Well if we are speaking only for ourselves---I would not castrate if possible. Having said that I castrated my (then 12 year old) daughters dog when he was 7 mths old and never regretted it. He was going stiff legged and looking as if he would be itchy with other dogs.

He died aged 16 and was on no medication until the last few months.

Now she is a tad older and has two large entire males one of them has coped with two bitches being in season with her in a caravan, the other has just had the implant to see what happens.

Each case has to be taken on its own merit IMO. Some pet dogs might be better done yesterday, others better left.

Your original post didn't read as if it was just about your dogs?

rune

Rescues I have every sympathy with castrating and insisting on it.

I think it's important to remember, when using for example Norway as an example, that we have ALOT less people and alot less dogs than for example the UK.
You won't find thirteen dogs living on the same street etc. Therefore, the chance of "accident" litters is smaller. But ofc you have idiots that breed for money and fun, just in a smaller scale. Things are more spread out (we ofc. have big cities and towns but still, not the same scale).
Norway also has a law which states that ALL dogs have to be on the leash between April 1st and August 20th.

Routine castration might be a way of helping with solving already excisting problems, but it's definitely not a MUST to keep these issues away, as yes, Norway is a good example of.

Julie, is the leash law between April and August for the reason of nesting birds?

Ok, point taken that my first post implied a wider conversation than just our own dogs…

I think that, in situations where there are dogs roaming free - as in eastern Europe - spaying and neutering them is the only way to go, obviously. It's that or euthanise them, and neutering them is at least a humane option.

With UK rescues, I really feel quite strongly that neutering tiny puppies is disgusting and should be illegal. I know of litters of 7wk old puppies which have been neutered, and instances where an entire litter was recalled back to the rescue at that age to be neutered (ie 12 wks). To me, that is really awful - it is within the socialisation period. Neutering before and after puberty have very different effects on the personality of the dog - think about human castrati, as an example!

Adult dogs in kennels are already stressed and frequently have just gone through losing their owners or being strays - then they are kennelled in a stressful environment, being scared, bored or frustrated most of the day. That is already a huge amount for any dog to deal with. THEN add into the mix major abdominal surgery (for a bitch) and imagine the poor dog recovering from that surgery on its own, in a kennel, without an owner, and with all those other stressors…

I wish more rescues would allow dogs to go to their new homes and have a policy of wanting to see proof of neutering within 6-8 mnths, so the dog has had an opportunity to settle in. There are some which do this.

These days there is a REALLY EFFECTIVE 'morning after jab' which dogs can get from the vet for weeks after mating. There's simply no need for people to end up with litters they don't want. (You would be amazed how many pet owners don't know about the morning after jab and get very stressed at the thought of owning an intact dog, just in case something should happen.)

Finally, breeding from a rescue dog would never be a good idea - because you don't know what is behind it, what temperaments or health issues its parents had and so on. But some of those rescue dogs might need their testosterone to enable them to feel more confident - and so to stop them from becoming fear aggressive. Neuter a dog which is already lacking in confidence and a worrier and you can easily end up with a fear-aggressive dog. Hormones serve more purposes than purely reproduction.

There ARE surgical procedures which vets can carry out which prevent conception but leave the animal with its hormones: Tubes tied, vasectomies, hysterectomy where ovaries are left in… Personally, I wouldn't want these for my dog because it's still altering the animal for human benefit - but when the alternative is whipping out the gonads of every dog, regardless of whether it would benefit from the hormones, and without knowing much about the individual animal - then I think this is a better idea. It at least leaves new owners with a choice about removing those hormones or not. I wish vets could be more flexible about the range of neutering options available.

To be clear: What I'm most against is the unthinking assumption that you 'should' neuter your dog.

I'm against the owners of male dogs reaching adolescence and finding their dog is a hooligan, and neutering their dog to make life easier. I'm especially dubious of these folk, because most of the time, yes, the hormones are playing a role, but it's nothing which good training, applied consistently, wouldn't have fixed. And, as I said above regarding aggression, the same goes here - if there are lines which are so hyper and distractible, that they need to be neutered before they are trainable, then really, we should be asking whether they should continue to be bred. (And, if we neuter so early, as a matter of course, then we will never know which dogs would be so excitable without neutering - or which would have been aggressive without neutering.)

Similarly, I'm 'against' the owners of bitches disliking blood on their floor every 6 months and neutering after the 1st season for that reason.

In my eyes, the decision to neuter a dog should be about what is in THE DOG's best interests, not what makes life easier for the owner.

And if we're talking about what we do, I don't neuter male dogs at all unless there is a health reason for it. Female dogs, I don't spay until they are around age 6/7yrs old. (Again, unless there is a health reason which occurs before that.) I only spay then because the risk of pyo begins to get too great after that point.

My vet does keyhole ovariectomies, so only removes the ovaries and leaves the uterus in. This is much less invasive than a full surgical spay. This op is more common on mainland Europe. There have been no instances of pyo afterwards, since the uterus needs the hormones from the ovaries for that to occur - without the hormones, the uterus just shrivels up inside.

If bitches are included in this discussion, for me it's a no brainer. I know of so many dogs that have suffered really badly from pyo/phantoms that I wouldn't think twice about neutering a bitch for the sake of future health - nothing to do with mess and inconvenience

Really? Even though research shows that bitches which are left intact (to the age of 6yrs) live longer than bitches which are spayed?

Just as human women live longer than human men, the reason for this is known to be ovary exposure: Ovary exposure is what enables women to live longer than men. The same effect has been found in pet dogs. The incidence of pyo is not great until after the age of 6 yrs. (Of course there is always a risk, but I think the benefit of the ovaries remaining in far outweighs that risk.)

Research on ovary exposure:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...5/?tool=pubmed

More readable summary of the above: http://www.gpmcf.org/respectovaries.html

Phantoms, it depends on the severity of them. Most phantoms are relatively mild, and it's more that the owner dislikes the changes in the bitch's behaviour - which, to me, again falls in the category of spaying for human interests. But if a bitch is having severe phantoms, then yes, spaying would seem to be in her interests. However - usually they're not that extreme.

There are of course, risks to spaying - the most common side effect being lifelong incontinence, requiring drugs till death to manage. Spaying later at least ensures fewer years of these drugs, and bitches are less likely to become incontinent if they are older when spayed - it's immature bitches which are most likely to develop spay incontinence.

For every research paper saying one thing there is another saying the opposite, when I was looking into these things for Ben getting done (not that I had a choice but I wanted to be informed) I was reading papers that were saying both dogs and bitches lived and average 2 years longer if they were neutered/spayed

It seems the evidence out there is contradictory and confusing

Runningrabbit: Yes, the law is there to protect wildlife, like newborn manimals in the woods etc. I think some people mistake it to be there for dogs not to bother people, but that's not the case.

One of my aquiantances competes on a national level in agility with her dogs, and she had them spayed.. ONLY because then she doesn't have the issue with the bitch not being able to start competitions when she's in heat. This is completely wrong to me! She had it done to her youngest when she was about 11 months. Healthy dog, nothing wrong with it.
For me this is on the same level of spaying "because it's so healthy for the dog", "it might prevent future problems" etc. No actually, it's even worse, it's pure egoism because YOU want to compete in a sport.

Would you put yourself through major surgery for a problem that didn't already excist? If not, then why do it to your dog?

Until we have national data from vets that can state how many dogs are truly affected by pyo, phantoms whose quality of life is badly affected and how many are prematurely put to sleep through hormonal imbalances as well as the true figure to show true statistical data in respect of longevity and not based on limited studies, then, for me, yes, really, I will go on what I see and have known from experience.

For every study conclusion there is, at the moment, a study conclusion that refutes it. We need clearer, more positive evidence. Until that time comes, we each have to do what we feel is best in the interest of our own dogs

I've discussed this topic in quite some length with three or four different vets I know now and every one of them has said that the risk of this happening is usually when the dog is prone to UTI prior to spaying. I know the vet I use now always looks at the medical history when spaying is requested. Again, anecdotal as we have no national statistics on which to base the assumptions

Another link with a list of studies - this time showing that spaying and neutering do not reduce aggression in dogs:
http://saveourdogs.net/wp/wp-content...er-in-dogs.pdf