# Leaving a male intact?



## Morganhorse2003 (Apr 17, 2009)

I hope this doesn't start any conflict like it can in horses, but my puppy is kept at my SO's house with his family's two other dogs. Mine is fixed but the other two are intact. One is a Pom who they plan to breed and is pretty well mannered. The other is a dachsund who tries to breed everything he sees and is truly a pain. He is intact just because, no other reason. What are people's opinions on leaving a male intact just for the heck of it?


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

Just for the heck of it?

That sounds reckless and irresponsible, since you ask. There are legitimate reasons for not spaying or neutring, but that's not one of them.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

What he said. I leave my dogs intact for several reasons, but "just because" isn't one of em


----------



## Keechak (Aug 10, 2008)

"Just for the Heck of it" is not a reason, or if it is then it's not a very good one. I also Have many reasons for leaving my younger male intact but they are good reasons.


----------



## hulkamaniac (Feb 11, 2009)

Personally I don't think there's any reason to leave a dog intact unless there are plans for breeding and/or showing the dog. Just because is not a good reason in my world.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

I have an intact male that will most likely never be neutered. But I only came to this conclusion after hours of researching the benefits and risks of alteration. And I had to decide if I was capable of keeping an intact male without accidental breeding. 

It is a burden and responsibility that should NEVER be taken lightly.


----------



## peppy264 (Apr 23, 2009)

Witness the effects of propaganda. LOL.

You should be asking 'Are there legitimate reasons to neuter?' (not what reasons NOT to neuter). If no legit reasons (e.g. behavioral problems, can't control wandering, etc) to neuter, then don't put your dog through unneeded surgery.

A surgery is not a minor thing in itself, and neutering has various health risks associated with it. Why so eager to put Fido under the knife?


----------



## chul3l3ies1126 (Aug 13, 2007)

The way I see it, if a person is responsible enough and trains their dog to the fullest, then there is no reason why a dog shouldnt be left intact. 

But in our society, the RESPONSIBLE owner are FEW ARE FAR BETWEEN. So I honestly think the majority of society should spay and neuter their animals. 

I still am not sure if I want to neuter my male dane. No way is he for breeding purposes... but I consider myself one of the few responsible owners that want to leave their dogs intact... only because I KNOW I have complete control of every situation we're in together. I have complete confidence in the training I have done with him... and continue to do with him daily. Training never ends when you want a sound and wonderful dog.

I definitely think that those people you are speaking of NEED to fix their animals... sounds completely irresponsible.
Nessa


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

I have ansolutely no problem with leaving a dog intact for any reason. As I've said before, being intact is not a disease, nor is it a sign of an irresponsible owner. I am especially angry with people who neuter a very young pup "just because" the Vet said it's ok. I happen to disagree with that sentiment, and would never alter an animal before puberty. Contrary to popular myth & propoganda, it is *healthier *to leave a dog intact than to surgically remove organs responsible for reproduction AND *lifelong* hormone balance.


----------



## Morganhorse2003 (Apr 17, 2009)

Well this particular dog is about 2 or 3 years old. I don't really have a problem with the Pom who is intact because he is very mannerly, but the dog in question is not mannerly whatsoever. He tries to breed my puppy and when he doesn't allow it then he bullies him pretty badly. My SO and I are rather annoyed with having our legs humped everytime we're around him. I see no reason to leave him intact. He seems very stressed all the time trying to find something to breed to.


----------



## LastCallLabs (Apr 22, 2009)

As a matter of fact, a small bit of reading on the web will introduce you to the benefits of not neutering your dog. 

A recent very very throrough study in Vizslas suggested that the incidence of certain cancers among altered dogs were increased 85% in dogs that were altered. 

Its also more likely to suffer soft tissue injury. 

However, all of these things go down the drain if one is a irresponsible pet owner who is not willing to properly train and socialize the dog. If this is the case, I am sure dogs are more likely to be euthanized for improper behaviour or are allowed to stray and be killed in a car accident wandering the streets. 

In any realm, a lot of breeders are taking note of the significant decrease in cancer, especially breeds such as the Golden Retriever and Bernese Mountain Dog where the incidence of cancer is so dramatically increased for the breed as a whole.

If anyone would like a copy of the reporting, I would be happy to pass it along, a fascinating read.


----------



## Max'sHuman (Oct 6, 2007)

Well I personally think that speutering a dog is generally for the best. That said, it sounds like the issue is a dominance issue. You said it's irritating that the dog is constantly humping your leg but it's not a breeding thing or even a "it feels good" kind of thing, it's just him trying to say he's the boss. So in my opinion that would be the larger issue here and one that should be addressed with training. Even speutered dogs hump to assert dominance.


----------



## hulkamaniac (Feb 11, 2009)

chul3l3ies1126 said:


> The way I see it, if a person is responsible enough and trains their dog to the fullest, then there is no reason why a dog shouldnt be left intact.
> 
> But in our society, the RESPONSIBLE owner are FEW ARE FAR BETWEEN. So I honestly think the majority of society should spay and neuter their animals.


I would actually agree with you. The thing is training a dog to that extent is extremely time intensive. There was an episode of Mythbusters a while back where they tested methods to get past a guard dog. The dog was in a fenced area and was protecting a safe. The build team had to open the gate, walk to the safe, open the safe, take it's contents and make it back out of the gate. They wore a protective suit of course and, if I remember right, a GSD was the dog in question. One of them would try to get to the safe while another one would try to distract the dog from outside the fence. They tried things like a steak, acting submissive, acting dominant, etc... None of these things worked and the dog still attacked the would be thief. The one thing that did work and was the only thing that was "confirmed" was the scent of a bitch in heat. This was a professionally trained guard dog that would be hired out by a security company. The dog was totally distracted by a lure with the scent of a bitch in heat. He paid no attention to the thief at all and spent his time at the fence sniffing the lure. The urge to reproduce is an extremely strong urge and should not be underestimated. 

It is extremely difficult (although it can be done) to train a dog to ignore this urge. There is extreme responsibility then on the owner of the intact animal to do this training or have complete and total control of their animal at all times. No exceptions can be made. This is why I choose s/n. I don't want this headache and I'm of the opinion that there are just as many health issues with the s/n as there are without one.


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

Mine stay intact. I'm more concerned with neutering just because. That seems to be the trend. I will neuter for a legitimate reason, which would be a health issue if it arises.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Morganhorse2003 said:


> Well this particular dog is about 2 or 3 years old. I don't really have a problem with the Pom who is intact because he is very mannerly, but the dog in question is not mannerly whatsoever. He tries to breed my puppy and when he doesn't allow it then he bullies him pretty badly. My SO and I are rather annoyed with having our legs humped everytime we're around him. I see no reason to leave him intact. He seems very stressed all the time trying to find something to breed to.


The behavior you are describing is not breeding behavior. It is dominance behavior. Dogs do not try to breed other male dogs, human legs, etc. 

He is attempting to assert dominance. Neutering may or may not have an impact on this behavior. If he is doing it to the extent and obsessiveness that you describe, there is a good chance neutering won't have an effect.

Training can be very effective in controlling dominance humping whether or not the dog is neutered. 

My opinion is that even if the dog does get neutered, this behavior will likely need to be addressed through training.


----------



## DogGoneGood (Jun 22, 2008)

I'm surprised at how many people are saying they have an intact male and that it's okay to do so... last dog forum I was on where this topic came up the majority ruled in favor of neutering UNLESS the dog was for show/breeding.

When did this opinion change among dog fanciers, why, and where the heck was I when it happened?!


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

If you took a poll here, you'd find most spay and neuter.


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

DogGoneGood said:


> I'm surprised at how many people are saying they have an intact male and that it's okay to do so... last dog forum I was on where this topic came up the majority ruled in favor of neutering UNLESS the dog was for show/breeding.
> 
> When did this opinion change among dog fanciers, why, and where the heck was I when it happened?!


I think most people here s/n, like RonE mentioned below. It just happens a lot of people who replied don't neuter I guess. 

Not sure when this opinion changed amount "dog fanciers" as that'd depend. Not all groups of fanciers have thought everyone must s/n or they are bad owners or whatever other mess. Many people I have known have pretty much never s/n just as many I know always have. Depends on the people.

I've always seldom s/n mine. Most of mine have been intact. So my opinion didn't exactly change and I still think s/n has its place. It is a personal choice as well.


----------



## Dogstar (May 11, 2007)

The thing about that ep is that that was ONE dog. I know folks with intact male service dogs (this is unusual, but it does happen) and they have no problem with working around in-season girls. Quite likely, the individual dog had not been proofed for that type of a situation. (Which is why it worked, duh. ) I have a girl in season right now, and Mal is still as focused as ever (which is to say, not terribly; eh's a furry slug.) 


Cait


hulkamaniac said:


> I would actually agree with you. The thing is training a dog to that extent is extremely time intensive. There was an episode of Mythbusters a while back where they tested methods to get past a guard dog. The dog was in a fenced area and was protecting a safe. The build team had to open the gate, walk to the safe, open the safe, take it's contents and make it back out of the gate. They wore a protective suit of course and, if I remember right, a GSD was the dog in question. One of them would try to get to the safe while another one would try to distract the dog from outside the fence. They tried things like a steak, acting submissive, acting dominant, etc... None of these things worked and the dog still attacked the would be thief. The one thing that did work and was the only thing that was "confirmed" was the scent of a bitch in heat. This was a professionally trained guard dog that would be hired out by a security company. The dog was totally distracted by a lure with the scent of a bitch in heat. He paid no attention to the thief at all and spent his time at the fence sniffing the lure. The urge to reproduce is an extremely strong urge and should not be underestimated.
> 
> It is extremely difficult (although it can be done) to train a dog to ignore this urge. There is extreme responsibility then on the owner of the intact animal to do this training or have complete and total control of their animal at all times. No exceptions can be made. This is why I choose s/n. I don't want this headache and I'm of the opinion that there are just as many health issues with the s/n as there are without one.


----------



## lovemygreys (Jan 20, 2007)

The studies I've read about the "benefits" of not neutering were fractions of a fraction of a percent difference in getting or not getting a disease or condition.....once generalized out are statistically insignificant as to be irrelevant.

It is becoming fashionable not to neuter/spay and that's really sad. There are millions dogs and cats euthanized in this country EVERY YEAR because "the masses" may log on for advice and read drivel about "it's healthier to keep your pet intact" so they do and then Fluffy mates with Bowser. Congrats folks! Stoke your ego, keep your pets intact, encourage random people on the internet to do so and we can just filling up the landfill with dead, unwanted dogs.

There are legitimate reasons to keep animals intact..."just because" is not one of them...and I've not read any studies that convince me leaving a dog unaltered will significantly extend their life or make them healthier than an altered pet. I think removing a dog's balls actually had the potention to make (esp males) them a better companion because they lose the drive to reproduce.


----------



## hulkamaniac (Feb 11, 2009)

I know this much. I am an intact male. (I will prove it to you if necessary.  ) If I see an attractive female walk by, I get distracted. Sometimes temporarily, sometimes more so. If I see a naked attractive female walk by, you can forget about whatever I'm doing I'm thoroughly distracted now. And I'm a human being who is capable of higher thought and capable of reining in my impulses. A dogs reproductive drive may or may not be stronger than ours (I think it is), but they lack the higher reasoning to restrain themselves. 

For me, I don't want the hassle of keeping my dogs inside all the time on the off chance a bitch in heat happens to stray by. I don't want to hear complaints from the neighborhood dog walker about my dogs "attacking" her (yes, I own a vicious attack spaniel) trying to get to said bitch in heat. I have heard numerous stories of dogs getting out of dog runs with roofs, six foot fences, tie outs, and virtually every other dog restraint system you can think of. I've heard stories of dogs coupling through the door of a crate. The world has far too many unwanted dogs and I'm just not going to risk it.

I don't see s/n as detrimental to the physical health of my dogs in any way shape or form. It's certainly not detrimental in any psychological manner. The dog knows no difference and statistically is just as likely to live a long and healthy life as before.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

Hmmm....my male is intact. I'm not having any issues with girls in season. I show several intact males...only one is extremely distracted by a bitch in season.

I show a GSD that's been bred before. There was a bitch in full standing heat at the last show...he had no interest.


----------



## peppy264 (Apr 23, 2009)

hulkamaniac said:


> For me, I don't want the hassle of keeping my dogs inside all the time on the off chance a bitch in heat happens to stray by. I don't want to hear complaints from the neighborhood dog walker about my dogs "attacking" her (yes, I own a vicious attack spaniel) trying to get to said bitch in heat. I have heard numerous stories of dogs getting out of dog runs with roofs, six foot fences, tie outs, and virtually every other dog restraint system you can think of. I've heard stories of dogs coupling through the door of a crate. The world has far too many unwanted dogs and I'm just not going to risk it.


OMG the power of testicles !!!!! Those unneutered dogs will be jumping tall buildings to assault innocent virgin chihuahuas next. LOL. If you can't control your dogs then go ahead and neuter them. But lots of dog owners are more than capable of making sure their unneutured dogs don't get loose etc. Preaching to them that they should neuter their dogs because of your shortcomings is absurd. 



> I don't see s/n as detrimental to the physical health of my dogs in any way shape or form.


A lot of studies disagree.


> It's certainly not detrimental in any psychological manner.


How do you know this? 


> The dog knows no difference


LOL. They've told you that have they?

Its amusing how people (and innumerable S/N propaganda web sites) can claim all sorts of behavioral benefits of neutering, but completely disavow any chance that neutering can have negative effects (e.g. lessening drive).


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

peppy264 said:


> A lot of studies disagree.


I've seen those studies, and I've seen that there are just as many studies showing the opposite---that early spay/neuter is healthier. Both sides seem equally legitimate. All in what you choose to believe, I guess.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

All I can comment on is my personally experience. I have only ever had one intact male, Dusk. I have also never been more closely bonded to a dog than I am to him. Not that that has anything to do with him being intact.

But he has been exposed to countless females in heat. And I only say countless because I have never counted nor do I wish to. He has also been left accidently in crates where an intact bitch has just been removed from. He still came out and showed with the same amount of determination and focus. 

Now I know he notices intact bitches, because is behavior did change when my bitch came into season. But all it amounted to was a bit of whimpering before he went to sleep at night. This would last about ten minutes, until I would tell him to shush up and go to bed. 

But I still remain cautious all the time. However, I don't really do more than any RESPONSIBLE owner should be doing for any dog. 

1) I don't leave him outside when I'm not home.
_Dog napping is a risk with any dog. As is your dog getting into something they shouldn't, or someone throwing poison or antifreeze over your fence._

2) I keep a good solid raw iron fence that can't be scaled or dug under. 
_Any dog can decide there is something more interesting on the other side of the fence. We should all have safety precautions for this._

To me this isn't a hassle, it’s just responsible dog ownership. PERIOD.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

Xeph said:


> Hmmm....my male is intact. I'm not having any issues with girls in season. I show several intact males...only one is extremely distracted by a bitch in season.
> 
> I show a GSD that's been bred before. There was a bitch in full standing heat at the last show...he had no interest.


This seems slightly off topic, but maybe you know. Do they really put vics vapor rub on male dogs in shows to distract them from bitches in season? Someone suggested this to me before we had neutered our doxie and were looking into showing him and I was like


----------



## peppy264 (Apr 23, 2009)

Willowy said:


> I've seen those studies, and I've seen that there are just as many studies showing the opposite---that early spay/neuter is healthier. Both sides seem equally legitimate. All in what you choose to believe, I guess.


Your right, do your research and make up your own mind. But look for real studies, not the propaganda that is repeated endlessly on thousands of web sites about the magical health benefits of neutering.

And, when you are making up your own mind, consider this: you have a male dog. Males are born with testicles. Hormones are part of a complex system and impacts his physical development and behavior. When you are messing with that you are messing with nature. Should not be done lightly.

By the way, my comments were just about neutering. My understanding is that spaying at an earlier age is more justified health-wise than neutering - have not researched this as I only am interested in male dogs.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

Yup, Vick's is pretty common. I find vanilla to be more effective, plus it won't have toxicity repercussions for the dogs.

Dogs tend to lick their noses after something is applied or they eat food. Vanilla #1 disguises the smell of a bitch in season, #2 smells pleasant to humans, #3 isn't toxic to the dogs, and #4 tastes awful as its own extract so the dogs are less inclined to nose lick xD

When there is a bitch in season at home that isn't due to be bred, chlorophyll capsules have become a quick and easy remedy to make the boys lose interest. Harmless to the bitch and keep a really driven male mellow enough that he'll at least eat.


----------



## chul3l3ies1126 (Aug 13, 2007)

Xeph said:


> Hmmm....my male is intact. I'm not having any issues with girls in season. I show several intact males...only one is extremely distracted by a bitch in season.
> 
> I show a GSD that's been bred before. There was a bitch in full standing heat at the last show...he had no interest.


I too have had Callahan near females in heat and have never had him distracted. So I guess it could either be the dog... or the owners training toward the dog. Who knows...
I will say that I am completely for spaying and neutering because the majority of pet owners are not responsible with the subject. 
Nessa


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

Xeph said:


> Yup, Vick's is pretty common. I find vanilla to be more effective, plus it won't have toxicity repercussions for the dogs.
> 
> Dogs tend to lick their noses after something is applied or they eat food. Vanilla #1 disguises the smell of a bitch in season, #2 smells pleasant to humans, #3 isn't toxic to the dogs, and #4 tastes awful as its own extract so the dogs are less inclined to nose lick xD
> 
> When there is a bitch in season at home that isn't due to be bred, chlorophyll capsules have become a quick and easy remedy to make the boys lose interest. Harmless to the bitch and keep a really driven male mellow enough that he'll at least eat.


Well, the more you know! I had just never heard it before and was hesitant to put it on his nose without hearing it has been done. Wish I knew all of this stuff while my female was in heat.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

I'm pro spay/neuter too, but I do not supprt *pediatric* spay/neuter


----------



## Tankstar (Dec 30, 2006)

Morganhorse2003 said:


> Well this particular dog is about 2 or 3 years old. I don't really have a problem with the Pom who is intact because he is very mannerly, but the dog in question is not mannerly whatsoever. He tries to breed my puppy and when he doesn't allow it then he bullies him pretty badly. My SO and I are rather annoyed with having our legs humped everytime we're around him. I see no reason to leave him intact. He seems very stressed all the time trying to find something to breed to.


Sounds like the dog needs training. neutering is not the fix all of everything.

I have my dog intact. for several reasons. Very small percent of testicula cancer for the higher increase of other issues is a biggie to me. that and he already has heart problems, so I dont want to fuss with unnesacery surgery if I dont have to. he aint no show dog, he is deffiently not breed worthy. Nore is he ill mannered and hump any one of anything. He doesnt start fights, he doesnt mark territory (unless its out side. and lets face it male AND female dogs who are fixed).


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I have had both neutered and intact dogs throughout my life- about half and half. A few have been intact for no particular reason at all including one mutt dog. My parents grew up on a farm and no one spayed or neutered their dogs. So we didn't either. The fact that we have always had intact animals has NO bearing whatsoever on how responsible we were. In having 6 intact males we've _never_ had one oops. We've had intact males and females at the same time, never had a pup. 

Right now I have half and half about- 2 intact males, 1 neutered male (the only male dog we've ever fixed actually), and 2 spayed females. I've dealt with intact females, not fun so now unless I breed them, I'm spaying. One of our intact males is a retired show dog that I don't know about breeding and the other is probably not going to be a good show dog and definitely won't be breeding. I'm pretty sure he'll stay intact though.

My anecdotes though really mean nothing at all. _I_ am a responsible owner so _I_ can handle an intact dog. The majority of people in this country are NOT responsible and I think being on dog forums we forget that. I've worked in the shelter (rural and during puppy season no less) long enough to see the vast benefits of spaying and neutering. There were times we'd have 6-7 litters at the shelter at once that were homeless. Yes, the anti spay-neuter people would point out that if the dogs were contained blah blah blah..... And I agree. However, they're not being contained properly. Many people are just naive about how far a dog/bitch will go to breed. Some know and just don't care. We have to remember our answers could be read by those people as well as the average DF member who is probably more up on dogs than the average dog owner.

I have to wonder like lovemygreys about lurkers. We have to be careful with what we say. This thread could easily be read as 'do not neuter your dogs' which could be very harmful. Most people should neuter their dogs. Having an intact dog means you have to be beyond responsible.


----------



## KaseyT (May 7, 2008)

I have yet to meet an owner of an intact dog that does not believe he/she is a responsible dog owner.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

KaseyT said:


> I have yet to meet an owner of an intact dog that does not believe he/she is a responsible dog owner.


I have yet to meet an owner of any dog that does not believe so. What does that have to do with anything?

If someone has an intact dog that is properly contained at all times and has never had an oops, then they're responsible. If someone has an intact dog that wanders and breeds with whatever's in sight, then they're not responsible.


----------



## hulkamaniac (Feb 11, 2009)

peppy264 said:


> OMG the power of testicles !!!!! Those unneutered dogs will be jumping tall buildings to assault innocent virgin chihuahuas next. LOL. If you can't control your dogs then go ahead and neuter them. But lots of dog owners are more than capable of making sure their unneutured dogs don't get loose etc. Preaching to them that they should neuter their dogs because of your shortcomings is absurd.


As someone mentioned, people underestimate what dogs will do to mate. If you keep your dogs indoors at all times and the only time your dog is ever outside he/she is leashed and fully under your control, then you will probably not have any problems. The fact of the matter is this isn't the case with the vast majority of dogs.



> A lot of studies disagree.


And there are an equal number of studies that claim the health benefits of s/n. To me it's six of one and a half dozen of the other. I don't think a s/n exposes a dog to any more health hazards than not s/n a dog. 



> How do you know this?


Because dogs are animals. Don't make the mistake of anthropomorphizing them. A fixed dog does not spend his life longing to have a family and a normal life and being deeply emotionally scarred because he can't. I have not taken any of my fixed dogs home and had them look at me with anything close to resentment. Dogs aren't capable of that.



> LOL. They've told you that have they?


They're freaking dogs!! Not humans. They're not capable of emotions like regret or resentment.



> Its amusing how people (and innumerable S/N propaganda web sites) can claim all sorts of behavioral benefits of neutering, but completely disavow any chance that neutering can have negative effects (e.g. lessening drive).


And it's also amazing how people can disavow all the studies on the positive health effects of s/n and the positive behavioral effects that s/n can have. Not to mention the more immediate and obvious result of controlling the pet population.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

I disagree on the resentment part, ehe....



> And it's also amazing how people can disavow all the studies on the positive health effects of s/n and the positive behavioral effects that s/n can have.


I feel the same about those who think everybody should spay/neuter.


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

Morganhorse2003 said:


> Well this particular dog is about 2 or 3 years old. I don't really have a problem with the Pom who is intact because he is very mannerly, but the dog in question is not mannerly whatsoever. He tries to breed my puppy and when he doesn't allow it then he bullies him pretty badly. My SO and I are rather annoyed with having our legs humped everytime we're around him. I see no reason to leave him intact. He seems very stressed all the time trying to find something to breed to.



Yet, this does not describe normal intact male behavior. He's not acting like this BECUASE he's intact, he's wild because he is untrained, underexercised, bored. I have FIVE intact males as we speak, four of which are adults. They wouldn't even dare to try this sort of behavior in their wildest dreams - nor do they act towards people in such a manner even when we have multiple bitches in heat!!! They are trained from the get go, even kennel dogs, to me mannerly and reasonably well behaved ... for a Beagle  
This particular dog doesn't really sound stressed so much as understimulated 99% of the time, then is going out of his mind when he finally is stimulated with other people/animals. 
If I ever had a male dog such as this, the last thing I would do is neuter them. Instead, I'd try changing diet to something that was lower protein and had a low glycemic response, so that blood sugar levels are not constantly spiking & crashing. A poor feed can cause or exasberate this sort of reaction in a dog that needs more exercise and/or mental stimulation. If there is not enough exercise combined with spiking blood sugar ... He's a classic example of an intelligent dog who is "bouncing off the walls". I would also suggest this dog's owner get serious about obedience training. My males learn from pups that this behavior is unacceptable. I have never seen an intact male hump a person or act hyper because of being intact. It's purely a behavioral and training issue.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

It's interesting to me that anything we disagree with is "propaganda." I think I used the word myself in a discussion about PETA.

Both my dogs are spayed because I don't have 100% control over their daily activities and I have almost no control over the activities of the 5,000-or-so intact males in my little town. I have auto insurance for similar reasons.

I have no problem with someone who makes a conscious decision for their own reasons not to spay or neuter but I have a huge problem with anyone who either does or doesn't for no particular reason at all.


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

ThoseWordsAtBest said:


> This seems slightly off topic, but maybe you know. Do they really put vics vapor rub on male dogs in shows to distract them from bitches in season? Someone suggested this to me before we had neutered our doxie and were looking into showing him and I was like



I have never heard of such a thing. Instead, it's generally an unwritten rule that it is very bad manners for an exhibitor to show a bitch in full blown heat ...


----------



## Elana55 (Jan 7, 2008)

Years ago (and with my years it was a LONG time.. just trust me) no one neutered male dogs unless there was a medical need to do so. Fact is, you would get a male puppy because it meant it was cheaper because you did not have to pay for spaying which was expensive (it still is not cheap!). 

Spaying was done for sure, but even then, not everyone spayed because of the cost. Years back (before even ME.. ) it was not uncommon for female dogs to be left intact. Remember, this is major surgery and there were no antibiotics less than 100 years ago, so it could be life threatening surgery. 

In my memory, it was not until the late 70's that it was thought to neuter male dogs as a regular thing because it was responsible to do so. 

Now most do neuter male dogs and most spay female dogs if they have a lick of care for the dog and shelotoer over population etc. 

Unless I am going to breed a dog, I would neuter him. 

The behavior, BTW, of the OP's Doxie is not because the dog is un-neutered. It is a behavior that would likely continue even if the dog was neutered.


----------



## deege39 (Dec 29, 2008)

What really burns my hide is: People take their dogs to the dog park, un-neutered/un-spayed... What? That's just asking for trouble all around! Especially when 3/4 of these people are inexperienced dog owners; so you know they're not trained. Don't mistake this for a minute, I am not against someone having an intact dog, but many of these people are so in-experienced, and you can tell by the way they handle themselves and especially their dogs!

A lady and I were talking and she asked if Donatello was fixed, and I said, _"Well of course!"_ She kind of chuckled and said that she sees several groups of people bring their Pit-Bulls to the dog park, and they're all "un-fixed", the owners having hidden agendas in mind let their dogs mate, right there in the park! 0.0 She told me that and I about died... It's unbelievable the gall of some people!

She said she made the mistake of walking in one of those "doggy-mating-parties" one day with her two fixed females, and all the intact-males were all over her dogs... -.- She said her dogs had a very unpleasant visit. 

I can only imagine!


----------



## peppy264 (Apr 23, 2009)

RonE said:


> It's interesting to me that anything we disagree with is "propaganda." I think I used the word myself in a discussion about PETA.


I used the word "Propaganda" very intentionally. Cruise through doggie web sites on the web. You will see the same pro-neuter message with the same list of reasons to do it repeated hundreds of times. The health risks and other negative aspects of the procedure are never discussed. It is propaganda because it is the deliberate spreading of an unbalanced message for a specific purpose (dog population control). 



> I have no problem with someone who makes a conscious decision for their own reasons not to spay or neuter but I have a huge problem with anyone who either does or doesn't for no particular reason at all.


Its hard to follow your logic. Do you have a problem with someone who does not neuter their dog because they believe in leaving things as nature created them, they and see no reason to put a healthy normal dog thru surgery and they do not let their dogs loose to impregnate bitches unsupervised?

You need a reason to have surgery, not a reason not to have a surgery.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

here is a funny little tidbit

my friend's dog will mount any female he comes across and gets full erections, and escapes to run after bitches in heat....

he's neutered. 

neutering isn't a cure all.


----------



## MissMutt (Aug 8, 2008)

deege39 said:


> What really burns my hide is: People take their dogs to the dog park, un-neutered/un-spayed... What? That's just asking for trouble all around! Especially when 3/4 of these people are inexperienced dog owners; so you know they're not trained. Don't mistake this for a minute, I am not against someone having an intact dog, but many of these people are so in-experienced, and you can tell by the way they handle themselves and especially their dogs!
> 
> A lady and I were talking and she asked if Donatello was fixed, and I said, _"Well of course!"_ She kind of chuckled and said that she sees several groups of people bring their Pit-Bulls to the dog park, and they're all "un-fixed", the owners having hidden agendas in mind let their dogs mate, right there in the park! 0.0 She told me that and I about died... It's unbelievable the gall of some people!
> 
> ...


I can see it being okay if a person brings an UNDER CONTROL intact dog to the park. I think there are some DFers who do this. Though they are responsible people. But oh my goodness, I met quite the winner today.

A woman with a Yorkie, Shih Tzu and one other dog. The Yorkie had been intact his whole life, then was bred once and neutered after. The bitch he had bred was the Shih Tzu, who was sitting up on the bench, not feeling well.. BECAUSE SHE WAS IN HEAT. Oh my god. I had to restrain myself from saying something dumb. In heat.. at a dog park. Thank goodness we were the only ones there, and I left right after this conversation because each dog literally had a problem of its own. A yappy, growly Yorkie, a shy mutt baby, and a Shih Tzu moping around in heat. And then she told me that her other (quite matted) dog was the product of those two. And that another pup from the litter had been bred to a Chinese Crested to produce "adorable" puppies. I don't even think it qualifies as "designer" anymore.

THAT, my friends, is the kind of person who should have had their dogs speutered a long, long time ago. That's also the reason I almost never go to the dog park anymore - I wish I had a good one.


----------



## Shaggydog (Mar 4, 2009)

The last male I had was left intact.He never wandered or even attempted to.He was content just to stay in the yard and guard it,which he done well.As long as the dog doen't try to wander off and try to get loose every chance a female dog comes around,I don't see why it would bother anyone.


----------



## hulkamaniac (Feb 11, 2009)

peppy264 said:


> I used the word "Propaganda" very intentionally. Cruise through doggie web sites on the web. You will see the same pro-neuter message with the same list of reasons to do it repeated hundreds of times. The health risks and other negative aspects of the procedure are never discussed. It is propaganda because it is the deliberate spreading of an unbalanced message for a specific purpose (dog population control).


And you choose to ignore the positive aspects of the procedure and the health benefits of doing the procedure. Not to mention the obvious reason of controlling the dog population. Let's make no mistake here, canine overpopulation is a huge problem. The health risks of having the procedure are statistically negligible. For every study that claims s/n is bad you will find a study that says it's equally good.



> Its hard to follow your logic. Do you have a problem with someone who does not neuter their dog because they believe in leaving things as nature created them, they and see no reason to put a healthy normal dog thru surgery and they do not let their dogs loose to impregnate bitches unsupervised?
> 
> You need a reason to have surgery, not a reason not to have a surgery.


There is a very good reason to have the surgery - 3,000,00 - 4,000,000 of them. That's the number of dogs and cats euthanized every year due to overpopulation. Half of the dogs that enter shelters this year will not make it out alive. We're not talking about dogs who are sick, ill or aggressive (although I'm sure some portion of that number are). We're talking about healthy dogs who will die this year because someone felt that they needed leave their dog as nature created and then one day they opened the door and Fido darted out. Or one day a stray dog wandered in the dog door or over the fence, or under the fence or didn't need to come inside the fence to do his deed. Accidents can happen. The surgery is inexpensive and the risk is negligible and there 3-4 million reasons to do it.

If you plan to breed your dog down the road (and of course do all the necessary testing to make sure your dog should breed) or you plan to show your dog, that's one thing. I have no problem with that. But we're talking the average run of the mill dog owner here.


----------



## peppy264 (Apr 23, 2009)

Hulkamaniac,

I'm trying to have patience with you because obviously you've been brainwashed by the very propaganda of which I speak. Propaganda can be very powerful, and has historically made many people do things they later find difficult to justify. 

In any case, I do not at all ignore the so-called health benefits of neutering. However, I am convinced, based on the research papers that I have read, that the health benefits to neutering a dog under 2 yrs old are significantly outweighed by the associated health risks. For dogs over 2 years old, it is more of a coin toss.

As for the so-called behavioral benefits of neutering, well that very much dependent on the particular dog and what the owner wants. My dog has no behavior problems and I've no intention of messing with his hormones unnecessarily. If he had aggression problems I could not deal with in another way, I may consider neutering.

As for the overpopulation issues, it is completely irrelevant to the dog owner who is keeping his un-neutered dog properly supervised (ie not free to roam, cause surprise litters, etc). I'm not sure why you can't understand this. Immaculate conception is not widespread. NO HUMP HUMP NO PUPPIES. Got it ?


----------



## Dogstar (May 11, 2007)

deege39 said:


> What really burns my hide is: People take their dogs to the dog park, un-neutered/un-spayed... What?!


Why does the fact that someone else has an untrained dog mean I should not be allowed to take MY well behaved, polite, trained, intact dogs to the park?


----------



## chul3l3ies1126 (Aug 13, 2007)

Dogstar said:


> Why does the fact that someone else has an untrained dog mean I should not be allowed to take MY well behaved, polite, trained, intact dogs to the park?


*Agreed*
Nessa


----------



## hulkamaniac (Feb 11, 2009)

peppy264 said:


> In any case, I do not at all ignore the so-called health benefits of neutering. However, I am convinced, based on the research papers that I have read, that *the health benefits to neutering a dog under 2 yrs old are significantly outweighed by the associated health risks*. For dogs over 2 years old, it is more of a coin toss.


You keep going back to this. The numbers just aren't there. Please cite stats to back up your assertion. The risk of death under anesthesia is 1.44% and that's sick dogs. For healthy dogs (who would be the vast majority undergoing the procedure) its .05%. Yes, it quadruples the chance of prostate cancer from .4 % to 1.6% That's hardly a significant health risk. Neutered dogs have an increased chance of a bad reaction to a vaccination. That chance - .32%. These are statistically insignificant by any stretch of the imagination. Please don't make the "it's a huge health risk" argument.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

There's also an increased risk of osterocecoma in males neutered to early. But I don't know the stats off the top of my head. 

Also urinary tract infections.


----------



## peppy264 (Apr 23, 2009)

> Please don't make the "it's a huge health risk" argument.


Never said "huge". Said "significant". At least significant enough to me that I would not neuter a dog under 2 yrs old unless I had some particular reason to do so. 

What I find offensive is books or web sites, even self proclaimed 'dog health' sites, which purport to give medical type advice but simply say 'Neutering has the following health benefits for your dog' without saying what the risks are. To me that is unethical.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

peppy264 said:


> Its hard to follow your logic.


Really? Then let me clarify.

Everything we choose to do or not do for our dogs should be a conscious decision - not just a default "for the heck of it." We need to weigh the risks of vaccinating for Lyme vs not vaccinating, for example. If you decide that the risks associated with vaccine outweigh the risks of Lyme for your dog, that's a conscious choice. If you avoid the vaccination "just for the heck of it" that's irresponsible. 

If you come to a dog forum and insist that every dog owner everywhere should avoid vaccinating their dogs (or feed raw or leave their dogs intact or any of the other sweeping generalizations that surface on Internet forums) then shame on you.


----------



## hulkamaniac (Feb 11, 2009)

peppy264 said:


> Never said "huge". Said "significant". At least significant enough to me that I would not neuter a dog under 2 yrs old unless I had some particular reason to do so.
> 
> What I find offensive is books or web sites, even self proclaimed 'dog health' sites, which purport to give medical type advice but simply say 'Neutering has the following health benefits for your dog' without saying what the risks are. To me that is unethical.


I'll ask again. Show me the numbers. I don't think 1.5% is significant. Do you consider that significant? If we had a general election and someone ended up getting elected to an office with 98.5% of the vote would the headline the next day say, "Despite significant opposition......" The risks of neutering are so negligible as to not be worth mentioning.


----------



## wabanafcr (Jun 28, 2007)

Here is a summary of the risks of early spay/neuter (before the dog is physically mature). Sources cited at the bottom of the page:
http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html

And another one:
http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

And to be fair, here is a rebuttal to the first article, but read carefully, as they do agree with some of the things cited:
http://www.unleashyourself.biz/documents/zinkrebuttalearlyspaynueter.pdf

I've done an early spay on one puppy, as she had an inguinal hernia that needed repair, and we had her spayed at the same time so she wouldn't have to undergo surgery again. This was before we did much research. Anecdotally, she did pretty well. Recovery was very fast and very easy on her. She matured taller than her litter sisters did, and was of a narrower build--she never developed the depth and breadth of chest that a mature Flatcoat typically has. She was a tad overweight, but that is due more to being overfed than anything else. She was the 2nd in her litter to die of cancer--she was 7 years old--and the first to die was a neutered brother, at age 5. They both died of hemangiosarcoma, which is listed as one of the increased risk cancers. I still have her litter sister, who is now 9.

I do require that most of the puppies I place be spayed or neutered, but not until 12 months. Flat-Coated Retrievers are a slow-maturing breed that already struggles with cancer issues, so I do not want to increase the likelihood of cancers. They are also highly active, so I do not recommend a procedure that changes the normal growth patterns of my pups. For me and my breed, it just isn't something I want to encourage. If someone wishes to leave their male intact, they must be an experienced dog owner and someone I am very familiar with (as in they have had a dog from me before and I know how that dog was raised and cared for), and then I don't really have a problem with it. Bitches must be spayed.

But I do understand why shelters and rescues use the procedure and why many vets encourage it. I just wish Americans were more responsible with their dogs across the board.


----------



## hulkamaniac (Feb 11, 2009)

Those articles deal with early s/n. I don't have too much of an issue with people who oppose early s/n though I think the issue is very open to debate. My issue is with people who say things like "You should never s/n because that's not how God intended it" or "S/N has significant health disadvatages to your pet" when that's just not the case. 

As I've stated before I can't control my dog 100% of the time. If I go on vacation and board my dog someplace can I be 100% certain that my dog won't escape or that one of the other dogs there won't escape? If I take my dog to be groome can I be 100% certain that my dog won't get away from the groomer just for 5-10 minutes? I can't. I also have no control whatsoever over all the other dogs in the neighborhood who may not be contained in appropriate fencing and who's owners may not be as responsible as I am. It's all about risk to me. Why take a risk when I don't have to and have no reason to? My dog is purely a companion. I'm not ever going to breed him and have no intentions of showing him so why should I take a risk of adding to the dog population problem?


----------



## animalcraker (Nov 9, 2006)

hulkamaniac said:


> There is a very good reason to have the surgery - 3,000,00 - 4,000,000 of them. That's the number of dogs and cats euthanized every year due to overpopulation. Half of the dogs that enter shelters this year will not make it out alive. We're not talking about dogs who are sick, ill or aggressive (although I'm sure some portion of that number are). We're talking about healthy dogs who will die this year because someone felt that they needed leave their dog as nature created and then one day they opened the door and Fido darted out. Or one day a stray dog wandered in the dog door or over the fence, or under the fence or didn't need to come inside the fence to do his deed. Accidents can happen. The surgery is inexpensive and the risk is negligible and there 3-4 million reasons to do it.


My 7 year old Cavalier is still intact. I'm never going to breed him and he's retired from showing. How does me neutering my dog have any benifical affect to the countless animals in the shelters? 

At the moment, depending which county I register him with, I pay 5-10 times more to liscense him than a neutered dog; yet it doesn't cost the city anymore to process his liscense. So essentialy me keeping my dog intact finacialy benefits the shelter animals, more so than if I were to neuter him. He's never gotten loose and I only board him with experienced people I trust (Breeders and his Vet, all of which have double gated facilites). It doesn't take a brain surgeon to be a responsible owner and keep your dog contained.


----------



## txcollies (Oct 23, 2007)

I only alter my dogs if I absolutely have to. I have a 7 year old intact male that I compete in performance events with, and he's never given me any problems. My teenager is also intact and he's not gonna go under either.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

I have trouble with Strauss in performance sometimes, and I can promise you it has nothing to do with his testicles >.<


----------



## peppy264 (Apr 23, 2009)

hulkamaniac said:


> I'll ask again. Show me the numbers. I don't think 1.5% is significant. Do you consider that significant? If we had a general election and someone ended up getting elected to an office with 98.5% of the vote would the headline the next day say, "Despite significant opposition......" The risks of neutering are so negligible as to not be worth mentioning.


One paper I still have is Long-Term Health Risks and Benefits Associated with Spay / Neuter in Dogs, by Laura J. Sanborn, M.S., May 14, 2007. I'm sure you can search for it and find it on the net. I didn't keep the other ones.

Unlike conventional wisdom, it appears pretty clear that neutering is not at all justified based solely on health benefits, as one would believe from countless pro-neuter web sites / propaganda.


----------



## peppy264 (Apr 23, 2009)

RonE said:


> If you come to a dog forum and insist that every dog owner everywhere should avoid vaccinating their dogs (or feed raw or leave their dogs intact or any of the other sweeping generalizations that surface on Internet forums) then shame on you.


??? I made no such generalization, not even remotely close. Neutering is completely appropriate for lots of situations. However, the generalization that is routinely made by others ('If you are not breeding or showing you should neuter your dog') is B.S. If you can prevent your dog from causing surprise litters, and you are happy with his behavior, then there really is no reason to neuter. 

You don't need a reason not to have an unnecessary surgery on your dog. You do need to be responsible and stop your dog from creating unwanted puppies. You can neuter to fulfill this responsibility. Personally, I believe in fences rather than scalpels, but to each his own depending on his circumstances.


----------



## txcollies (Oct 23, 2007)

I'm just not a fan of unnecessary (spelling) surgery. I'm responsible with my dogs and 
I won't feel guilty for the mistakes of others


----------



## nikkilugi (Mar 11, 2009)

I had a female boxer who we did not spay. We were responsible pet owners and she never became pregnant. In fact it seems most of the people in our neighborhood are responsible owners because we only had one dog show up outside our fence in that time and he didn't get in. Frankly she really wasn't in heat very much at all and it was very light when she was.

She has since passed away and we now have a new female boxer puppy. Our vet has said we should spay her at 6 months - I haven't decided what we will do. I had a pit bull as a teen and she actually died during spaying because she had a blood condition that wasn't caught. I understand there were and are differences between then and now but I am naturally less inclined toward surgery with my dogs.

I understand the problem facing our country with the overpopulation of pets, however I feel I am one of the responsible people who can take care of myself and my pets and have effectively demonstrated that.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

> but to each his own depending on his circumstances.


Thank you. That's all I was really looking for.


----------



## hulkamaniac (Feb 11, 2009)

peppy264 said:


> One paper I still have is Long-Term Health Risks and Benefits Associated with Spay / Neuter in Dogs, by Laura J. Sanborn, M.S., May 14, 2007. I'm sure you can search for it and find it on the net. I didn't keep the other ones.
> 
> Unlike conventional wisdom, it appears pretty clear that neutering is not at all justified based solely on health benefits, as one would believe from countless pro-neuter web sites / propaganda.


I did search the web and the excerpt I found was "The evidence shows that spay/neuter correlates with both positive AND adverse health effects in dogs." I've never disagree with that, I just make the argument that the adverse health effects are statistically minuscule and are not a good reason to not s/n. I don't think anyone advocates s/n based solely on the health benefits. The main argument for s/n is that it controls the pet population.


----------



## peppy264 (Apr 23, 2009)

hulkamaniac said:


> I did search the web and the excerpt I found was "The evidence shows that spay/neuter correlates with both positive AND adverse health effects in dogs."


You omitted the next few paragraphs of the summary:

_On balance, it appears that no compelling case can be made for neutering most male dogs to prevent future health problems, especially immature male dogs. The number of health problems associated with neutering may exceed the associated health benefits in most cases.

The traditional spay/neuter age of six months as well as the modern practice of pediatric spay/neuter appear to predispose dogs to health risks that could otherwise be avoided by waiting until the dog is physically mature, or perhaps in the case of many male dogs, foregoing it altogether unless medically necessary.
_



> The main argument for s/n is that it controls the pet population.


Quoting myself now, from above:

_As for the overpopulation issues, it is completely irrelevant to the dog owner who is keeping his un-neutered dog properly supervised (ie not free to roam, cause surprise litters, etc). .........NO HUMP HUMP NO PUPPIES. 
_


----------



## hulkamaniac (Feb 11, 2009)

peppy264 said:


> Quoting myself now, from above:
> 
> _As for the overpopulation issues, it is completely irrelevant to the dog owner who is keeping his un-neutered dog properly supervised (ie not free to roam, cause surprise litters, etc). .........NO HUMP HUMP NO PUPPIES.
> _


Both my face and my palm are in pain now. The average dog owner does *not* keep his/her dog under complete control 100% of the time nor is it reasonable to expect him to. The above average dog owner does *not* keep his/her dog under complete control 100% of the time nor is it reasonable to expect them too. Can you honestly say that your dog has never, ever, ever, ever, ever been out of your control? The dog has never wandered out of the gate and you had to go after it and call it back to you? The dog has never, ever jerked the leash out of your hands? That there is 0 possibility of your dog ever escaping? That you can successfully fend off any male dog that would try to mate with your dog while on a walk? That you can keep any and every stray dog from climbing over, digging under, chewing through your fence? If you can, then props to you. If you deny the fact that the vast majority of dog owners can't or won't then you're in deep denial.

I evaluate things in terms of risk. I'm not someone who enjoys taking unnecessary risks. I'm legally required to only carry liability on my car, but I carry full coverage for the simple reason that I'm willing to pay a few hundred dollars extra a year to transfer risk to someone else. This risk is negligible as I've only had one wreck in the past 6-7 years, but I still pay. I carry home owners insurance even though the risk of serious damage to my house is negligible. I choose to transfer that risk elsewhere. 

If I am an extremely responsible dog owner and I only take my dog out on a leash and I keep the dog securely confined and out of reach of other dogs when I'm not around is my risk of adding to the dog population high? No, it's just as negligible as the chances of someone hitting me while I'm driving. But what's the worst case scenario in either case? Someone hits me while I'm driving, totals my car and puts me in the hospital and has no insurance which causes a significant financial drain on me. That's a huge risk then that I'm not willing to take. I'll pay the few hundred dollars to transfer that risk. What's the risk if my dog gets out of my control for just 5 minutes of the 10-15 years of his life that I have him? I contributed to the 3-4 million dogs put to sleep every year. I'm not willing to take that risk. I'd much rather pay $100 or so for a routine surgery that eliminates that risk altogether. I'm not breeding my dog. I'm not showing my dog. My dog is healthy enough to undergo the surgery. *I* have no reason at all to take the risk. Maybe others do, but *I* do not.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

animalcraker said:


> It doesn't take a brain surgeon to be a responsible owner and keep your dog contained.


It is clearly beyond the capabilities of the vast majority of pet owners, or there wouldn't be so many oops litters. 

And there was a thread a while back in which the anti-neuter segment ADMITTED that oops pregnancies occasionally happen to even the most responsible of dog owners, but so what? (or at least that was the attitude that came across to me) Seemed to be to be a callous attitude to the lives of those animals killed because of lack of homes (if you don't wish to call it overpopulation).



hulkamaniac said:


> What's the risk if my dog gets out of my control for just 5 minutes of the 10-15 years of his life that I have him? I contributed to the 3-4 million dogs put to sleep every year.


Absolutely my feelings on the subject as well. My dogs have gotten out a couple times, and I KNOW, 100%, that they have not contributed to the problem. My grandpa's dog (intact) used to get out frequently (as I believe most pet dogs do, especially intact males), and who knows how many puppies he fathered? And how many of them were killed?


Personally, I would prefer that the average pet owner's default would be to spay/neuter. Default used ot be NOT to spay/neuter, and we all know the euth rate back then. Unless they've done extensive research on leaving an animal intact and KNOW--100%--that they can contain their pets, their pets should be altered. I can introduce you to a Lab bitch who is hugely pregnant with an unknown male's puppies (puppies with a rather uncertain future) if you wish to disagree. Her owners were positive they would be able to keep her from getting pregnant, and yet.......


----------



## Kristina97 (Apr 26, 2009)

Many people enjoy the companionship of cats and dogs, who were domesticated thousands of years ago. Over time, people have manipulated animal breeding to produce certain physical characteristics, resulting in the different types of cats and dogs we know today. One unspayed dog and her offspring can lead to 67,000 dogs in six years. Whatever the reason, the number of cats and dogs far exceeds the number of loving homes available. One unspayed cat and her offspring can produce 420,000 cats in seven years. Animal control agencies and shelters receive approximately 6 to 8 million animals annually. Spaying and neutering helps stem the tide of overpopulation. Female cats and dogs should be spayed soon after the age of 8 weeks. The one-time cost of spaying or neutering is less than the costs involved in raising puppies or kittens (which include food, shots, training, and time) and is far less than the cost that communities must pay toward animal control and euthanasia. Adopt from shelters—and don’t forget about adult animals, who are often overlooked by people looking for a puppy or a kitten, but who often have the advantage of being housebroken and trained.


----------



## Dogstar (May 11, 2007)

I'm curious how 1.5% is 'insignificant' when the argument being presented (health effects) for the other side; but only 0 is acceptable when it's for your side? 



hulkamaniac said:


> Both my face and my palm are in pain now. The average dog owner does *not* keep his/her dog under complete control 100% of the time nor is it reasonable to expect him to. The above average dog owner does *not* keep his/her dog under complete control 100% of the time nor is it reasonable to expect them too. Can you honestly say that your dog has never, ever, ever, ever, ever been out of your control? The dog has never wandered out of the gate and you had to go after it and call it back to you? The dog has never, ever jerked the leash out of your hands? That there is 0 possibility of your dog ever escaping?
> 
> Have you actually READ any of this thread, or just come in and copy and pasted the s/n koolaid?
> 
> ...


----------



## Kristina97 (Apr 26, 2009)

But domestication took these animals out of their natural environment, and their reproduction is no longer regulated by predators or habitat. The result is an overpopulation crisis that can only be controlled through widespread spaying and neutering. Approximately 70,000 puppies and kittens are born in the United States each day. Some of them are born to breeders who sell animals for a profit, some are born to people who want their cat or dog to have the “experience” of having a litter or who want their children to witness the “miracle of life,” and some result from allowing fertile animals to roam freely and mate. Whatever the reason, the number of cats and dogs far exceeds the number of loving homes available. Unwanted animals are often treated as a nuisance; incidents of kitten drownings and dog abandonments are common. Many people drop animals off in rural areas, thinking that someone will take them in or that they can fend for themselves. But the tragic fates for these animals include cruel treatment, starvation, disease, freezing, highway death, procurement for research laboratories, and more unregulated breeding.


----------



## Dogstar (May 11, 2007)

Spay and neuter already IS widespread. 81% of dogs and 70-something % of cats ARE spayed and neutered, so that's pretty much made it clear, IMO, that just s/n isn't going to solve the problem. 

Have you read Nathan Winograd's book Redemption? I'd highly recommend it. He points out that if we can increase dog adoptions by something like FIVE % annually, nationally, yearly, we won't hvae any adoptable dogs in shelters. 

Pit bulls and feral cats are different, and cats and dogs, period, are different. But the existance of breeders is not the primary reason for this problem. The main reason for this problem is irresponsible pet owners, whether they have intact dogs or not.


----------



## Kristina97 (Apr 26, 2009)

Even if someone can find homes for one litter of kittens or puppies, the overpopulation cycle continues if the animals are allowed to breed. And animals from breeders occupy homes that could have taken in homeless animals, who are destined to be destroyed. Animal control agencies and shelters receive approximately 6 to 8 million animals annually. Those who are not adopted within about a week or two (3 to 4 million of them) are killed either by painless lethal injection or by inhumane methods, such as the use of carbon monoxide or decompression chambers. In many areas where “pound seizure” is permitted, unclaimed animals can be given or sold to laboratories. Spaying and neutering helps stem the tide of overpopulation. It does not affect animals’ energy levels or change their personalities, as some people mistakenly believe. Spaying eliminates the stress and discomfort that females endure during heat periods, eliminates the risk of uterine cancer, and greatly reduces the risk of mammary cancer. Neutering makes males far less likely to roam or fight, prevents testicular cancer, and reduces the risk of prostate cancer.


----------



## Dogstar (May 11, 2007)

No one on my list would want just nay puppy. They want a collie puppy. They want a puppy that is going to be between 50-70 pounds, have the specific characteristics that my breed is known for, and be guaranteed for health, with a breeder who will back that up with money if a dog has a genetic health problem. 

Please, let me know where they can get this at a shelter and I'll conceed that reputable breeders don't exist.

Also, neutering absolutely affects drive. Spaying, I'm not so sure about, but neutering absolutely does. This isn't always a bad thing (particularly for most pet owners) but for working dogs, there are many good reasons to leave a dog intact. (Not least that a dog who is able to have a long and successful working career with really excellent health and longevity is, IMO, a great breeding candidate.)


----------



## Kristina97 (Apr 26, 2009)

By making sure that your pet can't have puppies or kittens, you'll have peace of mind that his or her offspring won't be euthanized in an animal shelter. Many people are surprised to learn that nationwide more than 3 million cats and dogs are euthanized in shelters. Still the result is homeless animals that have to be euthanized because there are more dogs and cats entering shelters than there are people willing to provide them with loving care. Homeless animals may get into trash containers, defecate in the neighborhood and bite or attack. You can also enjoy your spayed or neutered pet more. Licensed veterinarians perform the spay or neuter operation while the pet is under anesthesia. Spay or neuter surgery carries a one-time cost that is relatively small when you consider the benefits. When being conscientious about the pet overpopulation, don't forget to spay or neuter your pet rabbit. Millions of pet deaths each year are a tragedy—but it can be solved. You might think that these are animals born in the streets or there is something "wrong" with them. Even if you do find homes for your pet's puppies or kittens, that means there are fewer homes available to take in other pets from shelters.


----------



## Dogstar (May 11, 2007)

Your reading comprehension is remarkably poor.


----------



## Kristina97 (Apr 26, 2009)

Prevention of mammary tumors: Female cats and dogs are seven times more likely to develop mammary tumors if they are not spayed before their first heat cycle. The risk is generally estimated at 25% over a lifetime in unspayed females, meaning that the risk is reduced to ca. 3.6% over a lifetime in females spayed before their first heat. Pyometra is prevented, either due to the removal of the organ (when ovariohysterectomy is performed) and/or because of the lack of female sex hormones (oestrogen and progesterone) after spaying. Uterine cancer, ovarian cancer and testicular cancer are prevented due to the removal of the susceptible organs. These cancers are uncommon in dogs and cats, with only a 1% risk of obtaining testicular or ovarian cancer. In female rabbits, however, the rate of uterine cancer may be as high as 80%. For you, the operation results in added convenience. It eliminates blood stains on carpets and floors, and usually stops tomcats from spraying strong-smelling urine on furniture and drapes. You'll no longer have annoying or menacing suitors to contend with. There's no need to confine your pet during "heat" periods, and no unwanted litters to take care of or find homes for. Your pet will be more likely to stay home and devote attention to you and your family.


----------



## DogGoneGood (Jun 22, 2008)

Wow, I didn't think I'd have so much to read when I got back!

The first thing I want to point out - I've read several times in this thread that a dog humping anything other than a female in heat is not a hormonal thing, but rather a behavioral problem. I have to disagree. I believe it CAN be a behavioral thing, and may just be so in this case, I don't know, but I wanted to point out that it IS possible that it's hormones. If it wasn't possible, it wouldn't explain the several cases I've heard of where a young dog humps people and/or anything it can up until it's neutered. This includes my own dog. Coal was bad for humping as soon as he turned 6 months old. I waited for as long as we could handle this rude behavior before having him neutered, but as soon as he was neutered it stopped. He hasn't humped anyone since. (Let me point out as well; for those believing in the whole dominance theory and all that; Coal's a dominant dog.)

As for the debate at hand - I can see how it may be insulting to responsible owners who feel they do have full control over their intact dogs when people point out the millions of dogs dying in shelters. I'd probably be insulted too. I think most people's point (though of course I could be wrong) isn't that EVERYONE should spay and neuter, but rather a LOT of people should. The people who are contributing to the overpopulation AREN'T responsible owners, and giving them any kind of hint that it's okay NOT to spay or neuter will most likely result in them not doing it and continuing to let their intact dogs wander.

I'd like to think I'm a responsible owner, but I can NOT guarantee my dogs will never get out. I can't have a fenced yard at the moment and on occasion my dogs DO get out. Not to mention my only way of containing them, unsupervised, outside is on a line. If they were intact it would be REALLY easy for them to breed with a female. I try really hard to keep them under control and not roaming around the neighborhood, but they do get out sometimes. Just the other night my sister opened the door and I told her "DOG" and she pushed Linkin back and then kept standing there with the door wide open. She became distracted for just two seconds and I screamed "DOG!" and Linkin FLEW out the door. He's a quick little bugger that will take any opportunity he can get, and of course, Coal quickly followed right behind him. We were able to go out and retrieve them in less than 5 minutes, but my point is they HAVE gotten out and I wouldn't guarantee they'll never get out again. Accidents happen. I have my dogs neutered because I KNOW this, and thus I consider myself responsible for doing so. I could be 100% the MOST responsible owner in the world by building a fence the equivalent to Fort Knox, but in reality I can't do that. It's no my choice as it's not my property to make that final decision.

I haven't read the articles posted yet that are on the anti-speuter side, but I will when I get a chance.

I'm not against keeping a dog intact, I'm against irresponsible people keeping their dogs intact, or even responsible people who may not have complete 100% control of their dogs ALL of the time. It IS a personal choice, but not enough people put much thought into that choice or make the effort to contain their intact dog!

A member on another forum actually just recently posted about a law that may go into affect in their area which is mandatory s/n for all pit bulls. This made me PISSED (not just for the obvious "breedism" of it). The person who posted it is just getting into showing and weight pull and if his dogs are altered he won't be able to do that anymore. I don't think it's up to the government to determine whether or not people should spay or neuter their dogs, and I will fight any legislation like this to a T. There ARE legit reasons to not alter a dog, and people are entitled to those reasons. But you'd better make sure you have a good enough reason and are taking the extra effort to have control over your dog. That's just my two cents


----------



## Mr Pooch (Jan 28, 2008)

Hmmm,i got 2 fixed dogs,1 male and 1 female my unfixed male shall remain so due to quite a few reasons..ive heard the *for & against* fixing and i did fix my 1st male because of the "it will reduce agression kinda issues" (yeah right) but as far as im concerned i am extremly responsible so nobody cant holla that "fix ur dog" crap at me..."train ur extremly bad mannered pooch" is more of an issue IMO.


----------



## rutylr (Apr 26, 2009)

Mine are intact until they are done showing in Conformation.Then they are spayed.
A female might be bred once and then spayed/neutered.
All puppies except what I keep are placed on spay/neuter.(I don't trust anyone ,even with a tight contract).
There is no reason for pets to be intact.


----------



## Mr Pooch (Jan 28, 2008)

Well deciding if somebody keeps thier dog intact or not is nobodys business really,what is THE reason why dogs shouldnt be intact if you dont mind telling me?


----------



## ValtheAussie (Apr 19, 2009)

I've got no idea what the statistics are but anytime you anesthetize people or animals, there is a chance that they might never wake up. This is a risk inherent in all surgeries that require general anesthesia.

Cutting into healthy tissue also poses it's own inherent risks. 

If there is no chance that your dog is going to breed unwanted puppies and there are no other compelling reasons to neuter a dog, whose to say what is best for a dog in a given situation.

Conscientious owners aren't the people who are adding to the situation of unwanted puppies, IMO, anyway.


----------



## rutylr (Apr 26, 2009)

Mr Pooch said:


> Well deciding if somebody keeps thier dog intact or not is nobodys business really,what is THE reason why dogs shouldnt be intact if you dont mind telling me?


Pets..There is no reason for pets to be intact.


> If there is no chance that your dog is going to breed unwanted puppies and there are no other compelling reasons to neuter a dog, whose to say what is best for a dog in a given situation.
> 
> Conscientious owners aren't the people who are adding to the situation of unwanted puppies, IMO, anyway.


Most conscientious owners can not guarantee that there intact male will not get loose and breed a dog down the street.Or that their intact female won't get loose while in season and be bred,and have an unplaned litter.
Anyone who has an unplaned litter is adding to the problem..


----------



## Mr Pooch (Jan 28, 2008)

rutylr said:


> Pets..There is no reason for pets to be intact.


That Show snobbery is laughable my friend..so becoz my dog will never be BOB he should loose his bollocks? even though there is scientific evidence that *might* prove its totally not a must?

My dog wont be banging next doors pooch and is NEVER ina postion to be *OOP's* daddy so i find ur anwser very shallow indeed.


----------



## rutylr (Apr 26, 2009)

Mr Pooch said:


> That Show snobbery is laughable my friend..


No it shows someone who is responsible,not snobby.


----------



## DieselDawg (Oct 9, 2008)

Just some stuff from another forum I wrote:

Here is the thing...prostate, bladder and even testicular cancer % normally are very small...so 8x prostate and 4x bladder have to be taken in context. On the other side testicular cancer risks increase 6x without neutering...but again the % of testicular cancer in male dogs is small to begin with. (this does not hold true for male dogs where the testes do not drop properly...that increases the risk about 13x the normal rate). Usually testicular cancer occurs in older intact males.

All that being said, if a dog does get testicular cancer, it does not follow the same progression as in human males. It does not metathesize (spread) as readily as it does in male humans. The cure in almost all cases is to go ahead and just neuter at that time. If for some reason it has spread, chemo or radiation is used.

Now bladder cancer is another animal all together. By the time it is normally discovered it has already spread in about 50% of cases. Also if the TCC cancer is in the trigone area (neck of the bladder where the kidneys empty to the bladder) it is inoperable...Bad News.

Prostate cancer almost always occurs in older male dogs...not the same as enlargement of the prostate. This cancer is very rare but hard to treat because it usually has already spread to other areas.

The stance that neutering always lessens aggressive behavior in male dogs is also flawed. A dog that is aggressive out of fear, protective behavior, unstable, ect. will usually not be "calmed" by neutering. Using neutering as a form of "training" is not a good policy. Neutering does not guarantee anything when it comes to aggression. 

There are so many viewpoints about spay/neuter and depending on the circumstances, they are all correct. I just don't follow the automatic spay/neuter mantra. If you are a VERY RESPONSIBLE dog owner that can handle the nuances of an intact dog, there are many good reasons to keep your dogs intact. Very touchy subject with many tho...
__________________

Well I'll say it...research it and base it on your own conclusions. Neutering is not a panacea for unwanted behavior. Also do not discount the benefits of testosterone. There are many points of view on this subject.

1) If you can not be SURE that your male can be kept securely confined and not impregnate a female in heat...Neuter.

2) If your dog is "marking" his territory in your house and you can not get him to stop...Neuter.

3) If all else fails and your dog acts uncontrollable, including unwamted "humping"...Neuter.

4) If you can not keep strays out of your yard...Neuter.

5) If you dog has health problems associated with Testicular Cancer...Neuter.

6) If you are giving away or selling pups and they are not from properly registered sire/dam...Neuter. Do not trust the new owner to do it...

Otherwise, make an educated decision based on the health of your male.

Testorterone:

1) Triggers the closing of the Growth Plates in the legs...might only be a fraction of an inch, but that could be all it takes for tendon/ligament problems like ACL damage.

2) Helps develope proper Bone Density...is a factor in Bone Cancer.

3) Aids in strengthening tendons and ligaments.

4) Is key in "recovery" after strenuous exercise/events.

5) Will let your dog develope as nature intended. You can not ignore the affects of testosterone on muscular developement.

You can also try Hormonal Treatment to see what some of the effect of "final" castration would be...

For me, the benefits of keeping a dog Intact significantly outweight the benefits of Neutering (particularly early neutering...pre 16 months). Unless something major changes...I will keep him intact and safe.


----------



## Mr Pooch (Jan 28, 2008)

rutylr said:


> No it shows someone who is responsible,not snobby.


Exactly my point! so my dog dont strut his stuff in the ring,that mean if i leave him intact im being irresponsible?

Rutylr some show people need to walk in the shoes of people who actually try to better thier breeds irespective of them having reproductive organs or not,i roll with my dogs on a daily basis and deal with the "they dont look friendly" typa thing.

One of the reasons i neutered my 1st male was because of this(IMO made him worse)....i wont do it again,my intact dog is contained in public and as far as im concerned he isnt causing any drama so its all good.

Your philosophy seems to be "unless show quality then snip it"...well last time i heard "mass snippin" didnt better any breed i know of?

I am well aware of the dog overpopulation problem...as long as i dont contribute to that problem then i really dont see whats wrong.


----------



## hulkamaniac (Feb 11, 2009)

ValtheAussie said:


> I've got no idea what the statistics are but anytime you anesthetize people or animals, there is a chance that they might never wake up. This is a risk inherent in all surgeries that require general anesthesia.
> 
> Cutting into healthy tissue also poses it's own inherent risks.


I posted the stats a few pages back, but I'll post 'em again. The risk of a healthy dog dying under anesthesia is .05%. If your dog is sick (and I don't see why a sick dog would be undergoing the procedure normally) it jumps to 1.33% which is still miniscule.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

This thread has been going on for pages.....

Going back to childhood, I have owned the following male dogs......

A Rough Collie.

4 APBTs

2 Catahoula Leopard Dogs

A Rottweiler

1 BlueTick Coonhound

2 Black and Tan Coonhounds

3 Redbone Coonhounds

2 Blackmouth Curs

2 Australian Cattle Dogs

1 Lab Mix

I have also owned the following female dogs

2 Redbone Coonhounds

1 Catahoula Leopard Dog

1 Carolina Dog.

The total number of those dogs that were altered are as follows. 

My Current Lab Mix - He came out of a shelter that way. I would have waited, because he was altered to young and I think his bone development would have been better if we waited until he was a year.

My first ACD - He was purchased with a Limited AKC registration and a spay/neuter contract. He was not neutered until he was one year of age. 

My Carolina Dog - She came out of a shelter - She was about 11 months old when I got her and had just been spayed. 

The rest were left intact. 

The total number of litters whelped over the years by my intact females - 0
The total number of planned litters sired by male dogs I have owned - 3 - All planned with specific breeding goals in mind and puppy buyers in place. 

The total number of unplanned litters my males have produced - 0
My dogs do not get out. 

I have been around dogs my entire life. I was born into a dog family. My father, grandfather and other close family members bred dogs. Catahoulas, GSPs, and APBTs. 

I have been involved with hunting with dogs, dog sporting trials, and now conformation my entire life. Most of my close friends are involved with dogs as well. The total number of male dogs that had testicular or prostate cancer I have met in my life?- 0 I have met a few dogs (I have a friend that currently had such a male but she retired and neutered him for his benefit) that have been prone to enlarge prostates due to being around females in season. 

I have known a couple of females that got some type of cancer of the mammary glands. But not many and I have known and been around a BUNCH of intact females in my life. 
Statistics can say whatever they want but my personal experiences tell me my dogs do not suffer increased risk from being intact. 

As far as dogs getting loose and wandering, well that is part of being responsible. 
The way some folks on hear talk about it, I wonder if they have ever actually seen a dog breeding take place. The thought of your dog running past you at the gate, jumping the female in heat being walked down the street and inpregnating her is pretty remote. Then we have breeding through fences... Can it happen? I am sure it has but it can't be easy and I would like to see it happen once just because I can't work the mechanics out in my head. 

Could it happen at the dog park? Sure... If everyone is asleep. 

A few facts about dog breeding. 
Female dogs in their heat cycle for about 21 days. Of that heat cycle she is only going to be fertile for a portion of that time. Depending on the dog - 10th or 12th day up to maybe the 18th day. So just because she is in heat does not mean she is fertile the entire time. And just because she is in heat does not mean she is going to let a male mount her. Most won't unless they are in standing heat. Different females handle advances by males in various ways. Some sit down, some turn around and bite the fire out of them. Etc. 

Assuming the female is in standing heat, it still does not happen in a matter of seconds. There is usually some courtship involved first. Sniffing, jumping around, pawing, etc. 
When the actual breeding does take place it does not resemble the dominance humping we have seen dogs do. Well it sort of does at first. But the dogs actually "couple". Without being graphic, they end up facing apart, but connected by their private parts. They remain stuck (and yes they are stuck together) for a while. From a few minutes to a half hour or so. 

So you don't get "oops" litters over a brief lack of attention to your dog. You don't get oops litters, from you dog sliding past you at the gate and mounting your neighbors dogs. You get oops litters from placing two intact dogs (with a female in heat) together in an unsupervised location. You get oops litters from allowing your dogs to roam unsupervised. 

If you choose to leave your dog intact, you do not have to spend your life paranoid your dog is going to breed or be bred. Normal average responsiblity will prevent it from happening. 

On any given weekend, there are females in heat competing in conformation shows all around the country. Has an oops litter ever happened as the result of a coupling at a conformation show? I have no idea. But if it has, it took some pretty irresponsible human behavior. 

As far as those that say people should not breed until all the shelter dogs are spoken for..... Well what about folks that want something specific in a dog? I am not anti shelter or anti rescue. I have a shelter dog sitting at my feet as I type this. I am not against giving a shelter dog a home, loving it and making it part of my family. But am I only going to have shelter dogs? Nope. I have always and always will typically purchase puppies from breeders. I desire specific things in a puppy. There are things I want to know. I want to know the bloodlines, the status of the hips, elbows, eyes, ears, cardiac, etc of the parents and related dogs. I want to see the parents and other dogs in the line. Do they have the temperment I am looking for? Do they have the drive I want? How is the body structure? How have the other members of the bloodline performed in the sports or activities I am planning to do? These are questions that I most often want answers to. I am not putting down those that rescue because I think it is a great thing. But I also will not apologize for wanting something specific in a particular dog. Even still I completely understand there are no guarantees in choosing dogs. But my methods have worked for a lot of years. 

All that being said, I am not anti Spay and Neuter. I do not like to see any dog altered under one year of age. I also do not think it is the end all to preventing unwanted puppies. It is the owners choice. And choosing to or not to alter does not make one responsible or irresponsible.


----------



## rutylr (Apr 26, 2009)

Mr Pooch said:


> Exactly my point! so my dog dont strut his stuff in the ring,that mean if i leave him intact im being irresponsible?
> 
> Rutylr some show people need to walk in the shoes of people who actually try to better thier breeds irespective of them having reproductive organs or not,i roll with my dogs on a daily basis and deal with the "they dont look friendly" typa thing.
> 
> ...


My dogs are pets first.I show because I like it.Not to prove anything.Once they are done showing they are spayed so we can continue to show in performance.My dogs go everywhere.I am,. alot of the time the only one of my breed at a trial.So I take my dog (a breed people are scared of) and show them that they can be great dogs .Not everyones Rottweilers are killers.
I don't allow people who purchase or are given a puppy of mine to keep it in tact.There are to many what if's in life.It's again not snobby.I am being responsible with my dogs/puppies.again JMO


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

rutylr said:


> No it shows someone who is responsible,not snobby.


I must disagree with you rutylr.

I show my dogs....but in performance. Strauss will never be a conformation dog, but he's still intact. He's my pet first, exhibition dog second.

We have an intact Labrador too...he doesn't do anything. Heck, he hardly leaves the house. No oops litters from either of them.

You aren't automatically more responsible than me just because you show your dogs in conformation and then alter them after they've had a litter or two.



> Once they are done showing they are spayed so we can continue to show in performance


Didn't know being intact interfered with their ability to perform. I guess I can see it for bitches...but not for the boys.

And the only one of your breed? I'm in your area, just an hour away. You're not the only one with that issue. People don't trial Shepherds readily.


----------



## StardustInVegas (Apr 11, 2009)

I definitely have learned a lot about neutering vs. leaving intact.

I didn't realize that it was a big deal. I am so used to cats. Cats are neutered/spayed simply because of unwanted litters. Tom cats, when neutered later in their life, tend to have a really tough skin (which sometimes is a pain in the ass for vet techs), and "tough" face. When they pee, it STINKS so bad. Seriously.
No matter what, I've always had my cats spayed/neutered before hitting the 6 month mark.

When I got my puppy, it was a whole other ballgame, as I learned from a lot of different owners/views here. I did not have a choice of whether to spay or not. The shelter requires the dog to be spayed/neutered and microchipped before adopting out.

I'm glad that my dog is spayed. I see too many intact males at the dog park (and many oblivious owners that don't pay attention to their dog mounting another dog, especially if it was a female...it's not exactly obvious whether the female is in heat or not..at least not to me).

But I do have a question - I understand why it's better to wait a while before neutering your male dog, but why should female dogs wait until after a year or 1 1/2 years to spay?


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

Same reasons as males...bone growth and muscle development. Because bitches don't get as large, they can be spayed around 18 months and growth plates will most likely be closed, but the boys really need that extra time to bulk up and obtain that lean muscle they'll otherwise lose out on.


----------



## ValtheAussie (Apr 19, 2009)

IF neutering had so many health benefits, I'd think lots of human males would be running to get their nuts chopped off....

I had my lady dog fixed.....she'd be the one coming home with the puppies, after all....


----------



## Sammgirl (Feb 6, 2009)

I guess I don't have a whole lot of faith in most "normal" dog owners. I'm one of the ones that believes that pets should be spayed and neutered after a certain age. 

I don't like it when young ones are s/n, but once a dog gets its full growth then definitely s/n. 

An oops litter is accidental. No one plans it. There are good breeders and really responsible people that I know of who have had oops litters. It does happen. 

People make mistakes is all I'm saying. Even when you're responsible and have intact males and females, nothing is full proof. I'm saying that, and here in the future I will have a dog that will be shown, and will have to be intact to do so. 

I am a little wary of that and will be taking many precautions. 

I hope no one takes that as an attack. It's just an opinion, and I know that there are people who feel very strongly that they are responsible enough to keep a pet dog intact. 

Personally, if all I was going to do was have a pet, I would s/n as soon as I could. I wouldn't want the responsibility of having to constantly be vigilant and take extreme precautions. I know there are lots of arguments on here to the contrary, and maybe as I learn more my view will change.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

One thing that's always annoyed me is when people refer to spay/neuter as "fixing".

The dog was never broken  If anything, we just broke it!

Just general commentary by the way.

And I didn't know that simply going outside with my males and lifting my girls upside down every 4-6 months was an extreme precaution, lol! Seems pretty simple and unexplanatory to me.


----------



## sw_df27 (Feb 22, 2008)

I have 2 intact females and 1 intact male and I dont' have a problem with keeping them seperated a few times a year and being outside with them the whole time they get a potty break it's not that hard to be resp. in my Opinion.


----------



## hulkamaniac (Feb 11, 2009)

ValtheAussie said:


> IF neutering had so many health benefits, I'd think lots of human males would be running to get their nuts chopped off....


I don't think anyone is saying the primary argument for neutering is the health benefits. The primary argument is population control. 

The weird thing is you can make the argument against neutering cats for some of the same health reasons people argue against neutering dogs, but you don't see anyone claiming that cats should be left intact.


----------



## DobManiac (Aug 12, 2007)

hulkamaniac said:


> The weird thing is you can make the argument against neutering cats for some of the same health reasons people argue against neutering dogs, but you don't see anyone claiming that cats should be left intact.


Well, I've never owned a cat. But as I understand it an intact cat is A LOT harder to keep contained than an intact dog. And cats generally don't have recall, so you can't call them back. My male returns when called. So if he does get passed someone when they open a door or fence, he can easily be called back.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

hulkamaniac said:


> I don't think anyone is saying the primary argument for neutering is the health benefits. The primary argument is population control.
> 
> The weird thing is you can make the argument against neutering cats for some of the same health reasons people argue against neutering dogs, but you don't see anyone claiming that cats should be left intact.


I've never had a cat, never plan on having a cat either as they're not my type of pet (sorry cat owners!)

I think a lot has to do with the fact many cats are still indoor/outdoor cats and there is no way they are supervised all the time. I personally think cats should have all the same leash laws, etc dogs have and thus that wouldn't be a problem anymore. but that's a whole other thread. 

Also, I know this will depend on your area, but we have a LOT more stray/feral cats here than dogs. If a puppy here ends up in a shelter, chances are it'll get adopted. If a kitten ends up in a shelter.... all bets are off. The shelter I worked at euthanized a lot more cats than dogs and got in a lot more cats than dogs.


----------



## ValtheAussie (Apr 19, 2009)

Dogs and cats are as different as night and day. I can control where my dog goes but a cat is not an animal that takes kindly to supervision and Tom cats spray the house with an ungodly urine concoction, and if my dog were to spray like a Tom cat did, I'd fix it in a nannosecond.

I neuter all my cats but I think I can handle the dog.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

All of my cats are altered at around 6 months...I'm one of those "weird" people that has indoor only cats.


----------



## ValtheAussie (Apr 19, 2009)

Is Jim Morrison still alive????? *troll question on Doors boards, for us "oldie rockers*....

I am done with arguing about neutering or not; it depends on your situation and your pet.


----------



## rutylr (Apr 26, 2009)

Sammgirl said:


> I guess I don't have a whole lot of faith in most "normal" dog owners. I'm one of the ones that believes that pets should be spayed and neutered after a certain age.
> 
> I don't like it when young ones are s/n, but once a dog gets its full growth then definitely s/n.
> 
> ...


Agree totally...


----------



## ValtheAussie (Apr 19, 2009)

Pfffffft......if a woman isn't conscientious about taking birth control pills...she may or may not have a baby nicknamed "Ortho-Novum".

It's possible to prevent unwanted pregnancies in both humans and pets; believe me, all it takes is diligence and responsibility.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

ValtheAussie said:


> It's possible to prevent unwanted pregnancies in both humans and pets; believe me, all it takes is diligence and responsibility.


A level of diligence and responsiblity that the average pet owner is either unable or unwilling to provide. For instance, I went over to a friend's house the other day and she told me that her husband lets their puppy run loose (they live just outside of town so it's kind of rural, but with more dogs running around) and she was SOOO worried because the puppy is 8 months old now and she might get pregnant, and asked me when the pup might go into heat. I just told her all my pets are spayed so I really don't know. She had the puppy spayed 2 days later. They are good responsible people who really care about their dog but that pup DEFINITELY would have had an oops litter at some point if left intact.



hulkamaniac said:


> The weird thing is you can make the argument against neutering cats for some of the same health reasons people argue against neutering dogs, but you don't see anyone claiming that cats should be left intact.


Eh, if you hang around the cat forums long enough you'll meet up with some nutjob who's against altering. Particulary neutering males, since it's mainly done for behavioral reasons. Though very few people argue the point that there are WAY too many cats in the world. But since tomcats are so incredibly obnoxious, no reasonable cat owner leaves a cat intact. Unless you're TRYING to keep visitors away from your house  . If an intact male dog was as bad as a tomcat, I'd neuter at 4 months, no matter what the health implications might be. Ugh.


----------



## TxRider (Apr 22, 2009)

DobManiac said:


> I have an intact male that will most likely never be neutered. But I only came to this conclusion after hours of researching the benefits and risks of alteration. And I had to decide if I was capable of keeping an intact male without accidental breeding.
> 
> It is a burden and responsibility that should NEVER be taken lightly.


Definitely, I know several otherwise good owners who lost their dogs due to sex drive, smelled one in heat, got loose and were never seen again.


----------



## Barkalot (May 19, 2012)

hulkamaniac said:


> I don't think anyone is saying the primary argument for neutering is the health benefits. The primary argument is population control.
> 
> The weird thing is you can make the argument against neutering cats for some of the same health reasons people argue against neutering dogs, but you don't see anyone claiming that cats should be left intact.


I don't agree with that.......you cannot compare my large breed dogs to my cats. Physiologically, my dogs have greater risk for dysplasia by far as well as a requirement for muscle development that is not similar to a feline. Felines are prodigious climbers and depending on the breed have unique requirements in themselves. My Great Danes are have very unique and specific growth factors. Mine will remain intact.


----------



## Nev Allen (Feb 17, 2010)

My son refuses to n his boy because it would mean he was no longer a "man" - its a macho thing I think. No matter what reasons I give him for n him he will not budge. And that self same reason is why so many men will not neuter their males.
I believe very strongly, that if you are not going to show or breed with him, the removal of his testicles will, generally, 
(a) make him less inclined to break out and wander, 
(b)reduce the chance that he will hurt himself whilst breaking out, 
(c)avoid having to pay a fine and pound fees to recover him from the pound, 
(d)avoid any accidental breeding with random bitches producing another litter of bitsas,
(e)mean less chance of him being stolen (because he won't wander and because he has been neutered)
(f) there will be less chance of being hit by a car
(g) there will be less chance of him being hurt in a dog fight over a bitch in heat
(h) it will remove the chance of testicular cancer

Going back to the pound fees alone - here you get smacked with a $250 fine and $180 pound fee - that is more than it would cost to neuter him.

Going back to OP's point on humping - I agree that neutering will not stop this. It is a training issue and needs to be fixed by the owner , same as stopping him jumping up.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Nev Allen said:


> My son refuses to n his boy because it would mean he was no longer a "man" - its a macho thing I think. No matter what reasons I give him for n him he will not budge. And that self same reason is why so many men will not neuter their males.
> I believe very strongly, that if you are not going to show or breed with him, the removal of his testicles will, generally,
> (a) make him less inclined to break out and wander,
> (b)reduce the chance that he will hurt himself whilst breaking out,
> ...


A through G can EASILY be handled by simply being responsible......


H..... Well the chances of Testicular cancer are so small it is hardly worth mentioning. And not at all worth the many health risks associated with altering a dog..... On top of that, Testicular cancer, is the easiest cancer to diagnose and treat. Long term survival is very good. 
However the chance of prostate cancer skyrockets in altered male dogs.... Much harder to detect. Much harder to treat and long term survivability is not good.


----------



## Keechak (Aug 10, 2008)

Nev Allen said:


> My son refuses to n his boy because it would mean he was no longer a "man" - its a macho thing I think. No matter what reasons I give him for n him he will not budge. And that self same reason is why so many men will not neuter their males.
> I believe very strongly, that if you are not going to show or breed with him, the removal of his testicles will, generally,
> (a) make him less inclined to break out and wander,
> (b)reduce the chance that he will hurt himself whilst breaking out,
> ...


Actually you only have TWO reasons there nearly everything else you stated is just a side effect of your first reason given, the desire to want to escape.
If your son Is WILLING to keep the dog confined in a reasonable manner then that reason is not an issue at all, if your son is NOT willing to keep the dog confined it doesn't matter if the dog is intact or not he is just a bad owner.

Your only legit reason is regarding testicular cancer.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Keechak said:


> Actually you only have TWO reasons there nearly everything else you stated is just a side effect of your first reason given, the desire to want to escape.
> If your son Is WILLING to keep the dog confined in a reasonable manner then that reason is not an issue at all, if your son is NOT willing to keep the dog confined it doesn't matter if the dog is intact or not he is just a bad owner.
> 
> Your only legit reason is regarding testicular cancer.


The thing is.... Pro Speuter folks like to throw around testicular cancer as if it is a plaque...... Fact is..... it is neglible..... But......The chances of cardic tumors skyrockets in altered dogs. 5 times the chances in bitches and over 4 times in dogs.... Then there is bone cancer.... rare in intact dogs.... Common in altered dogs....

Other reasons for neutering..... Behavioral issues.... University of Pennsylvania recently did a study and found that in most cases intact dogs have less behavioral issues. 

I know I get very few severe behavioral problem cases with intact dogs. None since I have been keeping exact records....


----------



## Nev Allen (Feb 17, 2010)

Believe me when I have seen responsible owners loose dogs when a bitch is on heat next door. I have personal experience at the expense of a litter. The fence was 8 foot wooden palings and the neighbours dob went over it the first day and then scaled the 6ft wire fence the bitch was behind. He broke a chain leash and then ate his way through the fence, the next day. For 2 days in a row we found him at the front door and had no idea how he got there except maybe going over fences in other directions.

The responsible thing is to neuter if you are not going to breed or show.


----------



## grab (Sep 26, 2009)

I have one intact dog, the others are spayed or neutered. None of my dogs, through my entire lifetime, have gotten out (be they intact or altered), I've never had an oops. My intact dog will be neutered at some point, but it's not a pressing issue. He is extremely well mannered. He does not pay attention to females any more than any other dog. I've been around females in heat at my workplace and then come home, and he's not sniffy or rude. He does not wander around, looking for things to breed. He does not hump or mark things in my house. His former owners, whom I adopted him from, had bred him once (to make mixed breeds..hurray for responsibleness). Even having been bred before, he's not rude or obsessed with females. Nor is he rude with other males. 

I do believe humping things is a training issue...in some cases it may be dominance related, others driven by hormones. BUT, a well mannered dog doesn't hump random animals/objects..no matter what is or is not hanging between their legs. I have never had to tell Nog to not hump something...correction..one time he gave a thought to humping our elderly dog when she had a UTI. A single "hey, that's rude" and he never tried it again. But, I'll give him a pass, because my spayed female dog tried to hump her too at that time..a very uncommon behavior for her as well. One of my most memorable emergencies at work was a neutered, never bred dog who humped a visiting female in heat. Her owners, not knowing they were tied, called her to come in and she ran to them, tearing the skin all the way around his penis. So, neutering is not a cure all for humping or even desire to breed. 

He will be neutered at some point, as we're having his (small) umbilical hernia fixed and I don't want to have him put under twice. I DO know that I'll never neuter a dog under two again, unless a health reason pops up earlier than that. We adopted him at a year and a half and he's filled out so much since then. And I do not agree at all with pediatric neuters and spays. Dogs neutered when very young just look odd in some cases. 

We all have to make the decisions for what is right for our own pets. The sole reason of not neutering or spaying does not an irresponsible owner make


----------



## Keechak (Aug 10, 2008)

Nev Allen said:


> Believe me when I have seen responsible owners loose dogs when a bitch is on heat next door. I have personal experience at the expense of a litter. The fence was 8 foot wooden palings and the neighbours dob went over it the first day and then scaled the 6ft wire fence the bitch was behind. He broke a chain leash and then ate his way through the fence, the next day. For 2 days in a row we found him at the front door and had no idea how he got there except maybe going over fences in other directions.
> 
> The responsible thing is to neuter if you are not going to breed or show.


The responsibility is not a one way road, the bitch owners have to be responsible too.


----------



## LuvMyAngels (May 24, 2009)

Neutering does not mean an owner is responsible. Due to his health issues, my 3 year old Saint Bernard will remain intact for the foreseeable future. My vet will not do the surgery at this point, he (vet) says the risks outweigh any benefits to Buster. Knowing this, I'd be irresponsible if I were to "doctor shop" to find a vet willing to do the surgery. Rather than judging an owner to be irresponsible purely based on weather or not their dog has his/her reproductive organs, take a look at the rest of the dogs care.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Nev Allen said:


> *Believe me when I have seen responsible owners loose dogs when a bitch is on heat next door. *I have personal experience at the expense of a litter. The fence was 8 foot wooden palings and the neighbours dob went over it the first day and then scaled the 6ft wire fence the bitch was behind. He broke a chain leash and then ate his way through the fence, the next day. For 2 days in a row we found him at the front door and had no idea how he got there except maybe going over fences in other directions.
> 
> The responsible thing is to neuter if you are not going to breed or show.


They were not very responsible if their dog got out.

I have an intact dog and bitch in my house..... They will never breed to each other......In fact the bitch is done breeding and she is going to remain intact.....

I have repeated this many times over the years. Owning intact dogs and bitches. I am 44 and grew up in a family that bred dogs. My father one breed and my grandfather, two breeds. My world and my life has revolved around well bred dogs my entire life. It just is not that big a deal or that difficult to be responsible......


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Who's digging up 3-year-old threads?

I think people who were raised around dogs don't get that most people's lives don't revolve around dogs like that. It IS fairly difficult for an average family to maintain that level of responsibility for the dog's entire life. I have heard of way too many oops litters from owners who THOUGHT they were responsible enough to keep an intact dog. It happens. And it only takes once.

And, yeah, I don't like the idea that it's the bitch's owner's fault if someone else's dog gets her pregnant. I don't think so. I don't like that attitude, which I think is fairly common among people who keep intact males.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> Who's digging up 3-year-old threads?
> 
> I think people who were raised around dogs don't get that most people's lives don't revolve around dogs like that. It IS fairly difficult for an average family to maintain that level of responsibility for the dog's entire life. I have heard of way too many oops litters from owners who THOUGHT they were responsible enough to keep an intact dog. It happens. And it only takes once.
> 
> And, yeah, I don't like the idea that it's the bitch's owner's fault if someone else's dog gets her pregnant. I don't think so. I don't like that attitude, which I think is fairly common among people who keep intact males.


And I think people that say that the average person cannot be responsible to keep an intact dog without accidental breedings is simply empowering irresponsible dog ownership. 

There are many reasons a dog owner should keep their dog contained. Accidental breedings is far down on the list....

1) Getting hit by a car

2) Your dog could bite someone, kill another animal, etc.

3) Get Lost.....

4) Get stolen

5) Accidental breedings are way down the list.

IF a fence is not good enough to contain an intact dog, then it is simply not good enough. There are lots of reasons dogs want to get out of a yard. Reasons that may be more immediately powerful than a bitch in heat. A cat on the other side of the fence. Dogs do not have opposable thumbs, do not wear tool belts, etc. Not that hard to have a proper dog fence.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

But real people aren't perfect and things happen. Even responsible people aren't perfect. And if my dog gets out and gets killed, that's one dog dead. If he knocks up a female whose owners don't want pups or aren't responsible about homing them, that's a dozen dogs dead or suffering. Big stakes there.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> But real people aren't perfect and things happen. Even responsible people aren't perfect. And if my dog gets out and gets killed, that's one dog dead. If he knocks up a female whose owners don't want pups or aren't responsible about homing them, that's a dozen dogs dead or suffering. Big stakes there.


Doesn't take perfection...... Just reasonable care..... A dog that occasionally gets out through mishap has a far greater chance of getting hit by a car than inpregnating a female.....


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Not if there are few cars and many intact females .

In general I think that people who keep intact dogs are relying on a kind of "herd immunity", like people who don't vaccinate. If most dogs in the area are spayed/neutered (/vaccinated), they won't have problems keeping their dogs intact (/unvaccinated). If the majority of dogs in an area were unaltered. . .well, it wouldn't be so easy then.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

Ma'ii is intact. We decided not long after adopting him, that given his age, we wouldn't bother putting him through surgery, despite having no interest in breeding him. Thus far, he's had zero issues most people associate with being intact. He has no desire to wander, he get's along fine with other males, and he never marks in the house. We don't leave him alone outside unsupervised, we leash him in public, and we're cautious over what dogs he meest when we allow him to greet other dogs we don't know. Honestly, given how cautious and responsible we are with him, if he ever impregnated another dog, it would be the fault of the intact female's owners.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

The only real issue we've encountered with having Shammy intact thus far is usually someone at a dog event who will condescendingly point out that he has balls as if there is someway I missed the sun glaring off those shiny pink globes. I ALWAYS offer that they can touch them if they want, it's only fair since they pointed out my major over sight.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

ThoseWordsAtBest said:


> The only real issue we've encountered with having Shammy intact thus far is usually someone at a dog event who will condescendingly point out that he has balls as if there is someway I missed the sun glaring off those shiny pink globes. I ALWAYS offer that they can touch them if they want, it's only fair since they pointed out my major over sight.




LOL.... I did that a long time ago when Merlin was just over a year old at Petsmart. They were haveing a rescue day.... We were in line at the register and a woman behind me goes.... " Sir, Sir.... Your dog has his testicles." I said... "Why yes he does... And they are quite lovely.... Would you like to touch them?" She had NO answer for that.....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> Not if there are few cars and many intact females .
> 
> In general I think that people who keep intact dogs are relying on a kind of "herd immunity", like people who don't vaccinate. If most dogs in the area are spayed/neutered (/vaccinated), they won't have problems keeping their dogs intact (/unvaccinated). If the majority of dogs in an area were unaltered. . .well, it wouldn't be so easy then.


But most people..... Do not live where there are more bitches in heat than cars. If they did there would be more cars in the places with few cars....... When dealing with any kind of issue.... Whether busines, personal, social.... You rule to the norm and manage the exception. Your scenario is the exception rather than the norm.....


If you want something to really be concerned about.... What about the great possibility that people are significantly increasing the chances of a shortened life for their pets....

_Margaret V. Root Kustritz, a veterinary reproduction specialist at the University of Minnesota, reviewed 200 studies and found that while spay/neuter surgery has benefits, it is also linked to increases in the incidence of certain diseases and conditions such as bone cancer, heart tumors, hypothyroidism and canine cruciate ligament (CCL) injuries, as well as prostate cancer in male dogs and urinary incontinence in females. The extent of the risk can depend on the problem, as well as the size and sex of the dog, and the age the surgery is performed.

The risk of a type of cardiac tumor called hemangiosarcoma is five times higher in spayed female dogs than unspayed females, noted Kustritz. And neutered males have 2.4 times the risk of unneutered males. The risk was also higher for osteosarcoma (bone cancer): Dogs spayed or neutered before age 1 were up to two times as likely to develop the disease than those that hadn’t been altered.

Spaying and neutering may also heighten behavior problems such as aggression in some breeds and noise phobias in dogs altered at less than 5 months of age, she found. 

While it's long been believed that spaying and neutering can improve a dog's behavior, one large study done at the University of Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine found that, with a few exceptions, spaying and neutering was associated with worse behavior, although those effects were often specific to certain breeds and depended on the age at which the dog was altered. _


----------



## Rid#### (Jul 22, 2011)

Murphy is now 1 year old and we have had this discusion about getting him cut or not.
We would love to breed with him but he has come to us with no papers.
And I really don't want to add to the ever growing number of unwanted pups out there.
So he will be given the chop sooner rather than later.
One reason to why is that we are hoping it may settle him down a little.


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

JohnnyBandit said:


> And I think people that say that the average person cannot be responsible to keep an intact dog without accidental breedings is simply empowering irresponsible dog ownership. . .


This ^^^^^^. Work should be done toward HONEST education of what responsible dog ownership really entails. People can make up their own minds after that about what they want to manage. Selling propoganda such as "it is healthier to neuter" (and that is a quote from front line staff at two vet's offices made directly to me) is the wrong way to go, and unethical besides that.

I know people that truly thought (as they read it) their early neutered male dogs would never learn to mark or hump and were they in for a shock. One, neutered at 16 weeks, started marking at 18 months and required belly bands indoors 'til the day he died.

I have no difficulty with sites, groups, etc. that state that they promote spay/neuter as they wish to diminish unwanted litters. I do have difficulty with sites, groups, etc. that deliberately omit the risks involved with neutering, while stating only benefits, and often exaggerating those.

SOB


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rid#### said:


> One reason to why is that we are hoping it may settle him down a little.


That is another myth of neutering... Penn did a study on it...


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

A 5 times higher chance of a miniscule risk is still a miniscule risk. In practical terms I do not believe spay/neuter decreases the average dog's lifespan.


----------



## Rid#### (Jul 22, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> That is another myth of neutering... Penn did a study on it...


We are old school people and this was and has been the belief as long as I have had dogs.
But in saying this our main dogs have been female, as we have found them to be better pets in the wash up.
I have to say that you have got the brain doing a workout now on weather to go ahead with this or not.

And before anyone has a go at me it is not a macho thing at all.
If not doing the cut is going to give him a better life I would rather them stay where they were.

And one other point I have to make here is our old dog obedience trainer told me one time was this.
A lot of female dogs that have been given the chop early get all types of cancers.
Though I do have to say that next doors female who had a couple of litters still ended up with Mamory cancer, which did kill her in the end.
So it might be a double edged sword. Maybe a little more reserch is in order here for me to do.

So thanks for your input Johnny Bandit you have given me an eye opener.
And I am believing in what you have got to say here more than some.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

JohnnyBandit said:


> LOL.... I did that a long time ago when Merlin was just over a year old at Petsmart. They were haveing a rescue day.... We were in line at the register and a woman behind me goes.... " Sir, Sir.... Your dog has his testicles." I said... "Why yes he does... And they are quite lovely.... Would you like to touch them?" She had NO answer for that.....


Hahaha. I work for a shelter so there are some.. staunchly anti-intact dog people there to say the least. Two weeks ago there was a local dog event and I manned the booth for our shelter, with my manager and two volunteers, one of whom is also my neighbor. There were hundreds of dogs there and at one point one of the volunteers very bitterly said "There are so many un-neutered dogs here.." and not one to ever be able to keep my mouth shut I said "Yeah? My Shambles is not altered." Every one made a face and I said "Look, I'm sorry all these dogs are intact. You're more than welcome to touch my dogs balls if you REALLY want to if the urge is so strong." 

It's easier to creep people out than to argue with them!


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Willowy said:


> A 5 times higher chance of a miniscule risk is still a miniscule risk. In practical terms I do not believe spay/neuter decreases the average dog's lifespan.


You pick one thing.... Bone cancer in altered dogs is no joke......

The ACL thing.... Is HUGE...... Having been involved with, running, etc perfomance events for years, I have seen more than a few ACL injuries........... It is virtually always altered dogs..... And that is not my ancedotal observations..... Texas Tech did a study that confirms that....

I am currently working with a dog less than two years old doing some excercises trying to get him to use his leg again after surgery to repair an ACL rupture. This is not a performance dog... But a pet that happens to be a shelter dog that was neutered at 12 weeks of age.....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rid#### said:


> We are old school people and this was and has been the belief as long as I have had dogs.
> But in saying this our main dogs have been female, as we have found them to be better pets in the wash up.
> I have to say that you have got the brain doing a workout now on weather to go ahead with this or not.
> 
> ...


I am not anti Speuter..... But I do not think people should be pushed into it via the pet overpopulation rhetoric.......


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

ThoseWordsAtBest said:


> . . . Every one made a face and I said "Look, I'm sorry all these dogs are intact. You're more than welcome to touch my dogs balls if you REALLY want to if the urge is so strong."
> 
> It's easier to creep people out than to argue with them!


Now I want a short coated intact male just for the opportunity.

SOB


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

spanielorbust said:


> Now I want a short coated intact male just for the opportunity.
> 
> SOB


You can borrow Sham! His intact-ness is REALLY hard to miss and he's a big fan of rolling over and showing the world.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

ThoseWordsAtBest said:


> Hahaha. I work for a shelter so there are some.. staunchly anti-intact dog people there to say the least. Two weeks ago there was a local dog event and I manned the booth for our shelter, with my manager and two volunteers, one of whom is also my neighbor. There were hundreds of dogs there and at one point one of the volunteers very bitterly said "There are so many un-neutered dogs here.." and not one to ever be able to keep my mouth shut I said "Yeah? My Shambles is not altered." Every one made a face and I said "Look, I'm sorry all these dogs are intact. You're more than welcome to touch my dogs balls if you REALLY want to if the urge is so strong."
> 
> It's easier to creep people out than to argue with them!


Tell me about it.....I am still getting crap over me (not any rescue I am associated with) but ME, I, yours truly, placed an intact hound without neutering him and to a person while will not likely neuter him....

None of the rescues I called got back to me, he was sitting in my garage howling, and we all know what happens to large dark adult hounds if you take them to animal control. So I convinced one of my buddies that keeps hog dogs that I found him a new hog dog.... (I was pretty sure the scars on his face neck were from hog tusks. I was right) He took him and tried him with the promise that if the dog did not work out, he would hold him for me until I found a place for him..... The dog worked out great.... In fact, I have a pig in the freezer that he was the strike dog on....


----------



## Rid#### (Jul 22, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I am not anti Speuter..... But I do not think people should be pushed into it via the pet overpopulation rhetoric.......


I totally see where you are coming from as this is a big thing here now.
And it is only going to get worse to.
I will have to have another sit down talk with the wife over this subject once more.


----------



## ThoseWordsAtBest (Mar 18, 2009)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Tell me about it.....I am still getting crap over me (not any rescue I am associated with) but ME, I, yours truly, placed an intact hound without neutering him and to a person while will not likely neuter him....
> 
> None of the rescues I called got back to me, he was sitting in my garage howling, and we all know what happens to large dark adult hounds if you take them to animal control. So I convinced one of my buddies that keeps hog dogs that I found him a new hog dog.... (I was pretty sure the scars on his face neck were from hog tusks. I was right) He took him and tried him with the promise that if the dog did not work out, he would hold him for me until I found a place for him..... The dog worked out great.... In fact, I have a pig in the freezer that he was the strike dog on....


Oh, there is some gossipy huff about Shambles being intact. A volunteer asked me one day if I knew my own work wouldn't adopt a dog to me because I have an intact dog. Uh, OK, I have five dogs and I sure as hell don't need any more, but if you would choose to deny a dog to a trusted employee that would offer it a good home that's your prerogative, but the REAL funny part there is they DID adopt a dog to me that they were going to euthanize and the kicker? She was intact as well! I had been working there 3 months when they allowed me to take her so they have no idea if I wanted to secretly breed my dog to this girl. 

I didn't, clearly. Shambles and Elsa puppies? The horror.


----------



## Nev Allen (Feb 17, 2010)

JohnnyBandit said:


> You pick one thing.... Bone cancer in altered dogs is no joke......
> 
> The ACL thing.... Is HUGE...... Having been involved with, running, etc perfomance events for years, I have seen more than a few ACL injuries........... It is virtually always altered dogs..... And that is not my ancedotal observations..... Texas Tech did a study that confirms that....
> 
> I am currently working with a dog less than two years old doing some excercises trying to get him to use his leg again after surgery to repair an ACL rupture. This is not a performance dog... But a pet that happens to be a shelter dog that was neutered at 12 weeks of age.....


Go into that study in more depth and I am pretty certain you will find that all the dogs that had ACL issues were spayed/neutered before they were 6 months old.

Chris Zinc, Prof of Vet Science at John Hopkins U, Baltimore, has specialised in sports medicine for canines and she has established facts that dogs that are spayed/neutered before growth plates have finished growing, are far more likely to suffer ACL injury. 

If you have the time and resources, do a research project on dogs that were spayed/neutered at a year and more and compare the results for your self.

Its not the spaying/neutering that causes the problem. It's doing it too early that causes skeletol abnormalities.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Nev Allen said:


> Go into that study in more depth and I am pretty certain you will find that all the dogs that had ACL issues were spayed/neutered before they were 6 months old.
> 
> Chris Zinc, Prof of Vet Science at John Hopkins U, Baltimore, has specialised in sports medicine for canines and she has established facts that dogs that are spayed/neutered before growth plates have finished growing, are far more likely to suffer ACL injury.
> 
> ...


Growth plates on dogs do not close in six months.... That is the reason dogs cannot compete in many performance venues until a year or even 18 months. It can take as long as two years for the growth plates to close....

No matter..... Your post further proves that neutering is bad for a dogs long term health. 

Fact is..... Lack of hormones brought on by altering a dog can and does cause lifelong problems......

If someone wants to make a social statement or feels like they cannot be responsible with an intact dog, then so be it. It is their choice to alter their pet.


----------



## houndies (Feb 2, 2012)

spanielorbust said:


> This ^^^^^^. Work should be done toward HONEST education of what responsible dog ownership really entails. People can make up their own minds after that about what they want to manage. Selling propoganda such as "it is healthier to neuter" (and that is a quote from front line staff at two vet's offices made directly to me) is the wrong way to go, and unethical besides that.
> 
> I know people that truly thought (as they read it) their early neutered male dogs would never learn to mark or hump and were they in for a shock. One, neutered at 16 weeks, started marking at 18 months and required belly bands indoors 'til the day he died.
> 
> ...


Absolutely! Education would be so much better than propaganda. I don't think most male dogs need to be neutered if the owners are responsible. Responsibility is a bit of a loaded concept. Owners with children, lifestyle, living conditions etc... can interfere with the most responsible owners. 
I grew up with intact males - never allowed to roam, hump excessively or pee where ever they wanted. These are behavioural things that can be corrected with or without their balls. 
But girls - I have 5 - and heats are a pain for them and us. And with my breed they are likely to have phantom pregnancies - again very stressful - so we spay after one or two seasons depending on their maturity. Hormones are a huge part of development and I know the pros and cons but personally I would never spay a girl before a year old and boys - well I would like to say I wouldn't ever. Too many behavioural issues, rather than training, are blamed on being intact. BUT I am a responsible dog owner.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

houndies said:


> Absolutely! Education would be so much better than propaganda. I don't think most male dogs need to be neutered if the owners are responsible. Responsibility is a bit of a loaded concept. Owners with children, lifestyle, living conditions etc... can interfere with the most responsible owners.
> I grew up with intact males - never allowed to roam, hump excessively or pee where ever they wanted. These are behavioural things that can be corrected with or without their balls.
> But girls - I have 5 - and heats are a pain for them and us. And with my breed they are likely to have phantom pregnancies - again very stressful - so we spay after one or two seasons depending on their maturity. Hormones are a huge part of development and I know the pros and cons but personally I would never spay a girl before a year old and boys - well I would like to say I wouldn't ever. Too many behavioural issues, rather than training, are blamed on being intact. BUT I am a responsible dog owner.


The thing is...... The number of dogs Euthanized has gone down Dramatically in the last forty years. 

Those that bang the speuter drum like to say that is the reason..... 

But.....
Lots of things have happened in the last forty years. 

In addition to spay and neuter being more common....

More places have leash and containment laws

There are more shelters

There are more no kills shelter

There is more education

The public is more aware

Fact is..... Nobody knows where the bulk of the credit lies.....


----------



## Nev Allen (Feb 17, 2010)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Growth plates on dogs do not close in six months.... That is the reason dogs cannot compete in many performance venues until a year or even 18 months. It can take as long as two years for the growth plates to close....
> 
> No matter..... Your post further proves that neutering is bad for a dogs long term health.
> 
> ...


You missed the point JB. The report you are refering to tells us there are more dogs being injured because they were S/N and I agreed with that. BUt if you leave your dog until it's skeleton matures, the chances of an ACL injury are the same as if you did not S/N.

So your argument that S/N causes ACL problems, whilst correct for dogs S/N to young, it does not hold when the dogs are S/N later in life.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Nev Allen said:


> You missed the point JB. The report you are refering to tells us there are more dogs being injured because they were S/N and I agreed with that. BUt if you leave your dog until it's skeleton matures, the chances of an ACL injury are the same as if you did not S/N.
> 
> So your argument that S/N causes ACL problems, whilst correct for dogs S/N to young, it does not hold when the dogs are S/N later in life.


Didn't miss the point..... 
On the ACL issue....Waiting until a dog is six months old does not help skeletal issues. The growth plates don't close that soon. 

Bottom line.... My argument is correct unless people wait 18 months or so to alter their pets.... Most that alter, do not wait near that long.......

But you either missed the point....Or chose to pick out a single item of many to contest. The ACL issue is just one of many health problems associated with speuter.....


----------



## Rid#### (Jul 22, 2011)

If you adopt a dog/pup from the pound here you don't get it until it has had the chop.
This is no matter what the age is, I see why they are doing this as there is a large nuber of homeless dogs here.
So they are doing their best to stop the numbers from growing, and this is over and above any other issue.

I have been told that the dogs that end up in a rehousing or the pound here, end up going to Melbourne to be rehoused.
But the number of dogs that are going there is 85% of all the dogs there that they rehouse.

I am more that certain I will not be heading down the lane of the cutting up of my boy after what I have found out here.
I feel I am responsible for the wealthfare of my dog and see no reason to mutilate him because of the scare mongering.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rid#### said:


> If you adopt a dog/pup from the pound here you don't get it until it has had the chop.
> This is no matter what the age is, I see why they are doing this as there is a large nuber of homeless dogs here.
> So they are doing their best to stop the numbers from growing, and this is over and above any other issue.
> 
> ...


The point Nev was attempting to make is virtually moot....
Most dogs are altered prior to 18 months of age..... Most dogs are altered prior to their growth plates closing.


----------



## Trzcina (Aug 9, 2010)

I don't have much (or anything) to add to what others have said. There are pros and cons both ways, but I would tend to prefer to leave a dog intact longer. Especially males, as there aren't heat cycles to deal with (which is the main reason I think my next competition dog, whatever it may prove to be, will probably be male). Heats aren't honestly that hard to deal with in many bitches (though I understand that varies a bit by breed), but... still, it's a pain sometimes.

Most of the male dogs I've been around have been intact (I know quite a few show people). -Very- few of them have displayed excessive marking or any other "male" behavioral traits (that are really more training issues). I've only known one that tried to escape frequently, and as far as I know it wasn't to find females. The dog displaying the most roaming, marking, humping, etc. traits I've seen was neutered. There isn't that much of a correlation from the anecdotal evidence I have.

The "neuter everything" frenzy seems detrimental. Sure, if you're not going to be a responsible owner, neuter your dog. But that also begs the question of should you really have the dog at all. It's not that difficult to properly manage and train an intact male dog (or even an intact bitch, if you can tolerate discharge and licking and heat cycle-based behavioral changes and so on), it just takes more thought and effort to remove the chances for accidental litters because they're -possible-. It irritates me when you get the people who insist that if a dog isn't sterilized--for any reason whatsoever, no matter how responsible you are with it--you're automatically a bad owner.

Neutering after maturity doesn't affect all that much. Once the dog's grown, it's grown. Its body is mature, and presence or absence of testosterone and other hormones isn't going to change that appreciably. From what I've read, it can have minor effects both positive and negative on health. That makes it something for each dog owner to decide for themselves, weigh their options and choose what they're most comfortable with. Pediatric neuter can have excuses, but is riskier and less justified for the decently responsible owner. Changing hormones significantly before they've had a chance to play their roles in maturation causes bigger changes (which back when choirboys were castrated to preserve their voices, similar growth patterns were observed in them--the growth plates didn't close right, so they became much taller than their peers, narrow shoulders from the lack of testosterone, etc.)

In my experience, the people who think intact dogs are impossible to manage seem to be the ones who have never tried, and likely have never even met an intact dog for an extended period of time. Of course, I know plenty of people that I would never sell an intact dog to if I were a breeder, but I also know plenty whom it wouldn't bother me. To me, it's interesting to have a "whole" dog and the arguments for the health and performance benefits seem valid to me, with the understanding that perhaps the average pet person isn't equipped to deal with the responsibility.

Then again, I've heard enough horror stories that I can't ever imagine having a cat that isn't spayed or neutered. I've been around many intact dogs and plenty of s/n ones too, and I've been around almost exclusively s/n cats. I suspect it will stay that way.


----------



## Candydb (Jul 16, 2011)

We have a 6month old Bernese and 2 fixed females and just moved to a 2 acre property (1 acre is fenced ) in the country-- I am not planning to neuter him d/t health concerns and the fact he wont have access to unfixed females (unless he proves to be an escape artist) ..... I have had 11 dogs so far in the course of my lifetime(I am 44 yrs old ) and would like to try one unfixed one.... So far no humping and my Giant Schnauzer is the Dominant one in the family (she humps....)
Also this Schnauzer has spay incontinence now at the age of 2! And she is a indoor dog (totally bonded with her people and grew up in a apartment in the city-- keeping her outdoors is not a option)-- What a pain. I would have rather have dealt with the heats....


----------



## Abbylynn (Jul 7, 2011)

My lifetime has involved many dogs. I have only ever had two females and two males speutered. I have never had any issues of unwanted litters or any escape artists or any ill mannered dogs.

I have however had major health issues with my last two neutered males ... my Schnauzer/Poodles Leeo and Blu Boy. They were neutered at 6 months of age. Not saying health issues are from that ... But Leeo did have a huge mass of probable cancer in his gut according to the vet ... and at only 5 and 1/2 years of age. Now he is gone. I am also watching Blu Boy like a hawk for this reason... and all the reasons as stated above. I also have Abbylynn ... a rescue who got spayed at 5 months of age which was out of my control.

Eddee is still intact .. and I plan on leaving him this way. He thinks Abbylynn is his girlfriend at times ... but then again so does neutered Blu Boy. And that is not so hard to fix.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Abbylynn said:


> My lifetime has involved many dogs. I have only ever had two females and two males speutered. I have never had any issues of unwanted litters or any escape artists or any ill mannered dogs.
> 
> I have however had major health issues with my last two neutered males ... my Schnauzer/Poodles Leeo and Blu Boy. They were neutered at 6 months of age. Not saying health issues are from that ... But Leeo did have a huge mass of probable cancer in his gut according to the vet ... and at only 5 and 1/2 years of age. Now he is gone. I am also watching Blu Boy like a hawk for this reason... and all the reasons as stated above. I also have Abbylynn ... a rescue who got spayed at 5 months of age which was out of my control.
> 
> Eddee is still intact .. and I plan on leaving him this way. He thinks Abbylynn is his girlfriend at times ... but then again so does neutered Blu Boy. And that is not so hard to fix.


Been there, done that and got the T shirt..... Two of the three altered dogs I have owned died way prematurely from unusual diseases. ( a rare cancer and an auto immune disorder) Both were well bred dogs from quality lines. None of the relatives succumbed to simlar ailments.


----------



## Abbylynn (Jul 7, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Been there, done that and got the T shirt..... Two of the three altered dogs I have owned died way prematurely from unusual diseases. ( a rare cancer and an auto immune disorder) Both were well bred dogs from quality lines. None of the relatives succumbed to simlar ailments.


That is just so so sad.  I am hoping that Abbylynn and Blu Boy are the exceptions to the rules and live a long life. Eddee too .... just because.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Nev Allen said:


> You missed the point JB. The report you are refering to tells us there are more dogs being injured because they were S/N and I agreed with that. BUt if you leave your dog until it's skeleton matures, the chances of an ACL injury are the same as if you did not S/N.
> 
> So your argument that S/N causes ACL problems, whilst correct for dogs S/N to young, it does not hold when the dogs are S/N later in life.



The cancer risks hold, though.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Candydb said:


> We have a 6month old Bernese and 2 fixed females and just moved to a 2 acre property (1 acre is fenced ) in the country-- I am not planning to neuter him d/t health concerns and the fact he wont have access to unfixed females (unless he proves to be an escape artist) ..... I have had 11 dogs so far in the course of my lifetime(I am 44 yrs old ) and would like to try one unfixed one.... So far no humping and my Giant Schnauzer is the Dominant one in the family (she humps....)
> Also this Schnauzer has spay incontinence now at the age of 2! And she is a indoor dog (totally bonded with her people and grew up in a apartment in the city-- keeping her outdoors is not a option)-- What a pain. I would have rather have dealt with the heats....


I'm on my 6th intact male, and I've never had a humper, a marker or a roamer.


----------



## Hallie (Nov 9, 2008)

I am fortunate. In my community we've actually seen the number of 'oops' litters drop. Thus there are less puppies surrendered and more adult dogs. Around here, most dogs are neutered or spayed unless the owner is planning to breed them. I've been active in the local shelter for years, but I don't agree that S/N for every dog is the answer to the over population. Since my community became more active where pets are concerned (pet festivals and events) the 'oops' litters have drastically decreased.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Pawzk9 said:


> The cancer risks hold, though.


 The ACL argument holds as well. Six months is not a magic number and far from the closing of growth plates....


----------



## TTs Towel (May 22, 2012)

Anyone with an actual link to a quality reference regarding the claims that S/N cause longterm (orthopedic and otherwise) problems?


----------



## Nev Allen (Feb 17, 2010)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Didn't miss the point.....
> On the ACL issue....Waiting until a dog is six months old does not help skeletal issues. The growth plates don't close that soon.
> 
> Bottom line.... My argument is correct unless people wait 18 months or so to alter their pets.... Most that alter, do not wait near that long.......
> ...


Actually you raised it as an issue here "The ACL thing.... Is HUGE...... Having been involved with, running, etc perfomance events for years, I have seen more than a few ACL injuries........... It is virtually always altered dogs..... And that is not my ancedotal observations..... Texas Tech did a study that confirms that...."

I fully agree and have said so in this forum somewhere, no dog should be spayed or neutered before they have matured. There is ample proof out there that spaying and neutering too early has flow on effects that do harm the animals in the long run. Agreed - no argument. But to use this as one reason not to spay and neuter is irresponsible. We need to change the way refuges, adoption and rescue societies handle unaltered dogs going to new homes so that people are still forced to s/n but only when the dogs are old enough.


----------



## Rid#### (Jul 22, 2011)

Being honest here now, I think that close to all things have been said and resaid here and really there can't be too much more that can be said.
If it is then it is just being reworded to say the same.
So really there is no point in making more points. Just go back to the beginning and reread it.
I am sure the answer will be there somewhere.
I was going to get my boy done but this has helped me out and I now understand the reason why to or not to.
And to keep pushing your point now is close on pointless unless you are after the brownee points to say you won that battle.


----------



## cshellenberger (Dec 2, 2006)

Rid#### said:


> Being honest here now, I think that close to all things have been said and resaid here and really there can't be too much more that can be said.
> If it is then it is just being reworded to say the same.
> So really there is no point in making more points. Just go back to the beginning and reread it.
> I am sure the answer will be there somewhere.
> ...


I think most of this has been said over and over. There are good resons to S/N, good reasons not to (if you can be responsible) and great reasons not to pediatric S/N and wait until a dog has reached maturity. 

I do think this has run it's course, I'll close the thread as respectfully asked by a member.


----------

