Carol, you had not posted when I was typing, so I apologize for parroting some of your post.

 Quote: Connie Sutherland

Carol, you had not posted when I was typing, so I apologize for parroting some of your post.

Parrot away my dear, we are on the same page.

I am going to go one more step: I don't think that people who have an intact male and also a female, and who are afraid of oops litters, are unfit to own dogs if their decision is to alter one.

It's a decision that everyone has to make.

I believe that altering should wait until full growth has been reached.

But in no way do I believe that "a dog should NEVER be altered before growth is complete."

And in no way do I consider an owner of a male and a female whose household is not set up to be completely bulletproof during evey heat to be unfit if they think it's better to alter one.

I don't consider people who are afraid of mammary cancers and who spay based on that "needn't have a pet." I don't think that someone whose dog died from complications of pyometra and who now spays, based partly on the emotional reaction to that, "needn't have a pet."

Let's educate the people who ask about altering. Providing articles and other information is good. Informed opinions are good!

Saying that someone who has decided that spaying is better in their own situation "should not own pets" doesn't seem helpful.

 Quote: jenni williams

Is it really that hard to keep an eye on a dog until it's physically mature people?

I am only going to address your question. The answer is, it doesn't seem to be hard, does it -- but it is harder than it seems.

Take just ONE LOOK on Craigslist, kijiji.com or any of the classified websites and see if you can count how many "oopses" are posted.

Ask any rescue how many boxes of puppies they get.
So... sadly.... the world as you have wondered about, where people are all responsible dog owners.. and the world as represented at shelters, classfied ads, rescues, etc.. are two different things.

To the OP: I am not in any way suggesting that you are an irresponsible dog owner. I'm just making a case for spaying.

I have had a female go through a heat cycle (She went into heat between the time I got her and her spay appointment) and didn't have an oops litter... but I have also raised an oops litter when I received a foster dog who ended up being pregnant. Trust me.... raising puppies is VERY HARD WORK. VERY HARD.

I'm finally going to say goodbye to the last pup of the litter - he's now 17 1/2 weeks old. (!)

You do NOT want to go through what I went through.

Bottom line is, it's up to you and you know your situation best. Take a good hard look.

Can you, realistically, avoid a litter. If the answer is yes, then have her spayed when she is done growing.

If the answer is no, then spay her before her heat. As I said I have done it both ways and did not personally notice a difference between the dogs spayed young and the dogs spayed after maturity.

I think if your puppy was, like, 8 weeks old.. it would be different. Six to eight months is not so bad.

Connie, your reply to Jenni seems just a tad harsh to me
It doesn't sound to me like she's saying that people who spay don't deserve to have pets. Her example was an owner whose 1-year-old bitch is on her second litter - not quite the same.

Reproductive hormones are involved in so much more than just breeding. By removing them you are tampering with the animal's metabolism, its natural progression of mental maturation, its temperament/personality, its skeletal development and so much more. Is it a good idea to disrupt a young (or even worse an immature) animal's entire endocrine system simply for the sake of convenience? Because the owner can't be bothered to protect an unspayed bitch from pregnancy twice a year?

My answer is no. I would not even consider neutering/spaying my dogs unless there was an immediate medical reason to do so (pyometra, mammary cancer).

HOWEVER, ending up with unwanted litters is FAR worse. With that in mind, neutering is most likely the lesser of two evils for the average pet owner.

In an ideal world we would all go the extra length in our pets' care and not subject them to unnecessary surgeries and major developmental disruptions. But clearly that's just wishful thinking...

 Quote: jenni williams

Is it really that hard to keep an eye on a dog until it's physically mature people? Guess I come from the nasty school of thought that believes that if you can't safely and surely provide what that animal deserves for OPTIMUM health and longevity, you needn't have a pet.

But she says it right here......

WOOPS, should've read more carefully - I apologize for my comment Connie

Ok I agree, that is a little extreme. I mean, I would never feed kibble to my dogs, or neuter puppies, but I certainly don't think that people who do don't deserve to own pets.

Just because someone's not as obsessive as we are about our dogs doesn't mean their pets aren't living perfectly happy and comfortable lives

 Quote: Yuko Blum

Connie, your reply to Jenni seems just a tad harsh to me
It doesn't sound to me like she's saying that people who spay don't deserve to have pets. Her example was an owner whose 1-year-old bitch is on her second litter - not quite the same.

YES! Precisely what I was saying!!! In my so-often-berated opinion, someone who has 2 Pits under one year old and has a litter should be on pet-owner probation. Let's all remember that most of Simon's littermates were stolen. I took responsibility for 2-Simon and his sister, who now lives w/my sister's friend. One died from being stepped on by their son, and the rest are God knows where now, living God knows what kind of life. Now, I hear that she's pregnant again. 9 months before her 2nd birthday. And I'm harsh for saying that they don't deserve pets? How many total lives are they going to be responsible for making miserable at the end? You think the people who stole the pups are taking good care of them?

 Quote: Yuko Blum

Reproductive hormones are involved in so much more than just breeding. By removing them you are tampering with the animal's metabolism, its natural progression of mental maturation, its temperament/personality, its skeletal development and so much more. Is it a good idea to disrupt a young (or even worse an immature) animal's entire endocrine system simply for the sake of convenience? Because the owner can't be bothered to protect an unspayed bitch from pregnancy twice a year?

Hallelujah!

 Quote: Yuko Blum

My answer is no. I would not even consider neutering/spaying my dogs unless there was an immediate medical reason to do so (pyometra, mammary cancer).

Agreed. Remember, I have one neutered cryptorchid who was 5.5yrs when neutered to prevent the retained testicle from becoming cancer in his abdominal cavity. My qualifications in my posts always seem to be left out of heated rebuttals.

 Quote: Yuko Blum

HOWEVER, ending up with unwanted litters is FAR worse. With that in mind, neutering is most likely the lesser of two evils for the average pet owner.

Yep. Fine. We all agree on that, (here I go assuming again!) which is exactly my point when I said the part about when GROWTH IS COMPLETE and breed and size being monumental in the decision-making process. There is a huge difference between spaying a Yorkie you've decided you cannot be responsible for at 4-6mos and doing the same to a Mastiff or GSD. Again, just my opinion, which I really would bet that if I took a poll of MOST (there's that dirty word again) people on this board, they'd agree that healthwise, there are differences.

I am happy to stand as the only one who believes that we do not have the automatic, God-given right to alter a dog and possibly compromise his/her health rather than simply take a few precautions. It seems basic (assumption-again!) that someone whose dog is pregnant with her second litter, when her first litter is barely 6mos old, and she herself is not yet 18mos, is probably not uber-responsible with her in general. If your dog can get loose and end up pregant, then why can't it get hit by a car? Killed in a fight? Etc, etc. I will gladly state again that someone whose dog is in these situations repeatedly-(note, I did not say once, or even occasionally; accidents happen) does not deserve to have a pet. How that translates into me saying that anyone who spays a pet doesn't deserve to have one remains a mystery to moi.

To the OP: Sorry for the novel, but I take it seriously when my words and intentions are twisted into something they're not. I don't want hundreds if not thousands of people reading something I wrote and thinking someone else's interpretation of it is indeed fact. Do what is best for you and your dog. Don't let anyone else make that decision for you-not your vet, not your family, not this board.

 Quote: jenni williams

To the OP: Sorry for the novel, but I take it seriously when my words and intentions are twisted into something they're not.

Direct untwisted word-for-word quotes, Jenni:

"Most of us on here agree that a dog should NEVER be altered before growth is complete"

and

"Is it really that hard to keep an eye on a dog until it's physically mature people? Guess I come from the nasty school of thought that believes that if you can't safely and surely provide what that animal deserves for OPTIMUM health and longevity, you needn't have a pet."



Edited by Connie Sutherland (12/28/2007 10:56 AM)
Edit reason: add "Most of us on here agree that "

 Quote: Yuko Blum

Woops, should've read more carefully - I apologize for my comment Connie

Ok I agree, that is a little extreme. I mean, I would never feed kibble to my dogs, or neuter puppies, but I certainly don't think that people who do don't deserve to own pets.

Just because someone's not as obsessive as we are about our dogs doesn't mean their pets aren't living perfectly happy and comfortable lives

No problem, Yuko. ;>