Neuter/spay - Why? Why not?

I guess what it all boils down to is whether or not you view neutering/spaying as an invasive/dangerous procedure

No it doesn't. It's the "side effects" of removing the hormones before physical maturity that worry me, not the actual neutering procedure.

ron2

In my own simile, neutering is like using a condom to stop conception. You can best depend on it by using it every time, without fail.

I once read from a doctor what the technical term is for females that rely on the rhythm method (counting days) for contraception. The technical term is "mothers."

Neutering is NOT like using a condom.  Neutering is like castrating a human male, and spaying is like a woman having a hysterectomy.

Using a condom is a more accurate analogy for reliance on leads and tethers, which can also break and lead to, er, accidents.

There are other methods of contraception available for dogs - like an injection which (I think) suppresses the hormones in males.  This could be compared to a woman having a coil, cap, injection or pill.  There are "bitches britches".  It is also possible to perform vasectomies on dogs, withdrawing them from the gene pool, but not taking away the hormone that aids in proper development in young dogs.  Not a widespread choice, although the more I think about it the more I can't see why not.

Although most people who they neuter say they do so to prevent breeding, the truth is any and all of the above could be employed to do that - alongside good old fashioned decent husbandry and proper training and supervision of the dog.  The more I read about it, the more I am coming to realise that the real reason neutering is so popular is because it takes away those troublesome hormones and makes the dog "easier" to handle. 

While I dislike the idea of surgically lopping off the bits of dogs that don't suit us (only since tail docking was banned, becuase neutering for convenience seems a LOT worse to me than tail docking... who was that chap with the bed that was a perfect fit for every one?  I wil look it up...) I can see where this would be beneficial in some cases.  Particularly where the dog has a high sex drive and seems to be at the mercy of it (like my mums dog).  Why keep his testicles there when they are only going to cause his torment?  What else could she do to alleviate his love-sick behaviour  5 or 6 times a year other than remove them?

I suppose I'm a bit like Liesje though - I just wish people would call it like it is.  Neutering does not a responsible owner make, and don't let the AR propaganda convince you otherwise.  You can be a responsible owner and choose not to neuter, similarly you can be an atrocious owner and get the op done. 

The more I read about it, the more I am coming to realise that the real reason neutering is so popular is because it takes away those troublesome hormones and makes the dog "easier" to handle. 

that's it in a nutshell. They castrate most male horses because intact male horses are a real pita to deal with, it has nothing to do with birth control since horses don't usually wander and breed at will. People don't want to have to take responsibility and go through the irritation of heats so spaying bitches is very popular. People don't want to have to go to the trouble to train male dogs to not-mark-the-house and to ignore bitches in heat so they give them the chop.

mudpuppy

I guess what it all boils down to is whether or not you view neutering/spaying as an invasive/dangerous procedure

No it doesn't. It's the "side effects" of removing the hormones before physical maturity that worry me, not the actual neutering procedure.

I think the whole notion of these "side effects" has been overly dramatized and blown out of the proportion, mostly by the breeding community. Personally, I feel the "side effect" of 4 million homeless animals euthanized each year is much worse than anything your average individual dog will experience from the neutering/spaying procedure.

Chuffy

Neutering does not a responsible owner make, and don't let the AR propaganda convince you otherwise.  You can be a responsible owner and choose not to neuter, similarly you can be an atrocious owner and get the op done. 

 No one is saying neutering makes one a responsible owner.  But it does stop your dog from breeding.  If your dog somehow escaped from your control (happens even to the most "responble" people";) and either impregnated a dog or got pregnant, you've quickly gone from responsible to irresponsible.

Although most people who they neuter say they do so to prevent breeding, the truth is any and all of the above could be employed to do that - alongside good old fashioned decent husbandry and proper training and supervision of the dog.  The more I read about it, the more I am coming to realise that the real reason neutering is so popular is because it takes away those troublesome hormones and makes the dog "easier" to handle.

I think that the average pet owner who wants to be responsible does spay/neuter to prevent unwanted litters, because they have been educated by the veterinary community to do so.  But, statistics do show that most bites are from unneutered male dogs between the ages of 9-15 months of age.  The same hormones that make teenage boys fight one another, if they have not been adequately taught and socialized by their parents and society not to do so, are similar to the hormones that create the same scenarios with male dogs.  Fight for turf, fight for food, fight for females... Those tendencies do not make for peaceful cohabitation with humans.  Sure, you can successfully keep intact animals, and the people who should be doing that are the responsible breeders among us.  But, that doesn't mean that their ability to manage such animals extends to the family down the street that just wants a nice companion for their kids, no problems with the neighbors, and no blood on the couch (bitch britches have been known to leak).  I also agree that the euthanasia rate is still high enough that it makes no sense to have millions of pets remain intact past puberty.  How many times have we answered questions on this very forum from people who did that and ended up with an unplanned litter???  Granted, I'm not a fan of early spay/neuter of neonates, but I think that the usual age recommended by most vets is reasonable and that if breeders want to see how a pup turns out, they should keep it or sell to a show home, instead of selling to a pet owner and trying to get them to leave it intact long enough to show.  JMHO and not a fan of seeing any more unwanted dogs die.

pudel

Chuffy

Neutering does not a responsible owner make, and don't let the AR propaganda convince you otherwise.  You can be a responsible owner and choose not to neuter, similarly you can be an atrocious owner and get the op done. 

 No one is saying neutering makes one a responsible owner.  But it does stop your dog from breeding.  If your dog somehow escaped from your control (happens even to the most "responble" people";) and either impregnated a dog or got pregnant, you've quickly gone from responsible to irresponsible.

Not necessarily.  If you are the owner of the bitch you have the option of not allowing the pregnancy to proceed without extremely good reason.  Besides which, you ignored my point - which was that if it was only about birth control, other methods could be employed to deal with that.  You also ignored my previous point, which is that it does not matter how much we try to control the birth of unwanted puppies... it's the level of commitment owners have toward their dog which is the REAL problem, a by-product of our convenience-hungry, throw-away society.

spiritdogs

But, statistics do show that most bites are from unneutered male dogs between the ages of 9-15 months of age.  The same hormones that make teenage boys fight one another, if they have not been adequately taught and socialized by their parents and society not to do so, are similar to the hormones that create the same scenarios with male dogs. 

So you think the answer is to get these people to neuter - I think the answer is to try to get people to teach and socialise their dogs so that these issues are less likely to arise.... whether or not they plan to neuter in the end anyway.

spiritdogs

Sure, you can successfully keep intact animals, and the people who should be doing that are the responsible breeders among us. 

Why?  Why is it only the "elite" that should be  required to know about and manage dogs in this way? 

spiritdogs

But, that doesn't mean that their ability to manage such animals extends to the family down the street that just wants a nice companion for their kids, no problems with the neighbors, and no blood on the couch (bitch britches have been known to leak). 

This is the issue raised on the Intact Males thread - this philosophy carries with it the assumption that unneutered dogs will go this way (aggressive, hard to manage, "messy";) which is a total fallacy.  We own an intact bitch and she is not messy at all.  My sister owns 2, one of whom is very messy and the other is only a little.  Both are allowed on their couch, which I have no problems sitting on.  My brother owned a dog who was intact all his life, never got in a fight, never roamed, never marked indoors, never bit anyone.  He is not an especially knowledgeable person about dogs.  He has a good deal of common sense and I would say he is responsible, but I would say he is less dog savvy than most people here.  A good example of an "average" owner IMO.

spiritdogs

How many times have we answered questions on this very forum from people who did that and ended up with an unplanned litter??? 

Not that often, IMO, considering the post rate.  Most puppies don't come from unplanned litters.  They come from PLANNED litters by people who don't know what they are doing (BYB) or only care about making as many puppies and as much money as possible (mills).  The "NEUTER" message is simply NOT going to reach these people.  Reach their CUSTOMERS about the level of commitment required in dog ownership and destroy their customer base.... that is what I am thinking will be more effective now that "NEUTER!" has reached it's limit in many places.  This isn't a reason NOT to neuter.... but it IS acknowledgement that it is not the be all end all, that this "NEUTER!!!!!" message has reached most people that it is going to reach, and now other areas of the population issue need to be looked at.

Chuffy

So you think the answer is to get these people to neuter - I think the answer is to try to get people to teach and socialise their dogs so that these issues are less likely to arise.... whether or not they plan to neuter in the end anyway.

Why do you assume it has to be one or the other?  It should be both.

Chuffy

Most puppies don't come from unplanned litters. 

 Maybe that's because the spay/neuter message is working!!  Can you imagine what the stats would be like if suddenly everyone stopped neutering because they believed this nonsense that it is unnecesary and harmful to their dogs?

I wasn't going to post on this thread again but it is so frustrating to read about how if only people would be responsible they could easily prevent unwanted or unplanned litters.  I have read the posts claiming that in some areas there is no shelter overcrowding, puppies are in such high demand, etc.  This is the REALITY where I live.  City of 1 million people.  Median income is in the mid 40's.  This means that one half the population makes more than that and one half makes less.  In our city the less half makes much less.  The average family has three children.  Both parents work outside the home.  They can barely take care of their children properly much less a pet.  These people are your "average owner".  A dog is a dog not a member of the family.  They usually have at least one adult intact dog.  The dog may or may not be contained in a yard.  It is fed and provided water and maybe the kids play with it.  The family can not afford to take the dog to training classes, they can't afford doggie day care, they can't even afford basic vet care.  If the dog becomes ill it either recovers or it dies.  If the kids cry enough maybe they will take it to the vet but when given the estimate for treatment they have to decline due to financial hardship.  They can easily get another dog from the family down the street who has a litter of pups and they are free!  It's very common to see entire litters as young as 7 or 8 weeks loose in neighborhoods.  I saw two litters in my neighborhood in the last six months.  These are not strays, they belong to someone.  You may be thinking these are horrible people. They are not horrible people, they don't feel the same as WE do about dogs.  They feel they have the right to own a pet. They love their pets in their own way.  This is the way their parents were and their grandparents. I have talked and tried to "educate" adults with this mindset many times.  They will nod and agree but they think I am the crazy one because everyone they know is just like them not like me.  Yes we have low cost and no cost vac clinics and some of these people get the rabies but that's the exception not the rule.  They see no reason to spay or neuter, it's not a problem for them. 

Education is the key and finally through volunteer groups we are getting into schools at the primary level.  This is a drop in the bucket to what is needed.  I don't need the NAIA quoted to me.  I am a member and get all the same info.  If you live in an area that doesn't have these issues I can understand how hard it is to fathom.  As far as speutering for convenience.............see Ron's post as it reflects my feelings for the most part.

If you believe that the above described is an exaggeration you are wrong.  I left out many other things because of the length.  I DO NOT BELIEVE that PETA or any other group will EVER succeed in their agenda of wiping out all animal ownership.  The majority of the people on this planet will never stand for it.  Animal ownership is a part of who we are as humans.  PETA uses scare tactics and so do some of the more rabid factions of their opponents. 

Liesje, if you read this, do you still think you are an average pet owner? 

Chuffy

it does not matter how much we try to control the birth of unwanted puppies... it's the level of commitment owners have toward their dog which is the REAL problem, a by-product of our convenience-hungry, throw-away society.

So you are saying that it is more realistic to change our convenience-hungry, throw away society, than to ask the public to neuter their pets?  Do you think that maybe the reason our society has that mindset is because of the instant gratification that is available- in this case- the availability of puppies on a whim?

I think the whole notion of these "side effects" has been overly dramatized and blown out of the proportion, mostly by the breeding community. Personally, I feel the "side effect" of 4 million homeless animals euthanized each year is much worse than anything your average individual dog will experience from the neutering/spaying procedure.

as I've ranted about before mass neutering of pets doesn't fix this problem. If it did our local shelters would have gone out of business years ago. And just because a pet owner decides to let their dog mature properly before neutering doesn't mean that pet owner is going to be doing any breeding.

Chuffy

Neutering is NOT like using a condom.  Neutering is like castrating a human male, and spaying is like a woman having a hysterectomy.

I understand the operations are similar but I do not identify Shadow's testicles as my own. His were removed and I still have mine and I separate the two, so to speak.

The simile was to say that it is most effective when used every time. But to go with a condom as a prophylactic measure, using a condom would more accurately be the same as segregating animals in season. You have to make sure, every time, without exception. And some dog owners are good at doing that every time, just as some humans are consistent in their use of prophylactics.

I would imagine that some of the animals in a shelter came from a good breeder who couldn't keep up with what a former customer has done. I imagine a large number of them come from puppy mills and backyard breeders and oops litters. And they are definitely keeping intact dogs. We have one member here is the definition of a responsible owner and I admire her for many things and in know way judge her in this thread. Accidents happen. She had to deal with an "oops" litter from intact dogs that were not supposed to be breeding. Of course, when possible, that bitch was spayed, later. And the pups went to good homes. So, I'm saying that a good person with attention to detail and a set procedure can sometimes, through no fault of their own, wind up with a pregnant dam. It happens. Unless the dogs are speutered when possible. Then, they don't have litters.

JackieG

Liesje, if you read this, do you still think you are an average pet owner? 

With regard to my ability to contain my dogs, yes.  I live in the city in a small rental unit.  I do not have a fenced yard and could not afford to fence my yard even if I owned the place.  So I do not have a 6' privacy fence or an elaborate kennel/run.  One of my dogs has escaped on several occasions and if given the opportunity, he will take off (FWIW, he's neutered).  I face the same challenges containing my dogs as my lower-income neighbors on either side (an intact male pit bull in each of the units to the north and an aggressive large GSP in the house to the south).  I contain my dogs exactly the same way the neighbors in my old really bad neighborhood (think crack houses and gang wars) did - tie outs, leashes, or off lead.  I use "regular" collars and "regular" leashes, not expensive e-collars or devices commonly used by more experienced, dog savvy owners.

pudel

Chuffy

So you think the answer is to get these people to neuter - I think the answer is to try to get people to teach and socialise their dogs so that these issues are less likely to arise.... whether or not they plan to neuter in the end anyway.

Why do you assume it has to be one or the other?  It should be both.

Why SHOULD it be both, if the owner is willing and able to manage the dog completely successfully without putting him through surgery?

And I don't think neutering males is that effective for birth control ANYWAY, unless it is mandatory and EVERY non breeding male is neutered - which I am fully opposed to.