Neuter/spay - Why? Why not?

JackieG

Liesje

JackieG

The point is that most are not responsible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

 

But that has no effect on me.  Those dogs are not allowed near my dogs and my dogs (2 of the 3 being speutered) are not allowed near them.  If people are careless and irresponsible I guess that is their choice, but I won't put my dogs through surgery just for that.  I have plenty of reasons TO speuter my dogs, but the stupid actions of other people is not one of them.

I must be missing something, Lies.  I am not talking about you or Chuffy speutering your dogs or any responsible owner.  And it may not effect you but irresponsible owners effect me when I see the suffering their dogs go through. 

Of course it effects me but it has no bearing on my decision to or not to spay/neuter my own dogs.  In this thread and others people have been throwing in stats about how many dogs end up in shelters or euthanized and I'm not sure what that is supposed to mean.  If I neutered Nikon, it would have absolutely no difference on how many dogs end up in shelters.  It seems there is a stigma attached to keeping dogs intact.  Everywhere I go it's one of the first questions people ask me and then I have to constantly justify my position.  Who cares?  I don't walk around asking other people if they are getting vasectomies or tubal ligations.  I won't declaw my cats b/c everyone else's cats scratch them and ruin furniture.  To me it's like the price of a dog - not anyone else's biznaz unless they have a real reason for inquiring.

intact dogs are few and far between here and yet the shelters are full.

The evidence is in flux, but at the current time I believe the thinking is: spay/neuter before maturity causes assorted health problems. There is no overall health benefit to neutering males. There is an overall health benefit to spaying mature females. In my experience females often get more aggressive after being spayed. Males I am not sure.

Benedict

But then, if it's OK for "responsible owners" not to neuter because they can handle it...then surely, neutering is not always the best course of action.  You (general you) can't really say "everyone should spay and neuter your pets....but if you're a responsible owner it's ok not to."

I agree Kate.  Overall I'd like to see more education about (and the public being more receptive to) being a responsible pet owner in general.  To me the speuter campaigns are more of a band aid solution.

KarissaKS

I believe there should be a legitimate reason for keeping a dog intact.  The benefits of keeping a dog intact decrease as the dog ages -- as the health risks increase.  Intact males are at high risk for testicular cancer.  Intact females have even more things to worry about!

The benefit/risk trade off of speutering/non-speutering is not completely clear.  Last year this study was released 

study

the validity of this study has been questioned, but as the author of the precis states

"No sweeping generalizations are implied in this review. Rather, the author asks us to consider all the health
and disease information available as individual animals are evaluated. Then, the best decisions should be
made accounting for gender, age, breed, and even the specific conditions under which the long-term care,
housing and training of the animal will occur. "

I have decided not to spay Selli, who is a 4 yo golden due to the information provided in this study.  At least 25% of all Goldens die of Hemangiosarcoma, and I believe the number is much greater, due to the pathology of this cancer.  My previous Golden, Dex, died of Hemangio and I know far too many Goldens and Golden Mixes who it has also killed.  According to the study, spayed females have a 2 times greater risk of spleenic Hemangio, and more than a 5 times greater risk of cardiac Hemangio than intact females.  

The downside of keeping her intact includes increasing risk of mammary cancer, but only if the dog is spayed before 2 1/2 yo (which is not a factor for Selli anymore), and the elimination of the risk of Pyometra which kills about 1% of intact females.  

The numbers say to me that she should stay intact!  Even if the study's findings are exaggerated due to the methodology, I would do a lot to reduce Selli's risk of Hemangio.  I feed her a home cooked diet, do the least amount of vaccination possible, make my own treats, give her large amounts of omega 3s, etc.  Luckily, she only comes into heat once every 9 months and her heat cycles are not too annoying.  We even go to agility class with panties, which she is very good about.  She has corrupted the morals of a number of neutered males, but they fall back into line when she is no longer in heat.

We have decided that we do not have the lifestyle to whelp puppies, so even though she is breed quality, she will not have puppies.  My next dog will be a show quality/performance male, who if he has the right temperament, I do not plan of neutering.  Thay said, we neutered Duffy at 8 months and I am glad we did regardless of Selli's status.

LillianD

Yes, there are risks to surgery.  There are risks to an unaltered dog running out in the road to. 

This is silly - there are also risks to an ALTERED dog running out into the road.  !!  The risk is the same in both cases and in both cases the risk is avoided by CONTAINING and CONTROLLING the dog and has zero to do with neutering.

I have an altered dog who is an escape artist.  The number of people who assume that it's all down to hormones and are surprised when the dog still sneaks away when altered, either because he is bored, under excersized, or just likes getting out on his own with no one to tell him what to do.... is astonishing!

I do think cat heat cycles are different - in fact I think the debate on neutering male dogs is different altogether than the one on altering female dogs

Chuffy

I do think cat heat cycles are different - in fact I think the debate on neutering male dogs is different altogether than the one on altering female dogs

I agree.  Personally I don't want to deal with bitches in heat.  If that means Kenya is my last bitch than so be it!

Yes, this is kind of how I felt a few years ago.  I wasn't prepared to deal with the mess and what have you and thought I would be a male dogs only person, because I thought surgery was a bit extreme just to make the dog convenient to live with. 

And now we HAVE an intact bitch (shock horror!) and we have to keep a real close eye on her when she's "due" because it's very hard to tell when she is in season.  She keeps herself scrupulously clean and there is no change in personality that we can tell.... To be honest, it would almost be easier to live with a messy bitch, because then we would know when to be on High Alert.  As it is, we are just careful pretty much all the time.  It was hard at one point when DH was so flippant about it, but now he is on board too.

LillianD

Yes, there are risks to surgery.  There are risks to an unaltered dog running out in the road to. 

 Are you serious? You feel altering will prevent a dog from running into the road and getting hit?

Liesje

I agree Kate.  Overall I'd like to see more education about (and the public being more receptive to) being a responsible pet owner in general.  To me the speuter campaigns are more of a band aid solution.

 I agree. I had a thought - what if the same effort that was put into pushing the general public to accept that "altering is the only way to be a responsible pet owner" was instead put into education about training, care and management. What if instead of "Spay/Neuter Your Pets" Bob Barker encouraged "Remember to always be a responsible owner - don't allow your pet to roam and seek the assistance of a professional trainer for behavior probelms"? Of course, such a message doesn't further anyone's agenda the way the S/N message furthers AR's agenda.

AgileGSD

Liesje

I agree Kate.  Overall I'd like to see more education about (and the public being more receptive to) being a responsible pet owner in general.  To me the speuter campaigns are more of a band aid solution.

 I agree. I had a thought - what if the same effort that was put into pushing the general public to accept that "altering is the only way to be a responsible pet owner" was instead put into education about training, care and management.

Bingo, and full house   Thank you, that's my point

Personally the way I see it, the arguments to keep a dog that is not being shown or bred intact are weak in comparison to the overpopulation problem. Giving the comparitively few responsible people out there their  "freedom"  allows millions of irresponsible people to have their freedoms as well.  The homeless pets suffer magnitudes more greatly than a neutered dog does.

AgileGSD

LillianD

Yes, there are risks to surgery.  There are risks to an unaltered dog running out in the road to. 

 Are you serious? You feel altering will prevent a dog from running into the road and getting hit?

The desire to roam to find a mate would be a lot stronger in an unaltered dog. I'm not saying altered dogs never try to escape, Sophie can be an escape artist, and can be quite clever in her methods. The few times she has escaped it's to visit the neighbors' who love her. If she were in heat she'd be more likely to roam, which would pose a greater risk of danger to her. 

We had a Great Dane in our neighborhood that was rescued at around a year old, he was unneutered for a few months and was ALWAYS getting out. This is a big dog, probably around 120 lbs at 12 months.  Before Sophie was spayed, he was always escaping the yard and running after her, he was too big for me to do much about, so I had to avoid that part of the neighborhood. Even with our fenced in yard, I'd be nervous about having an unspayed female in my home with dogs like that around.  He's neutered now and when we walk by his house, he barks, but doesn't jump the fence.  Now, I have no idea if that has to do with training or with the neutering, but I stand by my point that I wouldn't want to deal with a dog his size coming around if Sophie were in heat.    Even if I can "control" my dog every single second without incident, that doesn't mean I can control other dogs.

I'm not saying I don't respect responsible pet owners who decide not to spay or neuter. I just want my choice to spay and neuter to also be respected. Even if it's just for "convenience".    For us, altering the pets were done for reasons I feel were worth the risks of undergoing surgery.   Being able to go to the dog park, allow them off leash for a hike, and not having to keep Sophie inside the house 6-8 weeks out of the year were worth it.  They enjoy a wonderful quality of life with us, there are risks in so many things, vaccinations, allergic reaction to flea and tick prevention, adverse reactions to antibiotics, and the list goes on.    

pudel

Personally the way I see it, the arguments to keep a dog that is not being shown or bred intact are weak in comparison to the overpopulation problem

Said problem has not been solved by the speuter crusade and I don't think it will be.  

Chuffy

Said problem has not been solved by the speuter crusade and I don't think it will be.  

 Based on what?

Personally I will never own a non-neutered male or non-spayed female.  It's a personal choice, though I don't like the idea of surgery - I don't want to deal with a bitch in heat, and I don't want to take the chance of an intact male getting away from me (this is not to say I do not safely monitor and contain BUT I always think worse case scenario).  I'll never show, and I'll never breed - so I do not see why I should keep my dog intact.  Ari was spayed younger than I would have liked, but there were factors brought into the equation first and foremost we were contractually obligated to spay her by 6 mos. of age and she underwent exploratory surgery at 5 mos. of age, so we gave the OK if it was safe to proceed to spay her at that time (to avoid a second abdominal surgery).