I just found this: http://www.spca.cambridgeweb.net/neutering.html

And the reasons vets don't do vasectomies are reasons I'm not worried about. Hmm

 Quote:

Q. Why don’t veterinarians perform vasectomies on dogs instead of neutering them?

A. This is a frequently asked question. The reason we don’t perform vasectomies instead of castration on male dogs or cats is that none of the advantages of neutering would be obtained.

Um, the one BIG advantage of a vasectomy (no unwanted breeding) WOULD still be accomplished... what a silly response.

I believe the US spay neuter movement (as we know it today) was originally launched in the 60s solely to combat the pet overpopulation issue (which had been slowly brewing for a century). All the other "advantages" of the procedure were tacked on to help sell the case for routine sterilization. Vets and behaviorists touting a long list of health and behavioral benefits certainly made the argument a convincing one for the average pet owner - so convincing in fact that most people today rattle off 'lower aggression, less marking, no messy heat cycles and less wandering' as their main reasons for s/n their pets (not saying those same people would be responsible enough to avoid oops litters, but the point is that all that "marketing" has become so ubiquitous that the original intent, and any DISadvantages, have been second tiered.).

I believe in spay neuter programs (NOT laws) and I firmly believe that many pet owners today are not responsible enough to control their intact animals (for reproductive AND behavior reasons). But I don't agree with the DEGREE to which this movement has been implemented (shelters sterilizing pups at mere weeks old, vets advising s/n of giant breeds under 1 y/o, etc.). We should all be willing and aware enough to do the research necessary to make up our own minds on this issue, but I think a great many responsible, caring people are bullied into it, or at the very least, not wholly informed.

~Natalya

Aren't vets brilliant?

And those of us who choose to keep our dogs intact even when they aren't meant for breeding are "irresponsible." When I was 15 years old our family German shepherd had an accidental litter with the neighbor's collie. I am now 26 and have never been without at least 1 and have had up to 6 intact females, and have also had 3 intact males, and have yet to have another "oops," or any litters at all, for that matter. But I am irresponsible. I currently have 3 females and 1 male, and none will be fixed unless for health problems and unless I decide that my GSD puppy will be bred after she is titled and health cleared, I will not have any litters. It really isn't that hard to do. Why does this make me irresponsible?

That is a rhetorical question, by the way. I know I am not an irresponsible dog owner. I just have to rant about the vets and their "fix-a-pet" obsession.

ETA: I agree that most pet owners are not responsible enough to keep their intact animals from reproducing ... my little rant was not about spay/neuter in general ... just the attitude toward those of us who do not do it but do control our animals

Edited by Elisabeth Barber (12/13/2008 01:25 PM)
Edit reason: afterthought

Gotcha, Elisabeth. I pay an extra $150 for rabies b/c Caleb's intact. He is current b/c he's more likely to bite someone...the other intact boys just don't have rabies shots yet. It's ridiculous to penalize someone for making a personal choice, IMO. I have 3 intact males and 2 unaltered females...and I'm about to have 3. No "oops" litters yet. I have at times had 6 intact males on the property...still no issues. It does make me wonder why I can handle 7-8 intact dogs and some people have "oops" litter with 2!

An extra $150?! Do you have to register him with the city, or what is the extra fee for? I can't imagine. Dog laws really are getting out of hand, especially for the poor pit bulls.

"Intact fee." It's a county fee. Which is only part of the reason the county thinks all the rest are dead, lol. I'm not joking.

Sorry, Elisabeth-Caleb is a GSD...I forget not everyone is as obsessed with my dogs as I am.

Ah, lol I did wonder after I posted. Especially after seeing your post about the new dog you are getting.

I, too, tend to forget people aren't as obsessed with my own dogs as I am. I'll be talking to family in ND and use a dog's name and they always like "who?!" lol

That fee is ridiculous. The county doesn't know about my dogs either. I honestly don't even know for sure if I am supposed to have them registered, but kind of think that I am. No one is up to date on Rabies (shh!), but Roka and Heida will have to be when they are older in order to compete. *sigh* (they still won't be registered ... my dogs are none of the county's stinkin' business)

Yeah, it's wonderful that we "irresponsible" dog owners with intact and unaltered dogs pay so much more than those with altered dogs. In Gillette, WY for instance, it was $3 for tags for an altered dog. For intact/breedable dogs, it was $10-$15, just for tags to register your pet with the city. Just to register with the city.

Vets have pushed the fact that all pets should be altered and in doing so that you'll save yourself from more than accidental litters. I have done a lot of reading and asked many questions here and had come to the conclusion that I didn't want to s/n any of my dogs until they were older and grown.

We had originally planned on finding a male for our GSD but, looking at her lines more(lots of working lines, even has Natan v Busecker Schloss, but also has show lines-mostly on her mothers side) we decided against it. That and some breeder in MT said that she is a mediocre dog, just by looking at her lineage.

We also had wanted to breed our lab, but then came the thyroid problem. The vet didn't know if it was hereditary or not and then later-retesting his levels-says that it is. Funny to me, because I had contacted the breeder and she said that this is the first time that any kind of major health problem was reported to her(granted people kept in contact). She has never had any health problems with any of her dogs, including Otto's mom.

Having a vet tell me to spay my St. at such a young age and try to push it on me bothered me. I am going to wait to spay her. With the others-have to think about it a little more.

I'd like to thank everyone for thier opinions and information. It's greatly appreciated

I know in an older thread I read a link to a study on spaying and the accompaning side effects, as well as the benefits gained for the long term health of the dog. If I remember rightly, spaying too early has higher incidences of a multitude of problamatic issues, and spaying after the 2nd heat but before 2 years old showed definitive health gains in later years. Ummm, I think I have that right. Aaaa, try searching somewhere around the spring of 07, anyways that time frame for the thread. It was a good study (possibly) out of Cornell I think.

Anybody have any studies on the instances of intact males (or vasectomized dogs lol) and later life health issues?

If I'm not learning, I'm not paying attention.
Randy