too spay or not to spay

I can not find a direct link to this article from the Spaniel Journal.  I find it interesting.  I realize there are many article that appose this, but it raises some questions .

California AB 1634 has brought together many people from diverse backgrounds for a common purpose: to defeat this draconian bill. Many of us are genuinely unaware just how different our various worlds are. I am part of the working dog world and I don't claim to be an expert (or even a novice) in show dogs. One thing that's become apparent to me is that working dog people and show dog people have very different views about spay/neuter.
In conformation show dog communities, I'm told that most pups are sold on spay/neuter contracts and only a small number are kept intact - those kept by the breeder or sold as "show prospects", often to other breeders. There is a common refrain from show and pet dog communities that "responsible dog owners spay/neuter their dogs", and I've recently seen statements suggesting that if a dog owner doesn't wish to participate in conformation show events they should s/n their dog. Correct me if I've characterized this wrong.
In working dog communities, most and ideally nearly all dogs are kept intact. Often times it's just a given that this will happen. In other cases, working dog breeders beg their puppy buyers to keep their pups intact. That's why we are starting to see working dog breeders refuse to sell pups into California - since they don't want ANY of their pups to face mandatory s/n (at ANY age).
There are a number of reasons why most dogs are kept intact in working dog populations, but the main one is because it is simply impossible to select the breeding quality dogs at eight weeks of age, four months of age, or one year of age. We don't know if a dog is suitable for working dog breeding until he or she is two years old or older. It's common in some cases for the males not to get breedings until they are four or five years old, or older. Working dog people want to see health and working abilities that hold up over time before breeding these dogs. It's also well known in working dog communities that working abilities aren't maintained unless we breed the outstanding dogs... "best to best" in simplified terms. Given all this, it's imperative to keep nearly all dogs intact until they are mature adults in order to select the breeding dogs... not just the small fraction owned by established breeders. Working dog populations have been bred this way for thousands of years.
Most working dog studs are not owned by breeders... they are owned by people who bought a male to perform some working or performance dog function, and it turned out their male grew up to be an outstanding dog so he ends up getting bred. The same is true for many females that are responsibly bred. In working GSD and Malinois populations that I'm most familiar with, the most demanding selection for working abilities is with the male dogs, and again, most of these dogs are not owned by breeders.
It's totally inadequate to give special status to "legitimate working dog breeders" as AB 1634 does when truth of the matter is EVERY dog in these populations needs this option, not just those owned by established breeders. The alternative is an inevitable decline of health and working abilities in the population. There's really no way for a law to single out working dogs either, since there's no meaningful distinction a law could make between working dog populations and other dog populations. So bottom line: either all dogs get to stay intact or the law is bad for working dog populations.
It seems a lot of people have looked at the working dog language in AB 1634 and its exemption for "legitimate breeder of working dogs" and concluded that it's OK for working dogs now. Not so. I hope I've explained one of the reasons why this bill doesn't work for working dogs. There's other reasons, this is just one of them.
Many people are quite capable of responsibly keeping dogs intact, not just an elite few. If you want to see an illustration of regular people keeping dogs intact responsibly, consider that in Europe most dogs are kept intact, and yet, they don't have nearly the numbers of dogs in their animal shelters that we have. Spay/neuter is not the answer to the so-called and mis-named "pet overpopulation" problem, and those of us in the working dog world just don't buy the "responsible dog owners s/n their dogs" mantra. For example:
Human Population: 
California: 36 million 
UK: 60 million
% dogs s/n: 
California: about 70% 
UK: about 20%
# dogs euth'd annually in animal shelters: 
California 115,000 
UK: 7743
Laura Sanborn


Editor's note: Readers are invited to share their point of view on current event topics related to spaniels, hunting or animals, in general. Spaniel Journal reserves the right to edit for length or clarity and will publish or decline to publish as seen fit. If you would like to submit a Guest Commentary item, please send it to the Editor, Loretta Baughan at: loretta@spanieljournal.com



Spaniel Journal is a production of Autumnskye, LLC
Copyright © Spaniel Journal & Baughan Webdesign, 2002-2007, all rights reserved worldwide
Spaniel Journal - your source for flushing spaniel training, hunt test, field trial & hunting information




 

spiritdogs

If you intend for your dog to be social, or to hang out with friends, then it's probably easier to have the snip or the pluck.

On the contrary, Zipper is welcome absolutely everywhere. He attends all Humane Society social events, all trials and dog shows, he is a demo dog in some of my classes, and is selected as a role model dog specifically for puppies and dogs with fear/anxiety/aggression. He is the most bomb-proof dog I have ever met. He can fit in at dog parks, at puppy parties, and he's welcome at all family gatherings that we attend, as he fits in just about everywhere.

Not being argumentative, but just pointing out there is no one-size-fits-all approach. Nothing fits neatly into a little compartment. There are just as many speutered dogs who are not welcome at dog daycares and social play groups are there are intact animals who would fit in well. It depends on a lot more than just reproductive status, of course.

I agree, Kim.  The only places Nikon is not welcome are a few boarding places I would never use anyway (and they'd also reject us b/c of vaccines, not just my dog being intact).  I've never had issues taking classes, entering shows, going to events, or finding reputable boarders/dog sitters.  I do not use the dog park but as far as I know there are no blanket rules.  Dog daycare is not really my idea of "socialization" so I don't know what rules apply there.

It's interesting to read the comparisons with Europe. When I lived there (in Sweden), almost no one had dogs. Of all the people I knew (and I lived out in the country, not the city), only two households had dogs. One had 2-3 boxers and the other had a Lab. That was it. Many more people had cats. I don't know if that's changed a lot; I don't think any of the people I keep in touch with have dogs now. Here in the US, many of the people where I live have dogs. I think we're above average in terms of the percent of US households with one or more dogs.

ETA: Tried to find some data...not sure how accurate any of this is, but the pet dog picture seems to be really different between the two countries.

US Population: ~307 million people; 72 million pet dogs. 1 dog for every 3.75 people

Swedish Population: ~9 million; 800,000 pet dogs. 1 dog for every 11.6 people

Chuffy

6. Metabolism will likely change;

Chuffy

Meanwhile, puppy mills, pet shops and unscrupulous BYBs continue to churn out high volumes of sickly puppies for profit. For years, the message has been Neuter!!! and now in most places, being neutered is the norm.... But shelters are still full to bursting :-(

Also to comment on the difference of culture and living conditions in the UK and the US..........most homes in the UK have tiny yards and are completely fenced in with privacy fence.  I didn't know of one person in nearly seven years of living there that had more than one dog, in fact there were two dogs on our street with about 25 houses.  Keeping my dog in plain sight in a  20' x 20' 6 ft fenced yard is simple, especially when no one else has a dog on the block.

According to this article there about 2x as many dogs per household in the US as there are in the UK (BTW the article has a ton of info on s/n) There are rural areas and farms with working dogs but no where near the number that there are here and in rural US areas the whole dog culture is markedly different than in the UK.  Heck being from the Northeast the NC native dog culture is a shock to me.  It is in 2011 still common to see a yard with a handful of mutts, with a litter of pups that have never seen the inside of a home or vet's office  DH works with someone who last week came in and said 'dang had to shoot my last outside dog last night, got hit by a car'. In this person's culture that is perfectly acceptable and normal. So is dealing with litters.

I could go on and on but I will leave it at this - all cultures are not the same.  I completely agree that responsible owners should have the right to chose.  No problem with that, however seeing what I see everyday here I will preach s/n to the vast majority of pet owners I know and support my spca in all ways that I can.

Allowing joe public - in this area - to not s/n is begging for additional unwanted animals

Oh there is a huge issue with feral cats in the UK so apparently cat owners are not very responsible

FrisbyPI

US Population: ~307 million people; 72 million pet dogs. 1 dog for every 3.75 people

Swedish Population: ~9 million; 800,000 pet dogs. 1 dog for every 11.6 people

450,000 of those dogs are purebreds and registered with the Finnish Kennel Club and about 50,000 new puppies are registered each year. Spaying and neutering is rather uncommon and the number of rescues is quite low.

I personally have had an intact male and three intact females. I spayed one of those three a few years backand had to give her up a year later as she and another female of mine stopped getting along due to changes in the spayed female's temperament. The male was neutered at 11,5yrs old due to non-malignant testicular cancer and lived for 1,5yrs after that. Combined my females have had 29 heats and have been bred six times (3, 2 and 1). One of those six times was an accident that happened when I had to leave a bitch in the care of others due to her being in heat. Not a big deal in the end as she came across another Finnish Lapphund, which lead to me being able to register the puppies resulting from said breeding. "Everybody" knows that this was not a planned breeding and even tough there was really one possible sire I had the puppies parentage tested so nobody has any reason to speculate wether their pedigree is correct.

JackieG

Chuffy

TBH, if I think an owner "should" neuter, what I'm really thinking is: They shouldn't have a dog! (because they seem too irresponsible and/or too ignorant).

 

That's a very broad brush your using, Chuffy.  I guess you've never had a dog escape accidentally?   I think it's entirely possible to prevent an unwanted litter but I also know responsible dog owners who have had a dog escape long enough to be bred. Around here, with our never ending stray/unwanted dog population, I'll continue to preach spay/neuter and without any assumptions about the owners' intelligence. 

Heck, it's happened to me a number of times, it can happen to the best of people!

I'm not going to say "you should spay because your dog is bound to get out eventually and make puppies". Because, although there is a small chance of that, if you are careful about containment etc. then the chance is low enough that it does not justify surgery *in my opinion*.  Particularly in females, where the surgery is about as invasive as it is possible to be, yet they are only capable of producing puppies for a short time a couple of times a year.

On the other hand, if you own a latch key dog - if you someone who opens the door and lets the dog wander the neighborhood till they are ready to come home - then it probably IS only a matter of time before they make puppies; ergo you "should" neuter.  BUT - if you regularly let a dog roam at will with no supervision, if you are not evebn inclined to contain or train them.... should you even have a dog??  Make sense?   

YES that is speaking very generally, but please do note I am not saying ONLY irresponsible people neuter!  I also mentined in the same post that it's a decision that is normally better made on a case by case basis.  Some people/dogs would be better going down this route, others not.  But if you are irresponsible enough to let your dog wander around willy nilly, then yes, you danged well SHOULD neuter, or better yet, don't own a dog.  I don't think I can say it any plainer than that.

kpwlee

Allowing joe public - in this area - to not s/n is begging for additional unwanted animals

 You may be right there, or not, I am not sure.  As you say, there is a cultural difference too.  The US seems to have a love affair with surgery.... not that I can talk, it looks like the UK is not far behind :-/  One thing I do know is, s/n is - as someone else put it - a "band aid solution".  Education is the real key! 

kpwlee

Oh there is a huge issue with feral cats in the UK so apparently cat owners are not very responsible

I couldn't tell you, I don't think I've lived anywhere with a feral cat population and I don't know much about the issue.  In any case, regardless of which country they are in, feral cats are not owned by anyone so it is not a reflection of pet ownership in a given area.  One or two irresponsible households a decade ago could have given rise to a feral cat colony; everyone in that neighbourhood NOW might be excellent cat owners, but they are still surrounded by feral cats.  Doesn't have much to do with with whether to spay or neuter your dogs, though.