Castration

[Working_Setters]

Cordelia - Thanks for posting your alterative view on this complex subject. I grapple with this issue and am still formulating my opinions. For me the one factor driving me to support desexing of all dogs (male and female) in pet homes is the epidemic of unwanted dogs, this is a terrible problem that we must solve. Whilst I don't think desexing of all pet home dogs is the ideal solution, it is obvious that once desexed, these animals can no longer further increase the number of unwanted dogs.

However there are some points raised in your post that I'd like to respond to:

Aggression to other dogs in situations outside the house is pretty normal dog behavior. Appropriate behavior.

Nope. Inappropriate behaviour in our society.

There is considerable debate regarding the pros and cons of tail docking, surely many of the anti docking arguments could also be applied to castration? The castration of all males just because some of them may develop aggression problems is surely no different to TDing all pups because some of them may injury tails latter in life. Also there is the suggestion amongst anti TDers that if people want a dog without a tail, they should breed it that way. Again surely the same argument applies here, if people want a non-aggressive male then they should breed them that way.

In short there are IMO striking similarities between operating on a dog to prevent possible future physical problems (tail damage) and operating on a dog to prevent possible future behavioural problems (aggression).

Overly tall??? a centimetre or 2 os NOT 'overly tall for a start.

I disagree that 2cm isn’t a significant amount, I believe it is especially in small-medium breeds. If the dog is already at the upper limit of the standard, then an extra 2cm does in fact make him overly tall.

Apart from the fact that there is no way to prove the dog wasn't going to be an exact height anyway.

Again I have to disagree, if you take a statistically appropriate sample size and find a statistically significant difference, then you can "prove" it. Same way you prove smoking causes lung cancer, get a bunch of folks who smoke and a bunch who do not. If the smoking group consistently get more lung cancer - you can prove it.

Where's the proof that desexed males have a higher incidence of ortho problems that undesexed dogs.

Excellent point - anybody know if this research has been done? Would be very interesting to know the results.

Removing sexual hormones will change his metabolism and make your dog more sluggish, resulting almost inevitably in weight gain.

Only because owners continue to feed the same amount of food/calories post orchidectomy. If they cut down the amount of food/calories given after desexing then their dog wouldn't suddenly get sluggish and stack on the kilos

Here you and the original author seem to be saying the same thing? Desexing does make the dog more susceptible to weight can and without decreasing food and/or increasing exercise then dog is very likely to become over weight. It's not that all will gain weight, but without decreased food and increased exercise, they are likely to.

Again..... exercise and diet controls muscle tone and weight NOT desexing on its own.

I agree that diet and exercise are important factors affecting muscle tone, but so to are hormones (testosterone). No matter how much a female athlete eats and exercises, she wont have the same muscles as a male athlete due to testosterone differences.

Seems to me that the only reason for getting males castrated is to help with the unwanted puppy problem, but it does seem to me that the male dogs are paying a high price. Unlike bitches that may enjoy better health as a result of desexing, males seem very like to suffer poorer health as a result of desexing. Appropriate housing of male dogs would be equally effective in reducing unwanted pups, without any of the negative effects of castration.

[KOE]

I'm involved in rescue, I am a breeder who desexes all pets at 8 weeks and I believe all dogs, regardless of gender should be spayed if not actively involved in showing or a responsible, ethical breeding programme.

I think the local councils system of entire dogs being far more expensive to register is a great thing.

I don't think it should matter to pet owners whether their dog looks slightly different to their show cousins (they usually will despite any desexing differences).

I do think the health benefits are significant and I don't think 99% of the pet-owning public is equipped to deal with an entire dog of either gender.

The article points out the necessity for neutering in some multi dog households, but correctly management for entire dogs is pretty much the same as for desexed ones isn't it? ie - restrict to one's own property, on-leash restraint etc. I know of many, many desexed males that are far too dog-aggressive to have off leash!

Correct management theory is the same but the practice is much different. It can be a lot harder to contain an entire dog, it can be a lot harder to have a well adjusted entire dog, etc etc

Edit: Changed "is" to "can be"

Totally agree, I had a vizsla who lived with 3 girls and prostrate cancer appeared at 3 years so chop was done and end of his show career. One sign of the same in Oliver and he gets the chop as well.

A lot of pet owners can not manage their dogs properly and I would rather see a population of desexed dogs than maurading males anyday.

[Dogsfevr]

All our pups are spayed ,no spaying no pup very simple as a breeder we can find many great owners but these same owners can often become the same people that want just 1 litter or joe bloe ask to use Max at stud.

If all these so called responsable owners took care of there entire males/females then there wouldnt be all these opps litters.

All our retired stock are spayed & not one has got fat,lost condition or what ever other "Human" excuse there is .

The simple fact is many male owners wont get there dogs desexed due to there own male macho image,like owning a pitball is to many others believe keeping there males entire gives then same image.

Very few of these responsable intact owners ever check there dogs testicles so they wouldnt a clue as to whats going on because many think its gross to feel a dogs nuts.

When we groom dogs we check & we have sent a few owners of to the vets due to there intact dogs having issues that they didnt notice.

BYB are getting very clever when phoning breeders in the attempt to get entire stock so spaying is the only way to stop them so as i say all our pups are spayed & known of them have grown differently due to it .

I reckon compulsory desexing unless a good reason is given is a great way to go

[ozzieozzie]

Ok, sorry to rehash an old thread, but what about the head? I have been advised to get my dog desexed at 6 months, he is a pet, but then got told by another that his head wont fill out properly and that they need the testosterone to do that, I am all for the second breeder, cause this is our 2nd dog, and with our first, the breeder said the same as the second, now, why would he say something entirely different 4 years later? hope this makes sense..

better explanation::

dog1 breeder says dont desex until 18 months or so because he wont "Fillout" properly....

dog 2 now breeder is saying he should be desexed at 6 months.

We are very responsible owners, dog 1 NEVER got near a female, and died a virgin

We would like to wait for him to be at least 12 months if possible, jsut to allow for him to fill a bit, 18 mnths preferrably, please note, he will be a virgin then, also GUARANTEED, as ours are complete house dogs, anyway, except loo etc.

I want to keep him entire for his breed need the testosterone to fill out his head, and also for the bone plate thing, and yes, 1 or 2 cms or howmuch extra he can grow, can make them look different, as they are meant to be fairly low anyway, to a certain extent, considering their mass.

Also, just because he is a pet, doesnt mean that we want him to be a good example of the breed, we pet owners also like to have good looking dogs too. so, to me, it does matter what desexing will do to his growth.

Hope this makes sense.

thanks from Jodie and Craig

[Cavalier]

Until you actually get one of the problems mentioned you probably wont change your mind.

When your dogs get a pyometra, prostatic abscess, testicular cancer or mammary cancer you might think differently about getting your dogs desexed in the future.

As far as I am concerned, it should be COMPULSARY to have your dog desexed unless your are a registered breeder and have a licence registered with the local council and canine control body.

It is peoples Choice to keep animals entire and to breed that causes the huge amount of puppies being bred by backyard breeders and ending up at the RSPCA and other animal shelters.

[ravensmyst00]

Poor boy! Hope it goes well for him! I guess I have been lucky there!

But how many dogs would have to have surgery for this reason? Is it better to not routinely desex, unless indicated medically?

Or at least wait until the dog is physically matured for his size and breed, as mentioned in the article?

Every male dog that I have owned (with the exception of my show boy that I currently own) were desexed after the age of one. Why some people may ask - because every dog that I met that was desexed before that age had an infatuation with either a guests leg, a blanket or what ever they could wrap their legs around and do the old "doona dance" (sorry guys I just cant use the correct word not knowing what age our readers are).

I never had problems with my boys as they got out of the need to "doona dance" before I had them neutered. Not only that they also got out of the puppy phase. Many dogs neutered at an early age I found never matured mentally. As long as you get them neutered after 12 months I think that is fine especially if you have no intention of breeding or showing. It stops their need to roam and unwanted accidents.

[ozzieozzie]

I dont have any intention of breeding my boy, I am just planning on waiting to desex him a little later, as I have already said, to allow him to fill out, I volunteer at the awl, so I know all about pounds, and the dogs that end up there, and would love to have to stop volunteering, cause there is no more dogs to go there, but this isnt the issue, the issue is that I am still desexing him, just later.

Does anyone WITH EXPERIENCE of giant breeds have an opinion, please, would be interested, please in opinions.

cheers from Jodie

sorry, ravensmyst00 we posted at the same time....

[dogbesotted]

ok everyone here is some food for thoughT:

http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/full/11/11/1434

http://www.treshanley.com/cic/rotties.html

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...9&dopt=Abstract

Hypothyroidism in dogs: 66 cases (1987-1992)

Panciera D L

Dep. Med. Sci., Sch. Vet. Med., Univ. Wis., 2015 Linden Drive West,

Madison, WI 53706, USA

Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 204 (5). 1994. 761-767.

Full Journal Title: Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

ISSN: 0003-1488

Language: ENGLISH

Print Number: Biological Abstracts Vol. 097 Iss. 009 Ref. 122309

Sixty-six dogs with hypothyroidism were identified from dogs examined over a 5-year period. Hypothyroidism was diagnosed only if the dog had a low, resting serum thyroxine concentration and serum thyroxine concentration was not higher than the lower limits of the reference range 6 hours after IV administration of bovine thyrotropin. The prevalence of hypothyroidism was 0.2%. Neutering was determined to be the most significant gender-associated risk factor for development of hypothyroidism. Neutered male and spayed female dogs had a higher relative risk of developing hypothyroidism than did sexually intact females. Sexually intact females had a lower relative risk. Breeds with a significantly increased risk, compared with other breeds, were the Doberman Pinscher and Golden Retriever. The most common clinical findings were obesity (41%), seborrhea (39%), alopecia (26%), weakness (21%), lethargy (20%), bradycardia (14%), and pyoderma (11%). Low voltage R-waves were found on 58% of ECG. Clinicopathologic abnormalities included hypercholesterolemia (73%), nonregenerative anemia (32%), high serum alkaline phosphatase activity (30%), and high serum creatine kinase activity (18%). Serum total triiodothyronine concentrations were within reference ranges in 15% of the hypothyroid dogs. Response to treatment was good in most dogs, but those with severe concurrent disease or neurologic abnormalities were less likely to respond with complete resolution of clinical signs.

and so on....

[ozzieozzie]

cheers for that, and very interesting.

I am wishing to know, also the pro's of delaying desexing for the bone structure etc of the skull in a giant breed dog as is mine.

I already understand the growth of the bone plates in the leg, but would like to hear more in regards to the skull. I totally agree, but need some arguing points to use, please.

[morgan]

Hi Jodee - there are a lot of studies that show serious concerns with early desexing, particularly in larger breeds.

For instance the incidence of Hip Dysplasia is higher in dogs that have been desexed by 6 mths.

The different growth rate of the leg bones alters the ratio between them, increasing the rate of cruciate ligament ruptures in dogs that have been desexed by 6 mths. (Also affected by muscle tone being deficient due to lack of testosterone)

Cognitive impairment in older, neutered dogs appears as there is no testosterone to protect brain function.

"Humping" or sexually inappropriate behaviour is greatly increased in males desexed early.

Personally, I would never neuter any male prior to puberty, but large or giant breeds most definitely not, for their health's sake. As these breeds do not reach sexual maturity until much later anyway, accidental matings really aren't a problem anyway (and here management rears it's ugly head again)

You only have to look at the performance horse world to see that many of the elite winners are entire mares or stallions, as they have the correct muscle tone and ability. Keeping stallions is a pain in the a***, and riding hormonal mares is too (remember they come into heat, and PMS, every 3 weeks!) but many competitors go thru the added hassle, just to have a top athlete - gelding can really take the edge off.

I must admit, I haven't come across any studies concerning head structure and desexing in dogs, but it is well-known in the cat world that if you desex adult males they have the jowlier appearance of a tom cat, as their hormones have allowed the full development of their skulls. Males neutered prior to puberty never develop this larger skull, and always look more feminine.

[jelly]

Sorry didn't read all the posts but...

Honestly, I wasn't planning on neutering my male because initially we were thinking of showing. Later I did some research which made me come to the conclusion that I didn't want to desex for various reasons including after finding information the rates of cancer and the treatments used e.g. castrating at that time in some cases etc for entire dogs.

IMO after looking into it I decided I would rather not alter my dog. I felt it unnessesary in my situation. I have no qualms about keeping my dog in and taking him out only on lead if there is a bitch on heat nearby (which has happened), and we have absolutely NO aggression problems.

He IS getting done tomorrow because we are moving into a multidog household in a couple of weeks. Just as I made the initial decision based on my research as to what I concluded was best for his health and safety, I am making this decision also for his health and safety.

GOD DAMN! You can actually be responsible and not desex even if he is just a pet.

Edited March 9, 2006 by jelly

[curlyking]

Yep, I agree with you morgan.

Can't dock tails because the powers that be say preventing an injury is not a good enough reason to do so, but we can/must desex in case the animal produces. Seems like a contridiction to me.

[Ci]

I think that whole desexing arguement began to try and help stop all the unwanted puppies (and kittens) that are born every year.

And in order to try and get the general public to start being responsible for their pets - they use other points as for the postive reasons of why they should desex. So they push it. Which I can understand why they encourage desexing.

Lot of people still have no idea how many unwanted pets there are and how many get put down and the list is growing each year.

Edited March 10, 2006 by Ci

[morgan]

I think that whole desexing arguement is to try and help stop all the unwanted puppies (and kittens) that are born every year.

And in order to try and get the general public to start being responsible for their pets - they use other points as for the postivie reasons of why they should desex.

For me - I desex because I don't want to be responsible for adding to the going list of unwanted pets.

Which comes back to my original post - to desex is to be politically correct in this day and age of unwanted dogs. It is far more expedient than teaching people how to be responsible for their pets. We all know that the majority of pet owners neither have the knowledge nor the interest in doing the right thing, but why should owners with the knowledge, experience, facilities etc be coerced into it when it plainly isn't always in the best interest of the animal?

Surely the information should be available to those who are motivated enough to check it out? Of course we don't want Joe Public saying he won't do it cos it's bad, then producing umpteen puppies, but why should responsible owners have the health of their pets damaged because of the idiots?

I don't include kittens in this argument, as their reproductive physiology and management is totally different to that of dogs, and they must be desexed!

If owners are so worried that they can't contain their dogs and might allow them to escape to impregnate bitches, why not have them vasectomised? Plenty of stud cats are vasectomised to assist with the management of breeding queens, which must be mated to prevent disease, so don't tell me that vets can't do it!

For breeds prone to BYBs fertility is a huge issue, but I'm sure that if pet puppies were vasectomised instead of neutered prior to sale it would be far less invasive and stressful for them. Then if neutering is still desirable at a later stage for aggression or management issues, it can be done post puberty. And no unwanted puppies, ever, and no ending up in BYBs hands further down the track.

[jelly]

Since I found out you can get a vasectomy on a dog I have wondered why this option isn't generally encouraged if it is really only a question of litters being born.

Yes there are the other issues but I think mostly it's got to do with litters and then as Ci says they bring up those other things as supporting arguments for castration.

Edited March 10, 2006 by jelly

[Do No Harm]

I currently have a female. Acquired as a rescue at around three and a half months of age, she was very undernourished at that time.

In my circumstances, I would elect to spay any bitch I have, but I would never do so before full maturity. I cannot accept it as being in the animal's best interests to surgically interfer with it's normal development.

I am convinced that not all male dogs need to be castrated, and I'm horrified that neutering is advocated based on a fear of what might happen if it is not done. Responsible owners know their own dogs, and my experience has been that good husbandry and bonding are the ultimate management tools. My previous two dogs were males. Both remained intact and neither caused any problems - to me or anyone/anything else - during their lives.

All my dogs were 'rescues' and all were crossbreds of predominantly 'Working Dog' breeds.

Here are a couple of additional articles on early spay/neuter.

http://www.littleriverlabs.com/neuter.htm

http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html

I'm extremely uncomfortable with the view that all dog owers who are not registered breeders are presumed to be so ignorant of what is required to ensure their dogs live healthily, harmoniously and safely in our society that it should be mandatory for all their dogs to be spayed/neutered. Responsible owners, irrespective of the parentage of their dogs, are quite capable of making an informed decision, which is based on a proper consideration of the individual dog and their own social and domestic situation.

Edited March 10, 2006 by Blackfoot

[curlyking]

[blackfoot wrote:

I'm extremely uncomfortable with the view that all dog owers who are not registered breeders are presumed to be so ignorant of what is required to ensure their dogs live healthily, harmoniously and safely in our society that it should be mandatory for all their dogs to be spayed/neutered. Responsible owners, irrespective of the parentage of their dogs, are quite capable of making an informed decision, which is based on a proper consideration of the individual dog and their own social and domestic situation.

I agree entirely with this sentiment Blackfoot. Not only that but the inference that any bitch having a litter will have a problem. Most in reality don't but manage to whelp and look after therir litter perfectly well.

Edited March 10, 2006 by curlyking

[sas]

IMO whatever your view you could always Google and come up with a paper that agrees without your opinion and present it to the general public which doesn't mean it is correct.

I could go onto Google right now and come up with a reseach paper saying that males should be desexed for health reasons.

[ozzieozzie]

I realise this, but I have been told by 4 seperate breeders of my breed that my breed simply must not be desexed before 12-18 months because they simply will not grow to their optimum if desexed early.

I understand the health reasons for and against desexing at all, and my male WILL be done when he reaches maturity. But I am after evidence, and havent found any information to say that desexing my giant male will enable him to "spread" as he is supposed to, only if he is desexed, he wont grow properly. I refuse to pay thousands of dollars for a dog, only to not have him grow properly if desexed before his maturity, it doesnt make sense why one would.

[curlyking]

I could go onto Google right now and come up with a reseach paper saying that males should be desexed for health reasons.

Which is why owners should make up their own mind and not have proponents of one line of thought or the other tell them what they should do or condem then for not following the ideals of others!