Thank you, Jenni.

 Quote: Jenni Williams

Cute pics, too, Natalya.

I was admiring Caleb's handsome new mug shot too... needs a Santa hat!

~Natalya

'Welcome, Connie.

Natalya, it's old actually. So, no Santa hat. He's not really the jolly type, anyway .

Back on topic...

We don't normally spay dogs here at Leerburg. If we don't plan on breeding them and they are pets we will spay them.

I do agree that if people can't control a female dog during two heat cycles a year they should probably not own a dog. Having accidental breedings does not qualify one for being a responsible pet owner. Sorry - if the truth hurts then so be it.

I skimmed the article that Jenni posted the link to.

The very important point that the Vet who wrote this article seems to have missed (and which has been documented in other studies) is that a percentage of females that are spayed as adults become MORE AGGRESSIVE AFTER THE SPAY THAN THEY WERE BEFORE THE SPAY.

So people who are spaying to reduce aggression would be advised to do it when the dog is YOUNG - 6 to 10 months old.

And Natalya, thank you very much.

Yes, for most dogs, waiting for full growth (if altering is going to be done at all) is best, IMO.

But there are exceptions (there's one directly above this post, I see.... it was posted while I was typing), and my POV is that protecting your female from accidental pregnancies is crucial. And there are definitely health conditions that bring the altering question into the equation, too.

I'd read up, and especially check out Ed Frawley's articles. If you would like links or book titles, let me know.

It's your decision. There is no one-size-fits-all answer.

I think that the fact that you posted and asked instead of just accepting one vet's opinion is a very good thing. (And the vet is not incorrect about the mammary tumor issue; it's just that there are so many other issues, and many authoritative sources consider them to be more important --- and consider the mammary tumor issue to be often-overstated.)

Jenni, you are over your PM limit. So this is a little OT; sorry. I wanted to address this: "The average pet owner should be capable of watching their dog at least until it's old enough to be altered with as few health drawbacks as possible."

Which I agree with and WISH it were the case. But far from it.

The reality is that: The AVERAGE pet owner is the one who buys a cute puppy in a pet store and has NO idea about exactly what the best care, food, etc. even is. They either do not know enough or do not care enough to take the precautions necessary to prevent litters. Sad, but true. And with only one out of seven dogs remaining in the same home for its entire lifetime, and estimates of 7-11 MILLION dogs euthanized in shelters yearly, the AVERAGE pet owner does not even keep the dog they bought as a pup, they rehome it or give it to a shelter. This is the reason why I will be a staunch spay/neuter proponent for the AVERAGE pet owner until the day I die.

The dog owners represented on this board, are NOT average pet owners. They are above average. I personally support keeping a purebred or working dog intact, at least until it is mature, for those owners who have the knowledge, experience, and inclination.

I think this is where the (perceived?) difference of opinion comes in. When you state "AVERAGE pet owner" you need to realize who you are talking about. AVERAGE pet owner and RESPONSIBLE pet owner are two completely different animals (oh how I wish it were not true.)

My apologies to the OP for being off topic.

Angela, I don't know what's going on with my PM box. Some people can get through, some can't. Feel free to email me if that happens again.

I said SHOULD. No, sadly, it's not the way it is. It's the way it SHOULD be.

Qira's breeder is now putting that article in all the puppy books that go home w/his pups. It's a great article that talks about the physical considerations, but like Ed just pointed out, there are more than just physical concerns, which is my biggest issue w/knee-jerk spaying and neutering w/out all the facts. I just think there should be a good reason to alter an animal, and a really good reason to alter an animal before it's mature. I think vets have failed the general population of owners, convincing them that all their issues will be solved with this one simple surgery, and again, like Ed just said, it's not the case. Other problems can arise. Once again, it's all about balancing risks/rewards.

 Quote: jenni williams

.... I just think there should be a good reason to alter an animal, and a really good reason to alter an animal before it's mature. I think vets have failed the general population of owners, convincing them that all their issues will be solved with this one simple surgery, and again, like Ed just said, it's not the case. Other problems can arise. Once again, it's all about balancing risks/rewards.

Page one:

 Quote: jenni williams

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

And the difference between these two is pretty much the cause of three pages of posts here (and seven PMs to me).

What I personally am taking away from all this is the intention to avoid "never" and "always" in most of my posts.

P.S. I too got a "full in-box" message when I tried to PM you, Jenni. I am wondering if it's possibly a problem on MY end (the sender's end)...... maybe if we have no room for the "sent" copy, then it can't go?

I just erased 2 full pages of PMs. I get PMs daily (and have gotten a few today :grin , so it very well could be lack of "sent" space. Ah, everyone's so popular.

Along with banning "always" and "never," one other thing to take away: "when growth is complete" is a bit too open for interpretation...as in the Yorkie/Mastiff example I gave. Should've read something like "Most of us will agree that while exceptional situations may arise, it's generally best to give the dog as long as possible before altering to allow for as much physical maturity as possible so as to avoid many of the potential problems." Wordy, but I think it better covers more of the bases.

Poor OP; he didn't have a clue what he was getting himself into .

 Quote: jenni williams

I just erased 2 full pages of PMs. I get PMs daily (and have gotten a few today :grin , so it very well could be lack of "sent" space. Ah, everyone's so popular.

Along with banning "always" and "never," one other thing to take away: "when growth is complete" is a bit too open for interpretation...as in the Yorkie/Mastiff example I gave. Should've read something like "Most of us will agree that while exceptional situations may arise, it's generally best to give the dog as long as possible before altering to allow for as much physical maturity as possible so as to avoid many of the potential problems." Wordy, but I think it better covers more of the bases.

Right, *most* of the bases.

As Ed stated about the article cited earlier: "So people who are spaying to reduce aggression would be advised to do it when the dog is YOUNG - 6 to 10 months old."

It's a big and not-simple subject.