old self the next day.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> It is no guarantee that keeping a dog intact is the safest road to take. Today a female who presented on Friday for protuse bleeding from the vagina was recommended for spaying due to the excessive bleeding. She was passing clots. The dog had presented 8 months ago with the same problem and was told to spay the dog. Owner did not want to spay the dog. The owner again did not want to spay the dog due to limited funds. For what it cost him for care he could have spayed the dog and had money left over if he did it the last time. He must have had a change of heart or mind today. Dog was spayed. She will never go in heat again, need a blood transfusion.
> 
> Friday an intact male pit bull was in for an ACL surgery. Of course it probably did not help that he had rolls of fat on him. Contrary to popular belief intact animals can be obese. That would probably be more of the cause of his ACL tear.
> 
> ...


Data is rapidly piling up that puts the odds heavily in favor of intact dogs. 

And we have pyometra again.... All the folks I know..... All the intact dogs..... I have never directly known a bitch with pyo... I hear more about pyo in a week on here than I have in a lifetime in the dog community.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

I said that keeping a dog intact does not guarantee a healthy animal. I see it all the time. The clinic I work for is one of the busiest clinics in the area. We see a lot of stuff. Probably because we have in house testing for a lot of things and ultrasound machine for diagnostics and an orthopedic surgeon on staff. Today was a slow day and yet we did 15 surgeries. We had 3 doctors doing surgeries at one time. Most vet hospitals with only one or two vets on staff do not see that many in a week. This was nothing for us. We get referrals from other vets in the area because of time it would take for that vet who usually is a 1 or 2 vet practice to do a surgery like an exploratory.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> I said that keeping a dog intact does not guarantee a healthy animal. I see it all the time. The clinic I work for is one of the busiest clinics in the area. We see a lot of stuff. Probably because we have in house testing for a lot of things and ultrasound machine for diagnostics and an orthopedic surgeon on staff. Today was a slow day and yet we did 15 surgeries. We had 3 doctors doing surgeries at one time. Most vet hospitals with only one or two vets on staff do not see that many in a week. This was nothing for us. We get referrals from other vets in the area because of time it would take for that vet who usually is a 1 or 2 vet practice to do a surgery like an exploratory.


Nothing in life is guaranteed... 

But leaving a dog intact skews the odds in the dogs favor....


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

For you but not for me. I have a 17 year old JRT who was spayed young we assume because her nipples are very small and she is still very active. As a matter of fact, she was playing fetch with me tonight and playing tug with another dog. I had a Doberman live to be 10. not a big deal but seeing that he was in a house fire as a puppy and had terrible lungs his whole life. The fact he lived that long was a shock to all. We would x ray his lungs and all you would see is a haze of bronchial inflammation. Neutering did not kill him but inhaling smoke and having to be revived is what shortened his life. I doubt keeping him intact would have made a difference.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> For you but not for me. I have a 17 year old JRT who was spayed young we assume because her nipples are very small and she is still very active. As a matter of fact, she was playing fetch with me tonight and playing tug with another dog. I had a Doberman live to be 10. not a big deal but seeing that he was in a house fire as a puppy and had terrible lungs his whole life. The fact he lived that long was a shock to all. We would x ray his lungs and all you would see is a haze of bronchial inflammation. Neutering did not kill him but inhaling smoke and having to be revived is what shortened his life. I doubt keeping him intact would have made a difference.


If we are going to be anecdotal. 

of the 30 plus, maybe pushing 40 dogs I have owned. 

I have four not make it past 11. (other than a bitch I had killed hog hunting) 

Those are the only dogs that I have altered. 

Buc the Lab(my wifes dog technically) was the old man of the altered dogs. Osteo Sarcoma took him before he turned 10.

Bandit the ACD died at 6 from a rare Auto immune thing. His white blood cells were attacking his red blood cells. I am intimately familiar with the line. Nothing similar has popped up before or since. He was part of a puppy litter. One female died in a bad vehicle accident. A person died in the same accident. Another female jumped through a screen window and got hit. The other male died in his sleep about 4 months ago at 14. Last spring he killed a coyote. The sire lived to nearly 18 and the dam lived to almost 15. ACDs are known to live a long time. Some of the oldest dogs on record are ACDs. I have personally known a 25 year old. and a couple more in their early 20s. 

And if you care to do so, take some time and research Auto Immune issues and speutering. Especially Neutering.... Scary stuff. 

Katie the Catahoula- Died at 7 of cancer of the heart. I was involved with this line from birth. My grandfathers lines. We worked these dogs. Hunted hogs and herded cattle. We were getting 14-18 years out of these dogs. Many were working well into their teens. I produced the litter Katie was out of. Owned the sire and leased a bitch from a great Uncle. I forget how long the bitch lived. But Catcher the sire lived to 17. at 14 plus he was working stock on my cow calf operation. I retired him about 15 because he had visibly lost a step and after all those years with him, I did not want to witness him get killed because he slowed down. My pic Doc lived to be just shy of 16 and was baying hogs at 14. I sent the bitch back to Georgia to my Uncle. I forget how long she lived but she was 7 when I did the breeding. One dog out of that litter was killed by a hog. The rest lived into the teens. All went into working homes. Grandaddy had been around the line since childhood. Never saw heart Tumor. We worked these dogs HARD. Put them in danger with wild woods cows and feral hogs. And Katie Got Cancer.


Bronson the Rottweiler..... Well Bred.... I neutered him per breeder agreement. Died of liver cancer at four. 


I have had dogs fighting hogs, running deer, working cattle and make it to their teens. Over and over again. But alter them and their lives are cut in half.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

I've been working at my current shelter job for a bit over a year and I can think of two pyo cases right off the top of my head in the last few months (was noted on their paperwork as we brought them over to the building from spay/neuter) so I don't think that it being "rare" is entirely accurate.

Also, the fence is the expensive part  you said you got the chain link for free.


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Honestly, I don't see why one side's anecdotes should weigh more than another side's. And that's what I'm reading. 'Well your anecdotes say this but MINE say this'.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

Laurelin said:


> Honestly, I don't see why one side's anecdotes should weigh more than another side's. And that's what I'm reading. 'Well your anecdotes say this but MINE say this'.


THIS.

/tooshort.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Laurelin said:


> Honestly, I don't see why one side's anecdotes should weigh more than another side's. And that's what I'm reading. 'Well your anecdotes say this but MINE say this'.


Not the case.... I was not going to bring anecdotes into the discussion at all. 
But Luv chose to do so....

If there is a difference.... Luv knows what she observes whn they walk in the clinic. I some cases I have 50 years of history on the line the dog came out of.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rescued said:


> I've been working at my current shelter job for a bit over a year and I can think of two pyo cases right off the top of my head in the last few months (was noted on their paperwork as we brought them over to the building from spay/neuter) so I don't think that it being "rare" is entirely accurate.
> 
> Also, the fence is the expensive part  you said you got the chain link for free.
> 
> ...


Free fencing all the time on CL... You just have to take it down


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Free fencing all the time on CL... You just have to take it down


This may be true for your area but certainly not for all. For fun I just did a search for fencing on craigslist and kijiji for my area and came up with nothing.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

I have absolutely no idea how I would take down a fence haha! Or the tools it would require.


----------



## Little Wise Owl (Nov 12, 2011)

This is getting a little silly... I think at this point it's an agree to disagree situation. lol


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> If we are going to be anecdotal.
> 
> of the 30 plus, maybe pushing 40 dogs I have owned.
> 
> ...


I have a neutered male that will be 15 this may. My first dog was spayed as a puppy by the pound and she lived to be 17. Altering doesn't make the dog healthier ... just like I don't believe that keeping a dog intact makes them healthier either, I think we are forgetting that linage and breeding also play a part in determining health.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

Little Wise Owl said:


> This is getting a little silly... I think at this point it's an agree to disagree situation. lol


If only I could erect my own fence, maybe I could be a truly responsible owner


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

What about HOA that do not allow fences? More and more subdivisions are getting stricter about what can be erected or put up in a yard. I do not think those people should be considered irresponsible owners because of what the restrictions are in the housing property. 

I just do not believe that keeping an animal intact is a guarantee of health. Again today, 3 year old intact male Labrador was in for an ACL surgery. He was young, in shape, had nice muscle tone and good hips on x rays. Yet he had the classical drawer sign of an ACL tear. Friday it was an intact male pitbull. The study done on Rottweilers and osteosarcomas in my opinion did not for have a very large study base. Plus on the studies I have seen it is caused by a gene or lack of a gene. The studies done on Scottish Deerhounds who have a higher rate of osteosarcomas did not have the same results. I have to ask why. If it was due to being neutered than no matter what the breed the results would be the same. I have seen AHIA in Cockers and this is usually seen after a vaccine. Side note-one owner I was so mad at and hope he never gets another dog. He presented the dog to the clinic in the crate the dog had been in for a couple of days. The dog was so weak the poor pup of 5 months was so jaundice that the ear pinna glowed a brite yellow There was vomit and fecal matter dried on the dog. The dog reeked of urine. The dog had vaccines 3 weeks prior to this. He euthed the dog due to cost. BTW he said he came home from work to find the dogs like this. Sorry but anytime I hear of Auto immune I think of this poor pup. He was not neutered at this time and yet his life ended early but more from dumb owner disease than anything else. 

To say that your dog will be healthier to keep him intact. Or to say that to neuter him will be healthier is not right either. It is what type of battle you want to face. For me I find it easier to deal with neutered animals that I do not have to have a FT Knox type of yard and I can leave my animals uncaged at all times no matter the time of year. I have kept animals intact and also have them neutered to me it is easier to have them neutered. My dogs live a long healthy life, get vet care, do yearly blood testing and health checks. They are on HW preventive and go places with me. I do not have to worry about females going into heat, getting pregnant and if this makes me a bad owner than so be it. For many they see what I do for my dogs as being a responsible caring owner that got them out of the cage in the shelter.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rescued said:


> If only I could erect my own fence, maybe I could be a truly responsible owner



Frankly the sarcasm is getting a bit old. 

NO one remotely suggested you were not responsible. 

The point is not whether you can take down or build a fence or not. Nor is it whether you rent, have close neighbors etc. 


Your words.......


> Also curious as to if there is anything to do in my situation (close neighbors, rental properties that cant be altered) partly because my situation is not rare (and thats why more people dont have intact bitches) and partly because I would love to not dread her going into heat!


As I remember there is a health reason you do not want to spay this bitch. 

Pretty much it sounds as if you are trying to talk yourself into this being an awful and tedious experience.

At any suggestion, you come up with a reason why you cannot.

And there lies the point... Each situation is unique. But there is always a way.



OwnedbyACDs said:


> I have a neutered male that will be 15 this may. My first dog was spayed as a puppy by the pound and she lived to be 17. Altering doesn't make the dog healthier ... just like I don't believe that keeping a dog intact makes them healthier either, I think we are forgetting that linage and breeding also play a part in determining health.


There is strong evidence to the contrary...


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> What about HOA that do not allow fences?


You have to pick the dogs and homes that fit. HOAs in general are not dog friendly. A person chooses to live in a neighborhood with an HOA, they made a decision. 

An intact dog could still work. Just take a little more effort.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Frankly the sarcasm is getting a bit old.
> 
> NO one remotely suggested you were not responsible.
> 
> ...


The sarcasm was just sarcasm, I promise  Fence isn't possible due to rental things anyway so its a no-go. It would be an excellent idea for someone in a non-rental house (or renting from a different, non crazy realty company...). 

We will see how the experience goes. I was just being sarcastic, hence the , no hard feelings. And yes, she cannot go under anesthesia (grade v heart murmur and defects) so no spay. We will see how it goes. I signed up for it when I agreed to foster her so its not a huge deal, just inconvienent is all. Also partly because if I somehow mess up (or my roommate lets her out on accident or some freak thing) i KNOW she will die, because she would either die in whelp or die under anesthesia to do a spay abort. So just... more stressful than the average healthy 30 lb bitch owned in a decent area, kwim?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rescued said:


> The sarcasm was just sarcasm, I promise  Fence isn't possible due to rental things anyway so its a no-go. It would be an excellent idea for someone in a non-rental house (or renting from a different, non crazy realty company...).
> 
> We will see how the experience goes. I was just being sarcastic, hence the , no hard feelings. And yes, she cannot go under anesthesia (grade v heart murmur and defects) so no spay. We will see how it goes. I signed up for it when I agreed to foster her so its not a huge deal, just inconvienent is all. Also partly because if I somehow mess up (or my roommate lets her out on accident or some freak thing) i KNOW she will die, because she would either die in whelp or die under anesthesia to do a spay abort. So just... more stressful than the average healthy 30 lb bitch owned in a decent area, kwim?



Just relax about it. If the neighbors dog it a pain.... Take a clean water bottle mix 50/50 white vinegar and water. Dice up a hot pepper put it in there.... If he comes in your yard give him a snootful of that.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Just relax about it. If the neighbors dog it a pain.... Take a clean water bottle mix 50/50 white vinegar and water. Dice up a hot pepper put it in there.... If he comes in your yard give him a snootful of that.


You cant get close enough to the dang thing, thats why its so frustrating. He escapes when they're not home (??) and always stays just out of arms length so you can't grab him and take him to AC.

I guess I'm going to have to go outside with my dog EVERY TIME instead of standing at the door and watching her  I think we'll survive.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rescued said:


> You cant get close enough to the dang thing, thats why its so frustrating. He escapes when they're not home (??) and always stays just out of arms length so you can't grab him and take him to AC.
> 
> I guess I'm going to have to go outside with my dog EVERY TIME instead of standing at the door and watching her  I think we'll survive.


Well I have one of those super soaker water guns for the neighbors cats on my cars. goes about 30 feet...


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

some cities have laws and regulations on how a bitch in heat can be confined. Walking your bitch while in heat could cause YOU the owner to get a ticket. 
Confinement During Heat: Section 4-6

A pet owner must confine an unspayed (unsterilized) female cat or dog that is in heat (estrus) in a house, building or secure enclosure so that a male cat or dog cannot gain access. http://www.broward.org/Animal/Resources/Pages/AnimalLaws.aspx


An intact dog running at large shall be subject to higher civil penalties than a sterilized dog; provided, however, that if the dog is sterilized within 30 days of receipt of the civil violation notice, the penalty shall be reduced to the amount for a sterilized dog. An intact dog shall be sterilized if it has received more than two civil violation notices for violations of this section that, if appealed, have been affirmed. http://www.miamidade.gov/animals/library/chapter-5.pdf
Dogs in heat must be confined. (Section 5-20.1)

See I do not have to worry about this at all I like being able to take my dogs to public places throughout the year


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> some cities have laws and regulations on how a bitch in heat can be confined. Walking your bitch while in heat could cause YOU the owner to get a ticket.
> Confinement During Heat: Section 4-6
> 
> A pet owner must confine an unspayed (unsterilized) female cat or dog that is in heat (estrus) in a house, building or secure enclosure so that a male cat or dog cannot gain access. http://www.broward.org/Animal/Resources/Pages/AnimalLaws.aspx
> ...


Such laws are rare...... 

And Broward and Dade County? We call those Counties The (use your imagination) of the Caribbean. 

With all the issues in both of those counties, the least of their worries are intact dogs. 


That being said. I have NO problem with fines being severe for an intact dog at large. 

I have no problem with fines for dogs in general at large. being severe. I tried to push for a much higher fine for loose dogs in this county. But our AC is in shambles so it is kind of pointless. 

I was also a proponent of higher annual registration fees for intact dogs in this county. 
$40 bucks a year for intact dogs.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

luv mi pets said:


> some cities have laws and regulations on how a bitch in heat can be confined. Walking your bitch while in heat could cause YOU the owner to get a ticket.
> Confinement During Heat: Section 4-6
> 
> A pet owner must confine an unspayed (unsterilized) female cat or dog that is in heat (estrus) in a house, building or secure enclosure so that a male cat or dog cannot gain access. http://www.broward.org/Animal/Resources/Pages/AnimalLaws.aspx
> ...


We have a similar by-law here that females in heat must be confined to their owner's property (or inside? Can't remember the specifics)

Of course not everyone FOLLOWS that law, but it is on the books. (I didn't even know about it till after I started volunteering at the shelter)


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Sioux Falls has the same ordinance. I'm not sure about the smaller towns in the area because I never bothered to look . I wonder how often it's enforced though. . .


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Rescued said:


> The sarcasm was just sarcasm, I promise  Fence isn't possible due to rental things anyway so its a no-go. It would be an excellent idea for someone in a non-rental house (or renting from a different, non crazy realty company...).
> 
> We will see how the experience goes. I was just being sarcastic, hence the , no hard feelings. And yes, she cannot go under anesthesia (grade v heart murmur and defects) so no spay. We will see how it goes. I signed up for it when I agreed to foster her so its not a huge deal, just inconvienent is all. Also partly because if I somehow mess up (or my roommate lets her out on accident or some freak thing) i KNOW she will die, because she would either die in whelp or die under anesthesia to do a spay abort. So just... more stressful than the average healthy 30 lb bitch owned in a decent area, kwim?


I have always wondered why rentals are like that about fences, a fence done right can enhance the value of a home :/


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Willowy said:


> Sioux Falls has the same ordinance. I'm not sure about the smaller towns in the area because I never bothered to look . I wonder how often it's enforced though. . .


I did write out tickets to several owners for bitches that had attracted quite a number of suitors and was creating a mess for the neighbors. It was becoming dangerous for the kids in these nearby houses to be outside. I believe this is why most cities have them on the books. As far as issuing tickets and enforcing the law, unless neighbors complain, most officers are too busy just to be cruising neighborhoods looking for the law breakers of this ordinance.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Such laws are rare......
> 
> And Broward and Dade County? We call those Counties The (use your imagination) of the Caribbean.
> 
> ...


I am sure that the city you live in has such a law and they are not that rare. If not the city than your county. Check your ordinances as I am sure they are on the books.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> I did write out tickets to several owners for bitches that had attracted quite a number of suitors and was creating a mess for the neighbors. It was becoming dangerous for the kids in these nearby houses to be outside. I believe this is why most cities have them on the books. As far as issuing tickets and enforcing the law, unless neighbors complain, most officers are too busy just to be cruising neighborhoods looking for the law breakers of this ordinance.


Animal control officers are pretty much a thing of the past down here...

The idea behind the law is good in theory...

But it is also redundant. A decent owner is going to do this anyway
A bad owner probably does not know the law exists and would ignore it. 

On top of that the ones I have seen are vague. The way they are written in many cases an owner doing a breeding could be in violation of the law.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

The ones I have studied and researched in Florida and other states spell it out pretty well. Owners must confine their bitch in heat to a building, or an sturdy enclosure to allow no other animals entry and not allow it to be out in public. Pretty stiff fines in some counties. One had a $220 fine for first offense and mandatory court appearance thereafter for each offense. Heck speeding tickets are not that much.


----------



## BernerMax (Mar 15, 2013)

Actually I would like to take my large/ giant breed pup into town for a walk at the dog beach off leash, he is not aggressive at all, but I am pretty certain he would get attacked, as he is intact and I dont want that experience for him (I have witnessed the tough times intact males have at our dog friendly recc area)--
when we had our bitch go into early heat-- we did not know, partially d/t the fact that there was no reaction FROM the dogs at this park where she was walked (it was probably in the early stages of heat, but it was at least a week and a half)-- most of the males (99.9%) are neutered.....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> The ones I have studied and researched in Florida and other states spell it out pretty well. Owners must confine their bitch in heat to a building, or an sturdy enclosure to allow no other animals entry and not allow it to be out in public. Pretty stiff fines in some counties. One had a $220 fine for first offense and mandatory court appearance thereafter for each offense. Heck speeding tickets are not that much.



LOL Our speeding tickets start higher than that....and go into the 3 hundreds plus. Other than seatbelts.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> I am sure that the city you live in has such a law and they are not that rare. If not the city than your county. Check your ordinances as I am sure they are on the books.


My county does in fact have one.... I was on the advisory committee in 1999 and 2000 when we drafted the language. But ours is different. .




> The ones I have studied and researched in Florida and other states spell it out pretty well. Owners must confine their bitch in heat to a building, or an sturdy enclosure to allow no other animals entry and not allow it to be out in public. Pretty stiff fines in some counties. One had a $220 fine for first offense and mandatory court appearance thereafter for each offense. Heck speeding tickets are not that much.


The examples you posted are extremely vague. No provision for planned breedings, supervision, or transport. 

Broward County's ----Confinement During Heat: Section 4-6

A pet owner must confine an unspayed (unsterilized) female cat or dog that is in heat (estrus) in a house, building or secure enclosure so that a male cat or dog cannot gain access.


Dade County's is slightly better.- Sec. 5
-
20.1.
-
Confinement of intact female dog during estrus.
An intact female dog in heat (estrus) shall be confined during such period of time so that no other dog
may gain access to the confined animal, except for intentional breeding purposes.


Both are un enforcible. Not that they try.... But you could beat that in court.




Hillsborough County's.... The county I live in. 

Sec. 6-31. Female in heat.permanent link to this piece of content

The owner of a female dog or cat in heat (estrus) shall humanely confine such dog or cat in a building or proper enclosure so as to make her inaccessible to any male dog or cat, except for controlled, intentional permitted breeding purposes. When not in a proper enclosure, such dogs or cats shall be under the direct supervision of a responsible individual so that the dog or cat is not allowed to unintentionally come into contact with a male dog or cat and breed. 


It is not enforced either. 

Additionally Duval, Pinellas, and Polk Counties have such ordinances.... We have 64 Counties. 

And that is the way it is in much of the country. There may be a city ordinance, a county ordinance in a metro county, etc. But get out and away from major cities and it usually goes away.


----------



## mjfromga (May 24, 2011)

Kuma'sMom said:


> Reminder folks, swearing is NOT permitted on this forum. Replacing key letters with asterisks is STILL considered swearing. The offending post has been deleted, but this will be the only warning. Carry on.


My apologies, I didn't mean to get overzealous. However, in a forum that is meant for adults... I really didn't think it was that big of a deal, but whatever.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Rescued said:


> You cant get close enough to the dang thing, thats why its so frustrating. He escapes when they're not home (??) and always stays just out of arms length so you can't grab him and take him to AC.
> 
> I guess I'm going to have to go outside with my dog EVERY TIME instead of standing at the door and watching her  I think we'll survive.


Put the concoction in a super soaker? Lol one of the hug pump action ones. 

If the hot pepper is not feasible, then you can also mix a bit of a horse product called "wrap last" (which you can find at most feed stores and TSC's but be advised, don't do it outside on a windy day and wash your hands really good after handling the stuff lol.


----------



## BernerMax (Mar 15, 2013)

Well LOL had to call in our mobile goat vet today, and her dog that rides Shotgun is a little Border Terrier bitch (she will be shown, this yr, by the same handler as the guy who showed the 13 in Beagle at Westminister...) who happens to be in HEAT.... well wouldnt you know my neutered boy whined and scratched and worried near the car the whole visit-- my intact male was his usu playful self (although very curious when Vet opened up to get supplies, but then the little bitch was yipping a bit to get out)... interesting - intact boy is only 8.5 months though....
I do feel reassured though, that he is not over reacting to that heat smell- and acting like the same dog I know....


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

BernerMax said:


> Well LOL had to call in our mobile goat vet today, and her dog that rides Shotgun is a little Border Terrier bitch (she will be shown, this yr, by the same handler as the guy who showed the 13 in Beagle at Westminister...) who happens to be in HEAT.... well wouldnt you know my neutered boy whined and scratched and worried near the car the whole visit-- my intact male was his usu playful self (although very curious when Vet opened up to get supplies, but then the little bitch was yipping a bit to get out)... interesting - intact boy is only 8.5 months though....
> I do feel reassured though, that he is not over reacting to that heat smell- and acting like the same dog I know....


My intact male tends to make less a fool of himself around girls then my neutered boy as well. ha ha I have never bred my intact dog and won't but he has not been a hard dog to own by any means. He is trained and socialized and expected to behave, so he does.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

From our staff newsletter that I got today:

THIS is why I think s/n is an important tool for a lot of pet owners.



Y-axis is Animals euthanized in our county. The clinic only provides service for county residents (and our shelter)

(hopefully the picture will end up showing correctly, not sure why its sideways)


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

Rescued, that is one heck of a correlation!

Being Devil's Advocate, I'll say that there could have been other factors going on that could have had an effect, but it really does suggest that (whether it is a GOOD tool for some owners or not) that s/n programs can definitely decrease the numbers of dogs in shelters and therefore the numbers being euthed.


----------



## So Cavalier (Jul 23, 2010)

That graph certainly seems to support S/N programs as a means to decreasing the numbers of unwanted dogs euthanized in shelters.



> but it really does suggest that (whether it is a GOOD tool for some owners or not) that s/n programs can definitely decrease the numbers of dogs in shelters and therefore the numbers being euthed.


All this discussion about whether S/N affects the longevity of dogs one way or the other. Being euthanized as an unwanted dog in a shelter certainly shortens the lifespan of thousands of otherwise healthy animals.

I have always neutered my dogs. They have all lived well into their teens.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

BernerMax said:


> Well LOL had to call in our mobile goat vet today, and her dog that rides Shotgun is a little Border Terrier bitch (she will be shown, this yr, by the same handler as the guy who showed the 13 in Beagle at Westminister...) who happens to be in HEAT.... well wouldnt you know my neutered boy whined and scratched and worried near the car the whole visit-- my intact male was his usu playful self (although very curious when Vet opened up to get supplies, but then the little bitch was yipping a bit to get out)... interesting - intact boy is only 8.5 months though....
> I do feel reassured though, that he is not over reacting to that heat smell- and acting like the same dog I know....


At only 8.5 months old I would not consider your dog to be sexually mature yet. His breed generally does not mature to around 2 years of age. My intact male Rottweiler could have cared a less about females in heat till he reached 3 years of age. Your dog is still a juvenile and will act differently especially if the bitch is standing in heat.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

Greater Swiss said:


> Rescued, that is one heck of a correlation!
> 
> Being Devil's Advocate, I'll say that there could have been other factors going on that could have had an effect, but it really does suggest that (whether it is a GOOD tool for some owners or not) that s/n programs can definitely decrease the numbers of dogs in shelters and therefore the numbers being euthed.


Oh I have no doubt, i"m one of the people that ALWAYS says "causation is not correlation." Everyone feel free to pick it apart, since I can actually get answers (as to the influence of different things) and am curious!


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Rescue that is a good graph. It is sad working in a shelter and seeing the amount of dogs that people just walk away from. You know the dogs must have owners and yet no owners come looking for them. Some do but I often wondered about those other dogs who wait looking at the people going by. At times like those I would have loved to know what the dogs were thinking. When working in a shelter or vet hospital changes your perspectives a little bit and you see first hand what really goes on. No graphs or a study done by a small number of one breed of dog speaks of the volume of seeing first hand for yourself what really goes on. I will say that the work does have its rewards also.

I think shelters are doing a better job of educating the public about adoption and rescues getting animals out of shelters are helping too. I know growing up the shelter was just an outdoor area out in the country with dinky little cages/kennels. The lady in charge had like a garden shed to stay in during the cold weather or rainy days. Shelters today especially some that have good backing are open, friendly and do a lot of community awareness and adoption fairs. No longer hidden or deemed the gloomy little shop of horrors of yesterday, shelters have become more caring about the pet's needs. Plus I think the web with friendly on site pets for adoption has helped get animals adopted.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rescued said:


> From our staff newsletter that I got today:
> 
> THIS is why I think s/n is an important tool for a lot of pet owners.
> 
> ...


Interesting data...

Two problems....

1) it is extremely regionalized
2)Only half the data is there....It is only important if the number of spay and neuters in this location went up....


Additionally.... Was ANY or program changed? Anything. Law, Shelter hours, etc....

It feels good to say it worked.... But that graph does not show that it did.


----------



## kelly528 (Feb 13, 2014)

It's interesting. My boyfriend is from Hungary and his mom and he are pretty appalled at the standards by which people breed dogs in North America. Granted, the whole communist era and its fall had an impact on pet ownership and dog fanciers, I'm sure but as they told it, the general consensus is:

If your dog doesn't place in a show, _don't breed it_. I guess that if people want anything other than a €2000 show dog there, they scoop a pup out of a ditch (or Sochi) for free!

There are no 'designer breeds', no clowns trying to hawk their unpapered puppies for hundreds or thousands of dollars, etc. His mother paid $2000 for a maltese pup about a month ago and was horrified to find that it was getting lemon spotting on its coat before she even had it home. Here in Canada I can't count on one hand how many of my friends' parents decided to show their kids the 'miracle of life' and breed their random family pets. It's the world we live in over here, I think, where people can throw together any "purebred" pair of dogs and get some nice pocket change for the pups.

TLDR: Spaying / neutering family pets or any dog not destined to better the breed is a great deterrent for 'oops' / bad decision litters.

Say... has anyone posted that pitbull x chinese crested CL ad into this thread? I think that pretty much closes the case on the value of spay / neuter programs!


----------



## spotted nikes (Feb 7, 2008)

So Cavalier said:


> That graph certainly seems to support S/N programs as a means to decreasing the numbers of unwanted dogs euthanized in shelters.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Millions...not just thousands.
The majority of dogs in kill shelters are unaltered strays. Most will leave in a box via the back door enroute to the landfill. Over 3 million pets are euthanized each year. The majority of pet owners are NOT responsible enough to keep their dogs from getting loose, much less getting pregnant. 
I have yet to see any studies done on mixed breed dogs that are altered/intact. Instead a breed known for many genetic problems is used for the studies. And there is no control, for the dog's conformation, feed, etc. A poorly bred dog, that went on a spay/neuter contract or a puppy mill dog that was fixed, but then fed crap food, was possibly overweight, could have been used in the Golden study, against a show quality dog, kept at a healthy weight and fed quality food. Since show dogs are intact, and generally given better care, kept at a healthier weight, better conformationally than the avg puppy mill dog, the study is basically meaningless. They tested a small number of dogs, brought in to one clinic.
Anecdotally, my mixed breed dogs have lived well into their teens without problems. My purebred dogs (Cockers) have had an ACL surgery, and died early of heart or liver problems. All of mine have been altered.

I find it irresponsible to encourage people NOT to spay/neuter based on a tiny, uncontrolled study that doesn't account for variables as mentioned above. However the fact that millions of pets are killed in shelters each year, because they were unable to find homes for dogs who's owners failed to contain them, increasing the likelihood that they could have bred while loose, is overlooked. 

I think most dogs in shelters would rather lose their balls, and risk a chance of a miniscule rise in the chance they "might" get osteosarcoma/ACL injury, VS certain death in a shelter.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

I agree with spotted nikes. Too small of a study to say that it would make a difference. Plus when looking at studies there are a lot of variables to consider. Spotted NIkes pointed out just a few. The dogs that did develop hip/acl problems neutered by the breeder to cull out of a program and rehomed Breeders do this Keep a dog have hips x-rayed and then neuter and rehome if the hips are in question. A true study would be if all dogs in the study were fed the same food, lived in the same conditions and exercised the same way for both the control and test subject. Also, to consider the gene factors of the dogs. The DNA of the dogs in the studies I have read and seen are more of an influence than anything else. Breed two dogs that are cancer prone you are going to have pups prone to cancer, now breed two dogs that are longed lived and chances are you will have longer living pups. Semen and egg freezing would be viable for such studies. A breeder of Dalmatians pretty much bred out deafness in her line by being careful and testing for such a problem and only breeding dogs who did not carry such weakness. http://www.zyworld.com/jabbawockdalmatians/deafness.htm

The hardest part is any Joe Smo can breed their dogs and sell them. Those individuals believe it is their right to breed their dog and do not have to pay any consequences for doing so. Craigslist and oodles and hoobly and facebook market place are just loaded with the results of the Joe Smoz of this world selling off the results of their two average non-health tested dogs litters. They can find homes for them as pups. As untrained juveniles or young adults those dogs end up crowding an already crowded shelter/rescue system. Now if they were spayed and neutered not so much.

I would like to see data on intact stray animal compared to neutered stray animal/ Also , the return to owner data comparison. I know when I was at the shelter it was intact males that made up the majority of stray animals. Neutered animals made up for a small percentage and a neutered animal was more likely be reclaimed by an owner.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Interesting data...
> 
> Two problems....
> 
> ...


Shelter hours have stayed the same. There was a huge distemper outbreak in 2011 which I would imagine is why it spiked back up.

And yes, s/n rates increased. The clinic does public s/n 4 days a week.

At that clinic: 
6,620 s/n in 2010
6,891 in 2011
4,454 in 2012 but broken up differently due to the Feral clinic so I put the "least" number.

Stats for 2009 not online but can ask. So yes, the answer to


> It is only important if the number of spay and neuters in this location went up....


 is yes, the amount did!

Also, am I incorrect in thinking that the Golden study you posted in the OP was regionalized too, with the sample coming from one teaching hospital?
Also, I think an important thing is... pretty unlikely that providing low cost, accessable s/n for the public is going to result in MORE unwanted litters from those altered dogs, no?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rescued said:


> Shelter hours have stayed the same. There was a huge distemper outbreak in 2011 which I would imagine is why it spiked back up.
> 
> And yes, s/n rates increased. The clinic does public s/n 4 days a week.
> 
> ...


I am not saying it didn't. I am just saying all the information is not there. One cannot say that the S/N program had any effect based on that graph. In all probability is DID.... But....The data is not there to support it.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> One cannot say that the S/N program had any effect based on that graph. In all probability is DID.... But....The data is not there to support it.


What (identifiable) data would you need to make that conclusion- or to "fail to refute the hypothesis" in laymans terms


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

To Luv and Spotted Nikes..

I am not telling anyone not to S/N. And I am not advocating not spaying and neutering. 


Additionally it is NOT one study.... It is the UC Davis Study, The Purdue Study, The UK Study, etc. 

You can deny it if you like..... But the fact is... The data is there that serious chronic and life taking conditions are more prevalent in altered dogs. The OSTEO Sarcoma and Cardiac Sarcoma thing is HUGE. As is the Cushings and Diabetes connection. 

The pro S/N crowd loves the throw out the testicular and mammary cancer thing. What they omit is that those are easily treatable cancers. IF caught reasonably early. And if someone is paying attention to their dog, it will be caught early. Just as humans should be checking their testicles and breasts, dog owners should be checking their dogs. I cannot see how anyone would miss it if they are grooming and caring for their animals. 

The same S/N crowd omits the fact that if you neuter a dog you do not eliminate the risk of testicular cancer. You just replace it with a risk prostate cancer. If a dog remains intact through his fifth year He has less than 8 percent chance of getting prostate cancer.
http://www.vsso.org/Prostate_Tumors.html
There have been studies going back to the mid 1980's showing links between castration and prostate cancer in dogs. 

Structural differences between altered and intact dogs. Of course intact dogs can blow their acl/ccl.... But..... The fact is, castration/ovary removal prior to the closing of the growth plates, significantly delays the closing of the growth plates. That causes dogs grow tall and thin. It changes angles in which joints meet, changes distances tendons have to stretch, etc It reduces bone density. muscles, etc. 


So if we are going to talk about irresponsible.....

It is irresponsible to suggest, pressure, mandate that someone have their dog altered without sharing with them the potential of significant health concerns.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> To Luv and Spotted Nikes..
> 
> I am not telling anyone not to S/N. And I am not advocating not spaying and neutering.


Wait no but seriously. What data would you need to say that the s/n clinic made a difference in the euth rates in my area?


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> The fact is, castration/ovary removal prior to the closing of the growth plates, significantly delays the closing of the growth plates. That causes dogs grow tall and thin. It changes angles in which joints meet, changes distances tendons have to stretch, etc It reduces bone density. muscles, etc.


/\/\/\ This is one that I completely agree with as far as an anti s/n argument, or at very least and anti pediatric/juvenile s/n. I've studied human osteology, although it is somewhat different than the osteology of dogs, I strongly doubt that growth plates are any less important (my guess is that they would be even MORE important). 

I do agree that there is missing data from the chart, it would be really helpful to see the chart of how many s/n occurred over the same time period. To me that would be definitive. Now, here is the thing. I personally think that with my current experience, I could probably handle an intact dog, most likely for its lifetime. If by chance I thought I couldn't, or my family couldn't (lets just say DH, or kids if I had them weren't on board with helping). Would I still s/n for the purpose of trying to help keep those euth stats down? I have to say yes. I would (potentially) sacrifice my pet's longevity, to prevent the potential innocent puppies from being euthed (though I would do everything in my power to not s/n before adulthood). 

Actually, I've already done that...twice. Caeda MAY have been pregnant by that chocolate lab (the vet said he didn't see obvious evidence, but it could have been too early to tell without a microscope), and I neutered Dexter. Caeda made it to 10 months....she would have made it longer had I known and understoood then what I do know (how weaseley and fast that lab was, and that I should have FORCED my landlord to put a lock on our door). Dexter was over 2 1/2, fully grown, and considering he will be adopted out, I can't quite bring myself to trust the people he will go to, even if I think they are great I just can't bear the thought of him making puppies that could end up euthed. Neither dog, by being bred would add much to the breed (um...what breed lol), or to dogdom (though I do think Caeda would produce great puppies...I'm not a worthy judge of that). I wish I could have waited for Caeda, at least another year or so....but I will say, at very least, she doesn't have that lean lanky thing going on, she's bulky and solid, not a for-sure indicator, but encouraging at least.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

Greater Swiss said:


> I do agree that there is missing data from the chart, it would be really helpful to see the chart of how many s/n occurred over the same time period.


Okay. here is the thing- I can GET data (that has been made into data and exists), since I work there. But what do you mean by this? The clinic opened in 2009, so didnt exist before then. Do you mean "number of s/n performed by private vets in the county?" or "dogs registered in the county that are also altered?" or something else?


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

Rescued said:


> Do you mean "number of s/n performed by private vets in the county?" or "dogs registered in the county that are also altered?" or something else?


I mean the number performed in the same geographic area (by private vets and shelters) as the graph. If the number of s/n did go up (which I'm sure it did), it would be a much stronger correlation than just a date at which the program started....does that make sense? I completely believe that it did make a difference, but that extra quantitative data would help exclude some other outside influences that caused the drop in the euth rates.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

Greater Swiss said:


> I mean the number performed in the same geographic area (by private vets and shelters) as the graph. If the number of s/n did go up (which I'm sure it did), it would be a much stronger correlation than just a date at which the program started....does that make sense? I completely believe that it did make a difference, but that extra quantitative data would help exclude some other outside influences that caused the drop in the euth rates.


Yeah it does. But from a data standpoint thats not something you can quantify (and therefore not something that can be useful) due to the privacy records.


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

Rescued said:


> Yeah it does. But from a data standpoint thats not something you can quantify (and therefore not something that can be useful) due to the privacy records.


Ah....privacy. Figures. I understand the whole privacy thing, and respect it, but it would be kind of nice if statistics could be released. Heck, I'd happily go to a vet who had a whole privacy waiver stating that data (data only, no names or identifiers) was going to be collected. Oh well...


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rescued said:


> Wait no but seriously. What data would you need to say that the s/n clinic made a difference in the euth rates in my area?


I am NOT knocking the fact that Euths are down at your shelter. 

But that is all that graph you posted shows. 

Are the intakes up or down?
Are the Socio Economic conditions in the area improving or declining.
Is the human population in the area increasing or declining? 
Any new dog related local ordinances or state lawas enacted? 
Another shelter open? 
Any other campaigns or programs started up? 
New Responsible owner events? 
Has the capacity of your shelter gone up or down?
Any rescues partnering with the shelter? 
etc? 

To take your figure and say that euthanasia is down because of your new S/N programs is and assumption.... Without any supporting information.... 
A good assumption. But an assumption none the less. 

Those are just a few. Again I am not knocking your data or graph. But all it shows is the euthanasia at this particular shelter are down.

I can post up data for a large county animal control in which Euthanasia is steadily and dramatically down over the last ten years.

And from that we could make the same statement...... S/N Works. 

But then I could show data in which t he county budget for low cost and free s/n have been cut three times in the same ten years. And the current number of subsidized s/n is about a third of what it was 10 years ago. 

The point being.... There are lots of reasons Euthanasia goes up and down....


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

JB- one thing about diabetes in intact females. Owners are told to spay to help regulate their dog. 

Spaying diabetic female dogs
Immediately following heat, the ovaries of a bitch produce the hormone progesterone. Progesterone maintains pregnancy. However, progesterone has a negative influence on the role of insulin. Surgical sterilisation (spaying) removes the source of progesterone and helps normalise insulin requirements.

Bitches diagnosed with diabetes mellitus should be spayed as soon as possible. This will make their diabetes easier to manage. 
http://www.cat-dog-diabetes.com/dogs-sterilisation.asp


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> http://www.cat-dog-diabetes.com/dogs-sterilisation.asp


Yea the only place I have seen that, always traces back to Merk.... A drug company that makes insulin.....

Not biased there.....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> JB- one thing about diabetes in intact females. Owners are told to spay to help regulate their dog.
> 
> Spaying diabetic female dogs
> Immediately following heat, the ovaries of a bitch produce the hormone progesterone. Progesterone maintains pregnancy. However, progesterone has a negative influence on the role of insulin. Surgical sterilisation (spaying) removes the source of progesterone and helps normalise insulin requirements.
> ...


The thing is.......Luv, 

You are unyielding in your position....

My position is that it is up to the owner...

And an owner has to weigh their options. 

You call the studies weak... Tend to pick out single item to key in on...And Data from a drug company, ESPECIALLY Merck, is far from unbiased. 

And weak or not.... Non of the studies other than the UGA study which gets picked apart on a regular basis.... The "you must spay and neuter crowd" has not data to counter with. 

Additionally.... Data brought forth, such as rescued brought forth, fails time and time again. It shows euth numbers down, and says, see s/n works. But it fails time and time again....To show any direct link between s/n and a reduction in euth...

In a court, or in a scientific circle there is a word for this. circumstantial. 

The publishers of these "studies" always fail to factor in and mention all the other things that have changed in the last forty years. 

So when a study comes out.... That turns the S/N health issue at rest and turns it on its head.... How is your position going to be then?


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

I think it should still be up to he owner ... If they feel they need to s/n their dog then they should retain the right to do so ... Just because s/n isn't the right choice for your (general "your") dog doesn't mean leaving a dog intact is the best choice for all dog owners.


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> I think it should still be up to he owner ... If they feel they need to s/n their dog then they should retain the right to do so ... Just because s/n isn't the right choice for your (general "your") dog doesn't mean leaving a dog intact is the best choice for all dog owners.


I completely agree with you here, BUT there really should be better education given on the effects/bennefits of s/n vs. postponed s/n vs remaining intact. Even if general "s/n your pets" campaign remains, at very least vets should be educating owners. I don't agree with pediatric s/n but I understand completely why shelters do it, they are trying to find homes for these pets, and they can't be positive that the new owners will be responsible, or understand the responsibility needed to keep an intact animal, so I do respect the need of shelters to s/n prior to adoption. 

When I got Caeda, and she was in for her shots, I asked the vet "when should I have her spayed", they said "oh, wait until at least 6 months or so". No education, no discussion, nothing (and they were the best vets I've been to so far). I had to find information on it myself....and even then I found the 2 camps "You have to s/n to be a responsible owner, do it early" and "Do not s/n, it is bad for your pet". The only thing I found easily was the statement about it having an effect on growth plates, something I only really understood because of my classes in osteology (my DH didn't get it until I explained it, and he isn't a dumb guy). 

Either way, YES it absolutely should be the owner's decision, but it should be a decision based on their circumstance/lifestyle and education, not on the early s/n culture that seems to have arisen to protect dogs from uninformed or negligent owners, nor should it be based on the argument of "but it's their natural state", or "without his parts he won't feel like a man". Clear information and education on the topic is severely lacking, and that, of all things is what needs to change.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> The point being.... There are lots of reasons Euthanasia goes up and down....


Right. I'm not going to put together all of that info because a) I'm not really trying to convince you as an individual and b) it would be a waste of time anyway.

The point is, even if all that other stuff DID change...

For every dog that is altered, a dog loses the ability to reproduce.

Therefore, *It doesn't make any sense to say that s/n would HARM efforts to reduce euthanasia.*

Sure, maybe those 12,000 s/n surgeries made ZERO difference. Maybe NONE of those animals would have EVER reproduced if left intact. Is that likely? I guess thats for you (general) to decide.

However, there is no way that s/n programs, in and of themselves, are going to *INCREASE* the rate of animals being born. That just doesn't make any sense.

Also... increased risk of cancer, or death via Fatal-plus at a year old? I have a feeling that all the pitties would pick the first one.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> The thing is.......Luv,
> 
> You are unyielding in your position....
> 
> ...


I am not unyielding; I have always said that owners need to pick their poison. To say that keeping your dog intact will make it live longer is not right, nor is it right to say that by neutering your dog it will live a longer life. I stand by that yes owners need to know both sides of the fight. To be informed is always the better way. 
You point out that by neutering your dog it will have Cushings and Diabetes, which again I do not find to be true. That I have seen firsthand dogs that are intact having better control with their diabetes by getting them neutered. This is something that I am sure you have not had to deal with. The Cushing disease I blame more on dogs being prescribed steroids for their itchiness and bad ears. To the owner it is much easier and faster to have the vet give a shot and some pills than to find out what is really bothering the dog. in the end the dog gets Cushings 

Here is how I stand on studies; Depends on how the study was conducted and what was being study and what results 'were thrown' out for the study PLUS it all depends on the NEXT study that gets conducted countering the results of the last study.

Numerous studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, including the JAVMA, have reported the health benefits neutering can impart. Spayed and castrated cats and dogs tend to live longer and are less susceptible to reproductive tract diseases and hormone-associated disorders than are those left sexually intact.

*other studies*
Throughout the past three decades, however, the same journals have also published data showing the opposite to be true. Researchers have reported higher incidences of musculo*skeletal and endocrinologic disorders, obesity, and urinary incontinence in neutered mixed-breed and pedigreed cats and dogs, compared with incidences in sexually intact animals.

He explained that preliminary work at the UC-Davis Center for Companion Animal Health on Labrador Retrievers suggests that dogs of this breed are not as likely to see an increase in cancers or joint disorders associated with neutering as are Golden Retrievers.


Critics of the UC-Davis study claim a retrospective analysis won’t produce any meaningful insights into the complex physiological changes brought on by gonad removal. Others fault the study for being limited to Golden Retrievers and say the data cannot be extrapolated across dog populations. Still others insist the study only confirms what they had already suspected about the health risks of neutering

“Studies such as this may help owners and veterinarians make neutering decisions together that balance numerous factors and are tailored to the individual dog’s health, the owner’s goals, and the overall circumstances,” Dr. Hubbs said.

Given the ASPCA’s intersecting interests in animal welfare and solving the dog and cat overpopulation problem, the organization stays apprised of new research on neutering, Dr. Rogers explained. “Over the past 10 years,” he said, “there’ve been probably 20 significant studies looking at both the benefits and the risks of spay-neuter.

“We know that an animal that has been spayed or neutered is less likely to be relinquished to shelters. We know that spay-neuter conveys health benefits with respect to certain types of cancers. There are some risks that we all know about, such as obesity and urinary incontinence in female dogs.”

*These data are real, the issue is there, but the numbers are real small,” Dr. Bushby said. “We know that spay-neuter increases the incidences of some tumors and some medical conditions. We know that. We know that spay-neuter decreases the incidences of some tumors and some medical conditions. We know that*
https://www.avma.org/News/JAVMANews/Pages/131101a.aspx


I think the last statement says it best. some owners just do not want to deal with the hormonal responsibility of owning an intact animal and the one thing about a neutered animal it can *NOT*get pregnant nor cause a pregnancy. We know that!


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> I am not unyielding; I have always said that owners need to pick their poison. To say that keeping your dog intact will make it live longer is not right, nor is it right to say that by neutering your dog it will live a longer life. I stand by that yes owners need to know both sides of the fight. To be informed is always the better way.
> You point out that by neutering your dog it will have Cushings and Diabetes, which again I do not find to be true. That I have seen firsthand dogs that are intact having better control with their diabetes by getting them neutered. This is something that I am sure you have not had to deal with. The Cushing disease I blame more on dogs being prescribed steroids for their itchiness and bad ears. To the owner it is much easier and faster to have the vet give a shot and some pills than to find out what is really bothering the dog. in the end the dog gets Cushings
> 
> Here is how I stand on studies; Depends on how the study was conducted and what was being study and what results 'were thrown' out for the study PLUS it all depends on the NEXT study that gets conducted countering the results of the last study.
> ...



LOL this thread is going to go on forever.......

We are all debating... But the majority in the end say it is up to the owner. 

This is a good article. 
http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

_One thing is clear – much of the spay/neuter information that is available to the public is unbalanced
andcontains claims that are exaggerated or unsupportedby evidence. Rather than helping to educate pet 
owners, much of it has contributed to common misunderstandings about the health risks and benefits
associated of spay/neuter in dogs. _


And I have to dig it up but the UK study on Labs..... Shows SIGNIFICANT risk on Osteosarcoma in Neutered Labs.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> LOL this thread is going to go on forever.......
> 
> And I have to dig it up but the UK study on Labs..... Shows SIGNIFICANT risk on Osteosarcoma in Neutered Labs.



Oh please don't because than I will have to go dig up another study disputing that one!


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Greater Swiss said:


> I completely agree with you here, BUT there really should be better education given on the effects/bennefits of s/n vs. postponed s/n vs remaining intact. Even if general "s/n your pets" campaign remains, at very least vets should be educating owners. I don't agree with pediatric s/n but I understand completely why shelters do it, they are trying to find homes for these pets, and they can't be positive that the new owners will be responsible, or understand the responsibility needed to keep an intact animal, so I do respect the need of shelters to s/n prior to adoption.
> 
> When I got Caeda, and she was in for her shots, I asked the vet "when should I have her spayed", they said "oh, wait until at least 6 months or so". No education, no discussion, nothing (and they were the best vets I've been to so far). I had to find information on it myself....and even then I found the 2 camps "You have to s/n to be a responsible owner, do it early" and "Do not s/n, it is bad for your pet". The only thing I found easily was the statement about it having an effect on growth plates, something I only really understood because of my classes in osteology (my DH didn't get it until I explained it, and he isn't a dumb guy).
> 
> Either way, YES it absolutely should be the owner's decision, but it should be a decision based on their circumstance/lifestyle and education, not on the early s/n culture that seems to have arisen to protect dogs from uninformed or negligent owners, nor should it be based on the argument of "but it's their natural state", or "without his parts he won't feel like a man". Clear information and education on the topic is severely lacking, and that, of all things is what needs to change.


There is a similar discussion is going on another forum I am On about this new injection that is supposed to sterilize dogs without neutering them 

I said that I don't agree with it and think personally that it's a bad idea, I mean if you don't want to sterilize your dog then just ... Don't. I don't understand why there is need for a shot for male dogs :/ females I could see, since the surgery to spay a female is major surgery, where the surgery to neuter a male is not.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> There is a similar discussion is going on another forum I am On about this new injection that is supposed to sterilize dogs without neutering them
> 
> I said that I don't agree with it and think personally that it's a bad idea, I mean if you don't want to sterilize your dog then just ... Don't. I don't understand why there is need for a shot for male dogs :/ females I could see, since the surgery to spay a female is major surgery, where the surgery to neuter a male is not.


People want the benefit of testosterone without the ability to impregnate .


----------



## Emily1188 (Jun 21, 2011)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> There is a similar discussion is going on another forum I am On about this new injection that is supposed to sterilize dogs without neutering them
> 
> I said that I don't agree with it and think personally that it's a bad idea, I mean if you don't want to sterilize your dog then just ... Don't. I don't understand why there is need for a shot for male dogs :/ females I could see, since the surgery to spay a female is major surgery, where the surgery to neuter a male is not.


What about this threatens your ability to have your males traditionally altered?

I am just baffled that you think more options are a bad idea. Just absolutely baffled.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rescued said:


> Right. I'm not going to put together all of that info because a) I'm not really trying to convince you as an individual and b) it would be a waste of time anyway.
> 
> The point is, even if all that other stuff DID change...
> 
> ...


I am not saying it would not...

You seem to take my comments as picking apart what you posted. I just stated if you are going to say that is the lower euths are a direct result of the program.... The data to support it is not there..




Rescued said:


> Right. I'm not going to put together all of that info because a) I'm not really trying to convince you as an individual and b) it would be a waste of time anyway.
> 
> \


I am stubborn.... But not unwilling to look at and accept facts.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Emily1188 said:


> What about this threatens your ability to have your males traditionally altered?
> 
> I am just baffled that you think more options are a bad idea. Just absolutely baffled.


Not a bad idea, just needless, at least for males.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Not a bad idea, just needless, at least for males.


Um. This whole discussion has been about whether dogs are healtiher if they keep their hormones, yet also the need for birth control. If there's a way for the dog to keep his hormones AND not run the risk of an unwanted pregnancy, sounds win/win for me. And anesthesia is never without risk, although I understand it's not always possible to give the shot without some kind of sedation. I'm not at all sure why you would argue that this shouldn't be an option.



> I said that I don't agree with it and think personally that it's a bad idea,


And I guess you did say that it's a bad idea .


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I agree. Options are a good thing!


----------



## Wooe (Jul 13, 2013)

A couple of different things... 

I'm a bit curious, is there any data or estimates about the origin of puppies in the US? Ie. how big portion comes from puppy mills, careless but intentional breeding (miracle of life, easy money etc types), oops litters etc? I would imagine that the reason behind why all those dogs that are put to sleep were born in the first place would be relevant to what to do about it. 
Whilst we don't have puppy mills here, there are the occasional 'oh, but they'd have so cute puppies' variety of litters as well as some oops litters (many of those are terminated tho), and whilst neither is a 'good thing', they don't seem capable of overwhelming the market, so to speak. I suppose that as long as the dog population isn't out of control, the puppies that shouldn't have been conceived can be absorbed into society without much issues. 

The oops litters brings up another question tho. If my girl would for some reason end up in an oops situation, I would take her to the vet and she would get a shot (alizin, I think it's called). Granted, there are indications that it might increase the risk of pyo, it isn't 100 percent effective so I would need to go back for ultrasound to make sure etc, but all in all, it is better than an unplanned litter, especially if the girl is bellow legal age, and the risks are lower than anesthesia. From what I can tell, this isn't an option in US tho, does anyone know why? (essentially, it is an abortion shot, terminates pregnancy). 

Finally and totally anecdotally, Mitzy has sneaked past little Leia developmentally and is closing in on being done with her first heat. She did actually escape one time during the first few days, headed straight out to a pre-determined spot... and peed. Seems the heat made her need to go more at that time and nature called loudly  Poor girl had panties on tho, she never tried again. 
So far she has displayed horny behaviour once, behaving very willing and inviting towards one neighbour's dog. Alas, nobody had obviously bothered explaining about birds and bees to her, as the dog she tried to entice was female too. Poor Mitzy, always getting it wrong:wink:
Beyond that one 'incident' and the bleeding (she seems to be a big bleeder for her size), there has been nothing difficult about her at all. She has been a bit more mellow, a tad more lap dog'ish, slightly decreased appetite, all of it actually being a positive side effect when it comes to her  
No issues from intact males or anything on walks (most males here are intact). Will be interesting to compare how Leia behaves when she gets started tho, really hoping it will help her to be more stable and confident.


----------



## Effisia (Jun 20, 2013)

For me, I don't want to even risk the possibility of those orthopedic issues for an early spay. So we're waiting until our pup is two years old before we get her spayed. When we (eventually) get a male, I'd rather leave him intact. That's not the reason for spaying our bitch, I just have a big fear of pyo. I also would really rather get her back into a daycare situation a few days a week so she's not stuck at home all day with the cats who ignore her. But that's a waaaay secondary 'reason' and really just an added bonus for the decision to spay.

However, after seeing the way some other people I know deal with there dogs, I can totally understand the spay/neuter push. They've already had two litters with their dogs (both of which they got from the newspaper - guess how much health testing went into that), and every day I'm expecting to hear that now the mother AND the daughter bitches are pregnant. By the same dog, of course. 

Now I'm just at the point where I feel there are more people like them and less people like me (and the folks on this forum) and I can totally see why organizations that have to deal with euthing dogs all the time would get frustrated and just push for desexing.

Of course, on the other hand, I hate the glares and looks of disgust and absolute judgement when people find out our dog isn't spayed and we're waiting until she's two. That's when I go into 'rant mode' at them. Grr.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Wooe said:


> A couple of different things...
> 
> I'm a bit curious, is there any data or estimates about the origin of puppies in the US? Ie. how big portion comes from puppy mills, careless but intentional breeding (miracle of life, easy money etc types), oops litters etc? I would imagine that the reason behind why all those dogs that are put to sleep were born in the first place would be relevant to what to do about it.


I don't think there is data on that kind of thing. First one would have to decide what 'careless' breedings are. I find overpopulation in the US varies regionally in great amounts. Some areas have virtually no problems and are importing dogs while others are overflowing. And generally speaking it is not just that 'dogs' are overpopulated- it is certain breeds. If you look through craigslist and in shelter lists it is the same type of breeds or breed mixes over and over again.


----------



## SDRRanger (May 2, 2013)

In Nova Scotia it seems that there are soooo many pit and pit mixes looking for homes. The next seems like shepherd and/or lab mixes. We don't seem to have a large problem with small dogs (and they have even shipped up groups of small breed rescues up here and found them homes). 

What I've noticed on kijiji (the Canadian version of CL) is there seems to be a lot more designer breedings being offered (basically two "purebred" parents of different breeds that create a new one that the owners give a fancy name...)


----------



## Kyllobernese (Feb 5, 2008)

I know how many people are always commenting on dogs that are too fat. Susie was my first ever spayed female, done at six months before I knew better, and I have fought with her weight her whole life. She is ten this year and too fat even though her food has been limited for years. My sister and I always had an argument that spaying does not make them fat. She is now trying to keep the weight off her little Rat Terrier since she was spayed. I know that the spaying itself does not "make" them fat but the fact they seem to need so little food to keep them at a healthy weight is hard for most people. Susie weighs about 80 lbs. and gets less than two cups of food a day. The bag says she should be getting about six cups. (I know you cannot go just by that but it does influence most people on what to feed). I know there are spayed females that did not get fat but I am talking about the average family pet.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> If my girl would for some reason end up in an oops situation, I would take her to the vet and she would get a shot (alizin, I think it's called). Granted, there are indications that it might increase the risk of pyo, it isn't 100 percent effective so I would need to go back for ultrasound to make sure etc, but all in all, it is better than an unplanned litter, especially if the girl is bellow legal age, and the risks are lower than anesthesia. From what I can tell, this isn't an option in US tho, does anyone know why? (essentially, it is an abortion shot, terminates pregnancy).


Hmm, yeah, there are not a lot of options in the US for that kind of thing. I know there is a "mismatch shot" that prevents the fertilized eggs from implanting, but it has to be done very quickly (within 3 days? I think). But there are a lot more options in Europe. On cat forums, it seems like all the British people are constantly talking about getting their cat "the shot" while saving up to have her spayed. I guess birth control injections for cats are a big thing over there, last about 6 months, and are super cheap. I think that would be an excellent option to have, but, honestly, seeing some vet's prices for vaccines, I don't even know if it would end up being cheaper than a spay anyway .

I don't know if the FDA hasn't approved such products because of honest safety issues, or for political/financial reasons.


----------



## BernerMax (Mar 15, 2013)

Kyllobernese said:


> I know how many people are always commenting on dogs that are too fat. Susie was my first ever spayed female, done at six months before I knew better, and I have fought with her weight her whole life. She is ten this year and too fat even though her food has been limited for years. My sister and I always had an argument that spaying does not make them fat. She is now trying to keep the weight off her little Rat Terrier since she was spayed. I know that the spaying itself does not "make" them fat but the fact they seem to need so little food to keep them at a healthy weight is hard for most people. Susie weighs about 80 lbs. and gets less than two cups of food a day. The bag says she should be getting about six cups. (I know you cannot go just by that but it does influence most people on what to feed). I know there are spayed females that did not get fat but I am talking about the average family pet.


Yes 2 cups for my 130 lb Berner is not going to work he likes to feel full (and it doesnt help the other 2 are nibblers, he sneaks and eats their leftovers)-- but oddly my female is spayed and does not have the weight problem...


----------



## mjfromga (May 24, 2011)

Also, I forgot to add this. Most attacks are by entire animals. RARELY is a "nasty" attack by an altered animal. Rarely are fights started by altered animals and the vicious fights I've seen, heard about, and have been apart of all were involving intact dogs. There is solid evidence and research that heavily links unaltered dogs to bite incidents. This is why it's often mandated that the owner of a dog like this have the dog altered as part of the punishment. Just another thing to support the altering of pets. I don't always believe it's healthy for the dogs, but then again... there really are tons of reasons to do it. 

I have an intact bitch (she is 11 and will not be spayed at this point, but wish we'd had it done when she was young enough) and stray males wander into the yard and whatnot moderately often looking for what is making that smell. If both she and they were altered, we'd not have the danger of strays in our yard around our cats, my 15 month old placid puppy, my 11 year old dog who is arthritic, and my parents, who both have mobility issues and one is disabled. We always have animal control on hand, but I hesitate to call them since they usually don't have room (due to way too many unaltered dogs roaming the streets, ironically) and put the dogs down 

Most dogs with behavioral problems I see on Dog Whisperer etc. are also intact dogs. Hormones might keep the dogs healthier (not in cases of Pyo, mammary tumors, testicular cancer, etc.) but it is linked WAY more to behavioral issues in dogs than neutering/spaying is. I have not read through the entire thread, so this may have been mentioned or disputed already... but still. Dogs with very poor recall, dogs that RG/FG, dogs that are overly reactive. These dogs are more often than not entire/intact. The comments about proper rearing etc. are understandable, but I just think that sometimes other aspects are overlooked.

As for the weight thing, both of my dogs have weight problems. Not severe ones, but still. Jade is not spayed, Nigredo is neutered. Nigredo is about 81 lbs and eats about 5 cups of food a day and when lowered, didn't lose any weight but was so whiny/hungry it was just absurd so upped it back to the recommended amount. Jade who is about 54 lbs eats a lot less than him, about 2 1/2 cups of food and is still struggle to stay at a good weight. Always has had weight problems, not just in her old age. I've seen more bitches with weight problems than males. 

So to me... in the end it's like this:

Bone cancers are heavily linked to altered dogs, especially WAY too early and in large breeds
Weight problems are also linked to altered dogs

Problems such as poor recall, RG are linked to unaltered dogs
Unwanted litters and tons of dead (euthanized because of overpopulation) dogs are also linked
Pyo is linked to unaltered bitches, as are mammary tumors. Testicular cancer in males... only in unaltered dogs
Violence/biting/aggression is linked to unaltered dogs

Yes most of these problems can (and do) occur in both altered and unaltered dogs... but are generally more linked to one or the other. IMO... the altering is worth it lots of the time. It goes without saying that proper dog ownership can prevent behavioral problems from causing issues... and that not all dogs regardless of being intact or altered will have to deal with this. But for the average pet owner, I'd always recommend altering your pets. Not mega early like 3 months like they did with my dog... but at a year old or so, and with giant breeds, at the age of two.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

What is everyone's views on pediatric s/n that most shelters do? I can understand why they do it but if I had a choice I would let all my females to through one heat before they are spayed and wait until my males are at least a year before they are neutered.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

mjfromga said:


> Also, I forgot to add this. Most attacks are by entire animals. RARELY is a "nasty" attack by an altered animal. Rarely are fights started by altered animals and the vicious fights I've seen, heard about, and have been apart of all were involving intact dogs. There is solid evidence and research that heavily links unaltered dogs to bite incidents. This is why it's often mandated that the owner of a dog like this have the dog altered as part of the punishment. Just another thing to support the altering of pets. I don't always believe it's healthy for the dogs, but then again... there really are tons of reasons to do it.
> 
> I have an intact bitch (she is 11 and will not be spayed at this point, but wish we'd had it done when she was young enough) and stray males wander into the yard and whatnot moderately often looking for what is making that smell. If both she and they were altered, we'd not have the danger of strays in our yard around our cats, my 15 month old placid puppy, my 11 year old dog who is arthritic, and my parents, who both have mobility issues and one is disabled. We always have animal control on hand, but I hesitate to call them since they usually don't have room (due to way too many unaltered dogs roaming the streets, ironically) and put the dogs down
> 
> ...


The link between bites and unaltered dogs is anecdotal and the data is incomplete. 

Loose and roaming dogs are also more likely to cause serious bites than well managed dogs. So the root of the problem is likely irresponsible owners. And the fact that the dogs are intact is coincidental. 

As for aggression problems. In my experience as a trainer, I have dealt with a lot more serious behavioral issues, aggressive and antisocial behavior, fear aggression, unusual fears, etc in altered dogs. Because of the client base and referrals I have developed over the years and the circles I run in, I train more intact dogs than altered. I do not take on a ton of clients But I have gone back over my 2013 records... It was a rough year for me. But I trained 23 dogs.... 5 were altered the remaining intact. The majority of the significant behavioral issues were the altered dogs.



OwnedbyACDs said:


> What is everyone's views on pediatric s/n that most shelters do? I can understand why they do it but if I had a choice I would let all my females to through one heat before they are spayed and wait until my males are at least a year before they are neutered.


Awful.... too short...


----------



## spotted nikes (Feb 7, 2008)

JohnnyBandit said:


> The link between bites and unaltered dogs is anecdotal and the data is incomplete.
> 
> Loose and roaming dogs are also more likely to cause serious bites than well managed dogs. So the root of the problem is likely irresponsible owners. And the fact that the dogs are intact is coincidental.
> 
> ...


It's amazing that in every other species, altering a male reduces aggression and makes it easier to handle, but you believe that it doesn't have the same effect on dogs. Have you noticed that the most recent news making pit bull attacks all were intact males, and a female in heat was nearby? Or that fighting dogs are all intact? 
Have you noticed that almost all male riding horses (that aren't going to be used for breeding), are gelded? Because they are easier to handle and less aggressive. 

Your other observations are probably a result of your clientele. You are involved in activities where you want the dog intact, and deal with owners who compete. They are also more dog smart than the average backyard owner. The dogs that were altered could have been from a rescue with an unknown history, or were not breeding quality, so they were altered. Temperament is usually one of the criteria breeders use to determine breeding quality. So it wouldn't surprise me that the fixed dogs you saw may have been more aggressive than some of the others.

And intact dogs are definitely more likely to roam, looking for females in heat.


----------



## mjfromga (May 24, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> The link between bites and unaltered dogs is anecdotal and the data is incomplete.
> 
> Loose and roaming dogs are also more likely to cause serious bites than well managed dogs. So the root of the problem is likely irresponsible owners. And the fact that the dogs are intact is coincidental.
> 
> ...


You are something else. I have never seen ANYTHING like it. You refute evidence that is actually pretty darn solid at this point for your own personal opinions on one year of training. To me it kind of just looks like you are trying too hard at this point. You stand on an island, because you use your own experiences (which aren't even close to typical from what I've read from trainers) instead of looking at things as a whole. You also are WAY too quick to blame owners and dismiss the issues that might have HELPED these owners. YES, garbage dog owners cause lots of problems... but THAT is the reason why lots of us are FOR altering. Loose and roaming dogs are usually intact, BTW. The shelters ARE NOT full of altered dogs that they picked up roaming (HAHA).


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> It's amazing that in every other species, altering a male reduces aggression and makes it easier to handle, but you believe that it doesn't have the same effect on dogs


Yeah. . .humans have been castrating male animals to make them more docile for thousands of years. Geldings, barrows, wethers, steers/oxen---there's even special words for castrated animals. In cats it makes such a huge difference; _breeders_ don't even keep their tomcats indoors, and even show cats are altered as soon as they've had their litters. I don't believe dogs are so different. But they are easier to train. So I can see why the hormonal effects can be mitigated more than in other species. But to say that castration doesn't have any effect on reducing aggression. . .no. Dogs aren't magic.


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

> Have you noticed that almost all male riding horses (that aren't going to be used for breeding), are gelded? Because they are easier to handle and less aggressive.


To be honest, having worked with both geldings and stallions, this hasn't really been my experience. It's really only even a common practice to castrate all non-breeding stallions here in North America. In Europe, it's common practice to keep stallions intact, whether they will be used for breeding or not, and they don't have issues with aggressive horses there. It's a convenience thing again here, I believe. It's EASIER to get geldings to focus on training and not that hot little mare in the next paddock, and we have been conditioned to believe that stallions are automatically more aggressive and harder to manage than geldings. I'm sure it's true in some cases, but nearly the majority. I used to work in the barns at Spruce Meadows, as well as another international show jumping stable in the same city, and worked with multiple stallions at both locations and never had an issue with aggression in the stallions. These were all stallions used for breeding, and were housed in the same barn as the mares, and we still had no issues, with the exception of one stallion at Spruce Meadows who required two grooms to restrain him on his way to the breeding barn, but even that wasn't aggression, he was just so dang excited to get to where all the fun was, lol. But in the riding barn, he was extremely easy to work with, and was a fairly successful jumper as well.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

I agree I have actually had altered dogs who will target intact animals and be extremely aggressive to them, I have actually seen IME more aggression in altered dogs then in intact dogs.

I wish shelters had an alternative to pedatric s/n but I don't see one because they had such a turn over of animals that they couldn't possibly keep track of all the adopters to enforce s/n contracts.


----------



## KodiBarracuda (Jul 4, 2011)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> I wish shelters had an alternative to pedatric s/n but I don't see one because they had such a turn over of animals that they couldn't possibly keep track of all the adopters to enforce s/n contracts.


Our shelter has an alternative. No dog there gets s/n until it gets adopted. Once you hand over thw cash for the animal the shelter makes an appointment and brings the dog in for you. Although this sucks if you adopt a dog on a Friday, you don't get the dog til Monday afternoon after their s/n. This was especially inconvenient for me because I had to make another 2 hour one way trip to pick Maisy up 3 days after I initially adopted her. 

The alternative is you pay a 200 dollar refundable voucher that promises you get the dog s/n. So you pretty much pay for a s/n anyway and since s/n are cheaper than the voucher it's insentive to get some money back.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

spotted nikes said:


> It's amazing that in every other species, altering a male reduces aggression and makes it easier to handle, but you believe that it doesn't have the same effect on dogs. Have you noticed that the most recent news making pit bull attacks all were intact males, and a female in heat was nearby? Or that fighting dogs are all intact?
> Have you noticed that almost all male riding horses (that aren't going to be used for breeding), are gelded? Because they are easier to handle and less aggressive.
> 
> Your other observations are probably a result of your clientele. You are involved in activities where you want the dog intact, and deal with owners who compete. They are also more dog smart than the average backyard owner. The dogs that were altered could have been from a rescue with an unknown history, or were not breeding quality, so they were altered. Temperament is usually one of the criteria breeders use to determine breeding quality. So it wouldn't surprise me that the fixed dogs you saw may have been more aggressive than some of the others.
> ...


Heck yeah they are easier. It doesn't hurt them physically, as most horses are gelded by 2 years of age (at the latest) after the growth plates have closed. I have never had a gelded horse did early of a problem that was caused or exacerbated by castration.

In fact, it's a common practice in race horses to geld them on the later side because trainers and owners want to see what kind of talent they have before they make the decision ... ESP if they are well bred. With stallions IME they are either mean or they are not, there is no in between. 

We recently gelded two stud colts last year because they were too much of a PITA, and Low and behold their performance on the track, both at night aNd in the morning improved exponentially.

So, why can't it be the same with dogs? Castration doesn't change the animal's personality. It just takes away the components that make them hard to handle (I.e. That "second" brain  ). If you (general you) are making your argument based on that it changes their personality then your argument is void in that aspect.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

spotted nikes said:


> It's amazing that in every other species, altering a male reduces aggression and makes it easier to handle, but you believe that it doesn't have the same effect on dogs. Have you noticed that the most recent news making pit bull attacks all were intact males, and a female in heat was nearby? Or that fighting dogs are all intact?
> Have you noticed that almost all male riding horses (that aren't going to be used for breeding), are gelded? Because they are easier to handle and less aggressive.
> 
> Your other observations are probably a result of your clientele. You are involved in activities where you want the dog intact, and deal with owners who compete. They are also more dog smart than the average backyard owner. The dogs that were altered could have been from a rescue with an unknown history, or were not breeding quality, so they were altered. Temperament is usually one of the criteria breeders use to determine breeding quality. So it wouldn't surprise me that the fixed dogs you saw may have been more aggressive than some of the others.
> ...


What is amazing is that you think that sterilization actually calms other species. As far as I know that only applies to horses. CERTAINLY not cattle... I spent time with cattle daily for the first 27 years of my life... A steer is typically more aggressive to handling than a bull. And WAY more unpredictable. 

All a person has to do it go to a Steer show and a Bull show at the state fair and they will seet that steers are by far the more squirrely animal. 

Hogs its a toss up. Intact males squable some... But take away breedable sows and give them plenty of feed and they are peaceful enough. 

The nastiest sheep you will ever meet are Wethers. 
The same goes for Goats. Wethers are very testy and unpredictable. 
In fact herding dog people have been known to keep flocks of Wethers only for herding training. Because they are testy, nasty and will challenge the dogs far more than rams will. They are plain ill tempered. This gives the dog time or more tenacious stock and a heck of a lot cheaper than maintaining cattle to work. 
In fact most trials will not use wethers in their trial stock. Because the soft dogs cannot handle them. And if owners of softer dogs get wind wethers will be in the mix, they will not enter their dogs. 

And lets go back to horses... Stallions can be more to handle than geldings. No doubt. But horses are most often housed in communal or herd situations. A lone stallion well away from mares may still be a handful. But then again, maybe not. I have been around some very civil and downright nice stallions. Certainly they are not un manageable. Or their would be no horse racing industry. 

Bottom line is...
WE STERILIZE MOST ANIMALS TO MAKE THEIR FLESH MORE TENDER AND PALLETABLE.

And what is even more amazing... Is that you use the intact dog bites as an example.
Because IF the lack of testosterone. It would affect the dog's aggression towards other dogs. Not humans.

And is far as my clientele..... Other than conformation classes which have many benefits. My clients are very seldom my peers. Because they are.... well my peers... of similar experience and knowledge... Why they heck would they hire me? If I needed help I certainly would not hire me.... I would go to someone that is not a peer but that can play a mentor role. 

In fact most of my clients come from referrals from peers and vets... Lots of vet referrals. People coming in wanting a magic pill to turn Figo from a hot mess..... To a dream dog.....


Kid yourself if you so choose. But Neutering dogs does not cut down on aggression. It does increase things like separation anxiety, fear aggressions, and other odd behaviors.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> What is amazing is that you think that sterilization actually calms other species. As far as I know that only applies to horses. CERTAINLY not cattle... I spent time with cattle daily for the first 27 years of my life... A steer is typically more aggressive to handling than a bull. And WAY more unpredictable.
> 
> All a person has to do it go to a Steer show and a Bull show at the state fair and they will seet that steers are by far the more squirrely animal.
> 
> ...


That's funny because I have never had a neutered male with SA but I have had intact males who were more clingy then my neutered ones, my comparison, my females became more "aware" of me after they were spayed. 

I don't know much about cattle but the ones I did handle I would much rather handle steers then Young bulls :/. Now goats I can comment on, we inherited a small flock when we bought this place and all the billies had been castrated, but a neighbors intact billy got through our fence a fee times and or me tell you I will take my castrated billies over an intact one any day of the week :/. 

In reference to horses, it is no lie gelding a horse makes ALL of them easier to handle, period. If the horse is already easier to handle as a stallion then they make an extra nice gelding, that is just their temperament it has nothing to do with gelding. But a mean stallion that is gelded, their attitude improves exponentially there is no way around that.

I don't under stand why you are so against altering animals. It has it's place, and sometimes it is the best choice for all involved, including the animal.


----------



## spotted nikes (Feb 7, 2008)

JohnnyBandit said:


> What is amazing is that you think that sterilization actually calms other species. As far as I know that only applies to horses. CERTAINLY not cattle... I spent time with cattle daily for the first 27 years of my life... A steer is typically more aggressive to handling than a bull. And WAY more unpredictable.
> 
> All a person has to do it go to a Steer show and a Bull show at the state fair and they will seet that steers are by far the more squirrely animal.
> 
> ...


Goat aggression- https://fiascofarm.com/goats/buck-wether-info.htm scroll down to aggression" 
http://www.esgpip.org/PDF/Technical bulletin No. 18.pdf (scroll to "why castrate)
Livestock-http://www.mla.com.au/Livestock-production/Animal-health-welfare-and-biosecurity/Husbandry/Castrating-and-spaying
Livestock- http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/livestock/beef/facts/07-029.htm
Livestock/guard animals-http://www.extension.org/pages/27706/guard-animals-for-goats#.UzcALJqPKM8
Rabbits-http://rabbit.org/faq-spaying-and-neutering/
cattle-http://cattletoday.com/archive/2012/July/CT2750.php
cattle-http://www.animalwelfarestandards.net.au/files/2011/02/Cattle-Castration-discussion-paper-1.3.13.pdf
cattle-http://www.hsc.csu.edu.au/agriculture/production/3299/castration_answers.htm
cattle/livestock-http://www.grandin.com/behaviour/principles/understanding.motivation.html
pigs-http://animalsmart.org/species/pigs/swine-castration
livestock-http://www.animalfrontiers.org/content/2/3/52.full

These are just a few resources that dispute your argument. There are a lot more out there.

dogs and cats-http://www3.us.elsevierhealth.com/communities/Veterinary/Schwartz/neuteringeffects_instructions.html


----------



## spotted nikes (Feb 7, 2008)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> I don't under stand why you are so against altering animals. It has it's place, and sometimes it is the best choice for all involved, including the animal.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk&list=PLB73AB98728CE33D5&index=12 

(starts at about 1 min mark)


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

> Bottom line is...
> WE STERILIZE MOST ANIMALS TO MAKE THEIR FLESH MORE TENDER AND PALLETABLE.


I thought of that. .. but people wouldn't have wanted their oxen or draft horses to be soft and tender, would they? Just wonder how it got started and why they kept doing it if it didn't have benefits for them.



> And what is even more amazing... Is that you use the intact dog bites as an example.
> Because IF the lack of testosterone. It would affect the dog's aggression towards other dogs. Not humans


. . .what's your reasoning here? I mean, if a person is aggresssive it would affect his behavior toward animals as well as other humans, regardless of the reason for the aggression, right? Kind of across-the-board aggression?


----------



## So Cavalier (Jul 23, 2010)

> I don't under stand why you are so against altering animals. It has it's place, and sometimes it is the best choice for all involved, including the animal.





> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspL...E33D5&index=12
> 
> (starts at about 1 min mark)


Spotted Nikes....we have a winner!


----------



## xoxluvablexox (Apr 10, 2007)

spotted nikes said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk&list=PLB73AB98728CE33D5&index=12
> 
> (starts at about 1 min mark)


Well, that's bizarre.... Lol

ETA: just wanted to clarify, following comment isn't directed at you spotted nikes. Just general comment 

Question, usually when someone comes on this forum talking about getting their dog s/n to "fix" it's temp problems ppl are always like "that may not help anything, s/n won't fix a dogs temp problems, aggression issues, etc" (paraphrasing here obviously but that's the typical answer. NOW everyone's pretty much saying the exact opposite. Confused. 

Scientifically, the sex hormones are responsible for more than just making babies & testosterone is definitely linked with aggression but I'm not sure if that's in normal levels or just if the amount of testosterone is too high, or abnormal. Usually, studies only mention abnormal levels and aggression. So, I'm not sure what research there is to back up a claim that any intact animal is more aggressive than a s/n animal if their hormone levels are actually normal. Also, low testosterone in men had been linked to emotional problems like depression and mood swings, it's not just all about sexual performance so who's to say what kind of affects the complete lack of hormones, like testosterone, have on other animals. Yeah, they might be less aggressive but then are they going to be emotionally unstable and start having the equivalent of "mood swings" in people. 

Hormones are a complicated thing and it might be easy to say, oh, low testosterone = low aggression BUT it's not just that simple. Abnormal hormone levels are going to have adverse affects. So, maybe less testosterone means less likely to be aggressive but then what negative affect are those abnormal hormone levels going to have on the dogs brain. 

I think it would be ridiculous to think that low hormone levels would only have negative emotional affects on humans and not other animals. Unless, I guess, you're one of those people that believe other animals don't have emotions. I'm sure dogs don't get depressed or anything...


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

spotted nikes said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk&list=PLB73AB98728CE33D5&index=12
> 
> (starts at about 1 min mark)


:doh: I'm sorry but that's just plain silly and doesn't even prove a valid point


----------



## spotted nikes (Feb 7, 2008)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> :doh: I'm sorry but that's just plain silly and doesn't even prove a valid point


 If you want serious valid links, there are a bunch in my previous post. The other video was a joke.

The "every sperm is sacred" is kind of a joke about men in particular that are horrified that testicles are removed. WE see a lot of men here (especially with the Hispanic/Machisimo culture) that don't want their dogs neutered because it removes their manhood.


----------



## BernerMax (Mar 15, 2013)

Willowy said:


> I thought of that. .. but people wouldn't have wanted their oxen or draft horses to be soft and tender, would they? Just wonder how it got started and why they kept doing it if it didn't have benefits for them.
> 
> 
> It makes them gentler and not as prone to certain kinds of aggression. It did make our Berner easier to handle (even though I do think it will be at the detriment to his longterm health)-- they are working animals that people needed to be easier to work with....


----------



## grab (Sep 26, 2009)

I would guess that, working alongside mares that will be in season, geldings would be more manageable. Particularly in a working situation. Thus, it probably has a lot more to do with benefiting the owner. Most farmers have little time or patience to deal with shenanigans.


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

xoxluvablexox said:


> Question, usually when someone comes on this forum talking about getting their dog s/n to "fix" it's temp problems ppl are always like "that may not help anything, s/n won't fix a dogs temp problems, aggression issues, etc" (paraphrasing here obviously but that's the typical answer. NOW everyone's pretty much saying the exact opposite. Confused.


I've been told in the past that it may not "fix" problems, and the reasoning in some cases has been this (and it makes sense to me); If a dog has already learned to react to something in a certain way (other dogs humans, etc), removing those hormones won't make that reaction or whatever experience that has initially caused that aggression to go away....only training can help with that. On the other hand it has been suggested to me that removing the hormones (the extra testosterone which may be linked with some forms of aggression) can make the training go smoother. Basically, if the problem is already there (ie the dog has learned a particular reaction to something gets them what they want....for the stimulus to go away) and it is hormone mediated, it doesn't unlearn it because of surgery, although the surgery can theoretically make it easier to unlearn. 
My personal bottom line on S/N and behavior problems: surgery does not replace training, there has to be more reasons that just "fixing" a behavior problem to alter an animal.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

spotted nikes said:


> Goat aggression- https://fiascofarm.com/goats/buck-wether-info.htm scroll down to aggression"
> http://www.esgpip.org/PDF/Technical bulletin No. 18.pdf (scroll to "why castrate)
> Livestock-http://www.mla.com.au/Livestock-production/Animal-health-welfare-and-biosecurity/Husbandry/Castrating-and-spaying
> Livestock- http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/livestock/beef/facts/07-029.htm
> ...


And I can post a hundred sites that dispute these....

Plus I have forty plus years of personal experience that I trust more than any side. I am not an idiot. I know what I see. 

And we can do this through infinity..... The fact is, steers, whether, etc are more aggressive and a problem. 

I have horses, dogs and workers hurt by steers. I was hurt by a bull but it was the exception rather than the rule. 

I have walked bulls into trailers more times than I can remember and did so even as a kid. Multiple bulls in a single trailer. Straight out of the pasture and into the field. Other than show steers that have extensive time and work on them, I would not go in a trailer with a field steer on a bet. While you can walk your field bulls in a trailer. You drive your field steers in a trailer. Through a chute.... 

Heck you know the bulls they ride in rodeos? Those nasty mean aggressive bucking bulls? 
On the ranch, you can walk about among them, feed em carrots and scratch em behind the ears.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

spotted nikes said:


> If you want serious valid links, there are a bunch in my previous post. The other video was a joke.
> 
> The "every sperm is sacred" is kind of a joke about men in particular that are horrified that testicles are removed. WE see a lot of men here (especially with the Hispanic/Machisimo culture) that don't want their dogs neutered because it removes their manhood.


That is not my stance.... FAR from it... .And what you LOSE and repeatedly ignore in all of this.... Is I am not anti speuter.... Far from it..... 

I am against the myths, scare tactics, and down right lies that are fed to people concerning altering animals.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

spotted nikes said:


> If you want serious valid links, there are a bunch in my previous post. The other video was a joke.
> 
> The "every sperm is sacred" is kind of a joke about men in particular that are horrified that testicles are removed. WE see a lot of men here (especially with the Hispanic/Machisimo culture) that don't want their dogs neutered because it removes their manhood.


Some of your links were pretty silly too... a couple came back as invalid sites. 

This one is cute though...
Pretty colors..
https://fiascofarm.com/goats/buck-wether-info.htm


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

spotted nikes said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk&list=PLB73AB98728CE33D5&index=12
> 
> (starts at about 1 min mark)


Add sarcasm when you run out of valid argument.... And you are so far off base its amusing...


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> That's funny because I have never had a neutered male with SA but I have had intact males who were more clingy then my neutered ones, my comparison, my females became more "aware" of me after they were spayed.
> 
> I don't know much about cattle but the ones I did handle I would much rather handle steers then Young bulls :/. Now goats I can comment on, we inherited a small flock when we bought this place and all the billies had been castrated, but a neighbors intact billy got through our fence a fee times and or me tell you I will take my castrated billies over an intact one any day of the week :/.
> 
> ...


Clingy and SA are two different things.... Clingy is well clingy.... I WANT a dog that wants to be by me and near me. SA is far different. It starts with howing, barking whining when you leave and builds to destructive behavior and even self mutilation....


[QUOTEI don't under stand why you are so against altering animals. It has it's place, and sometimes it is the best choice for all involved, including the animal[/QUOTE]

I am not against it.... Far from it..... Never said I was.....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> I thought of that. .. but people wouldn't have wanted their oxen or draft horses to be soft and tender, would they? Just wonder how it got started and why they kept doing it if it didn't have benefits for them.
> 
> 
> . . .what's your reasoning here? I mean, if a person is aggresssive it would affect his behavior toward animals as well as other humans, regardless of the reason for the aggression, right? Kind of across-the-board aggression?


Well it gets to a point that it does matter.... When you get a three thousand pound steer (ox) or large draft horse.... It really does not matter. 

And dog aggression is a VERY different thing than human aggression. Male on male same species aggression that is fueled by testosterone is driven by the need to gain, maintain, and hold on to breeding rights. An intact dog knows you are not going to breed his bitches or any bitches nearby.


----------



## LuvMyAngels (May 24, 2009)

Since we're comparing different species...
When a man, for whatever reason, loses the ability to produce testosterone doctors are quick to start him on testosterone replacement therapy (often involving injections). Why? Because there are some serious health issues (mental and physical) that go along with "Low T". 

Why, then, would we not see the same issues in our male animals when we remove the same hormones?


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

BernerMax said:


> Willowy said:
> 
> 
> > I thought of that. .. but people wouldn't have wanted their oxen or draft horses to be soft and tender, would they? Just wonder how it got started and why they kept doing it if it didn't have benefits for them.
> ...


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

LuvMyAngels said:


> Since we're comparing different species...
> When a man, for whatever reason, loses the ability to produce testosterone doctors are quick to start him on testosterone replacement therapy (often involving injections). Why? Because there are some serious health issues (mental and physical) that go along with "Low T".
> 
> Why, then, would we not see the same issues in our male animals when we remove the same hormones?


As a man with Low T and that was diagnosed last fall. I can tell you that the difference is HUGE. If you would have told me I would feel THAT MUCH better I would not have believed it. Better mood, more energy. etc. I am off T at the moment because of my surgery. My surgeon wanted to cut down a few things. Hopefully on my appointment on Tuesday he gives me the go ahead. If so I am GOING straight to get my shot. 

I am convinced that at least part of my post surgery lethargy is related to a dropping T level. 

People that see the low t commercials thinks it is mostly sex drive related.... Its is mood, condition, sleeping, etc. 

Ten years on anti depressant/anti anxiety med..... 90 Days on T injections and I was off the meds and FELT BETTER.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> As a man with Low T and that was diagnosed last fall. I can tell you that the difference is HUGE. If you would have told me I would feel THAT MUCH better I would not have believed it. Better mood, more energy. etc. I am off T at the moment because of my surgery. My surgeon wanted to cut down a few things. Hopefully on my appointment on Tuesday he gives me the go ahead. If so I am GOING straight to get my shot.
> 
> I am convinced that at least part of my post surgery lethargy is related to a dropping T level.
> 
> ...



I am glad to hear that worked for you. I know someone else who has been receiving the shots for a year now and have yet to see this so called magic happen. BTW-it is NOT me! 

For the horse thing. I will say that I do feel sorry for the Stallions. Horses are herd animals and yet for many Stallions are solo pasture/pen animals. Yes I know some will let the stallion loose with a bunch of mares and call it being pastured-bred. This is not the norm with the good breeders. Mares are considered seasonally polyestrus and will be in season most of the year excluding winter months. This alone makes it almost impossible to let a stallion in there and not have a bunch of foals the next year. It is so much easier to take care of the male to prevent a pregnancy compared to having a mare surgically altered. My mares are generally a good bunch but somedays I do think they get the 'Moody mare syndrome". I did just geld my now 3 year old last year. I know that in horses the younger gelded horse grow bigger and I was really hoping for a smaller mini. No such luck. It is so much easier to have him gelded and the girls appreciate it too. A couple of horse trails I go to will post that no stallion are allowed. Is it that my horse is 'happier' now? I don't know but at least he has more on his mind than what was on his mind all the time a few months ago. 

For the bulls- I think it is a matter of opinion. I was talking to a salesman (drug rep) just a few weeks ago. He is the one that brought the subject up and not me. He is a cattle guy and has traveled around doing AI for the cattle industry. He was telling me about the guys he knew or saw get gored by a bull. I never did bring this thread up but listened to him tell me of his ordeals with his job. In his opinion, people are just plain crazy to keep a bull on the property. Also, in this article, it points out other different reason we castrate the bulls. http://agricultureproud.com/2011/05/12/why-castrate-cattle/ 


on goats- goats just plain stink unless they are castrated. sorry but to pee on themselves with that stronger male urine is not the turn on for me. It may work for those females he wants to impress but not on me. Plus, little Ringo just thought I needed to be bred and when he was castrated that desire went away. Thank goodness!

I think for any animal the reason we castrate is that it does make the animals easier to handle and you do not have to worry about any unplanned pregnancies. Can you keep an animal intact and not breed them? Yes but it takes work and dedication from all members in the household. I find it easier to recommend to neuter than go into an animals cycle and why not every intact animal needs to be bred.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

luv mi pets said:


> I am glad to hear that worked for you. I know someone else who has been receiving the shots for a year now and have yet to see this so called magic happen. BTW-it is NOT me!
> 
> For the horse thing. I will say that I do feel sorry for the Stallions. Horses are herd animals and yet for many Stallions are solo pasture/pen animals. Yes I know some will let the stallion loose with a bunch of mares and call it being pastured-bred. This is not the norm with the good breeders. Mares are considered seasonally polyestrus and will be in season most of the year excluding winter months. This alone makes it almost impossible to let a stallion in there and not have a bunch of foals the next year. It is so much easier to take care of the male to prevent a pregnancy compared to having a mare surgically altered. My mares are generally a good bunch but somedays I do think they get the 'Moody mare syndrome". I did just geld my now 3 year old last year. I know that in horses the younger gelded horse grow bigger and I was really hoping for a smaller mini. No such luck. It is so much easier to have him gelded and the girls appreciate it too. A couple of horse trails I go to will post that no stallion are allowed. Is it that my horse is 'happier' now? I don't know but at least he has more on his mind than what was on his mind all the time a few months ago.
> 
> ...


Treatment for low t does not work for everyone. And the delivery method makes huge differences. Between when I was diagnosed and when I started treatment, I did a lot of research. I found the creams etc had higher complications and lower success than injections. I chose bi weekly injections. 

Of course opinions are going to vary on cattle.. And I was busted up BADLY, just before I turned 16 by a bull. I have posted that account many times before.
I still maintain that steers are more cagey.

But this entire thread has become so diluted it has largely become pointless. 

The reasons, for castrating stock and pets is and always will be different


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Treatment for low t does not work for everyone. And the delivery method makes huge differences. Between when I was diagnosed and when I started treatment, I did a lot of research. I found the creams etc had higher complications and lower success than injections. I chose bi weekly injections.
> 
> Of course opinions are going to vary on cattle.. And I was busted up BADLY, just before I turned 16 by a bull. I have posted that account many times before.
> I still maintain that steers are more cagey.
> ...


I would be scared of the possible side effects that might arise from low T meds . But I guess its up to the patient and their doctor to calculate all the risks and see of the end justifies the means


----------



## LuvMyAngels (May 24, 2009)

JohnnyBandit said:


> As a man with Low T and that was diagnosed last fall. I can tell you that the difference is HUGE. If you would have told me I would feel THAT MUCH better I would not have believed it. Better mood, more energy. etc. I am off T at the moment because of my surgery. My surgeon wanted to cut down a few things. Hopefully on my appointment on Tuesday he gives me the go ahead. If so I am GOING straight to get my shot.
> 
> I am convinced that at least part of my post surgery lethargy is related to a dropping T level.
> 
> ...


My husband was diagnosed with Low T a little over a year ago. I can see the difference in him. We started to notice some subtle changes within 10 days of his first injection (there were no other medication changes at that point). Day 10 was a Sunday. Instead of laying in bed being a giant grump, he was up teasing and playing with me and our daughters. My teenager pulled me aside and asked "Who is this guy and where's my real dad?". 



OwnedbyACDs said:


> I would be scared of the possible side effects that might arise from low T meds . But I guess its up to the patient and their doctor to calculate all the risks and see of the end justifies the means


Like any medication, there are potential side effects. Without treatment there are also some health issues. Damned if you do, damned if you dont. It's a matter of weighing the risk vs. benefit and deciding on which is the lesser evil.


----------

