Please Neuter

I'm assuming you're talking about humans, and I agree. You seem to forget what I do for a living

Having reproductive organs is a responsibility most people can't handle.

However, human rights dictate we should keep them, and that I do agree with.

However, a dog? Most people don't have a frigging clue. And there's TONS of educational information out there. When you work in society you realise which bits filter in and which bits don't.

You only care about the info you're interested in and to most people, dogs are something nice to have in the home.

Therefore, ill always promote spaying and neutering and if you bother to educate yourself otherwise, then good. Then you pass the test and can own an intact dog

Regardless, my bitch is spayed and that's my choice. However, I think I'd pass the test to own an intact bitch should I want to

I don't think there should be laws to spay, but I certainly believe it should be promoted and people should opt out of that properganda by doing their own research. If you don't research or educate yourself to make an informed choice, then your loss. And I'll tell you to spay your dog.

Too many accidents, strays, rehomes, impulse buys, clueless owners. When that changes perhaps people should be offered the courtesy of not being treated like a moron who allows their dog to breed willy nilly.

Except those of us who work in the pet industry with the general pet owning public know what happens with most of those dogs who you give education to. They end up breeding because someone told them their dog is just to cute and should have puppies! And that one litter becomes two and then five and then you have a crap ton of poorly bred pug puppies everywhere with health problems.

It's a fine line between giving the information and really pushing the realities of bringing those lives into this world with their crap bred walking health problems.

And without being... Err generalising. Most people don't really care about the education side. They just want a bloody dog.

I'd rather they just owned a desexed bloody dog.

If they want to get into dogs as a hobby, then they earn the right to own an intact dog.

See where I'm going?

Spay spay spay spay.

If you want to be in the exclusive non spaying educated lot, then I will throw a blummin party otherwise. Do it!

Then maybe (maybe) people wont have so many friggin puppies!

Also, throw out tons of info about why not to breed. Once that sinks in, people can do what they want maybe give it.... What 10000000 years?

Nope, I'm talking about dogs. See where assuming gets you? Vasectomies and ovary-sparing spays are real things in DOGS, and are much healthier. It still results in a sterilised dog, which is the only reason you seem to be advocating spaying and neutering. You seem to forget there are health implications involved when you remove important hormones. I don't know what you do for a living and I'm not entirely sure I care.


Funny, many people have intact bitches. Or bitches with ovaries and no uterus. And that's THEIR choice.

One of my dogs has testicles. That's MY choice. The other one doesn't. That wasn't my choice. He will likely need testosterone injections in the future.

I agree with this, scare tactics in most cases are the way to go but yeah if your dog is a pet & nothing else ... It should be spayed or neutered.

I'm one for uneducated owners opting to spay/neuter is better that leaving the dogs intact.

I receive calls all the time (even one today) asking questions about why their intact female dog has bloody discharge, if they need to wear anything, should they just keep them outside during this, or they don't know that this means they can get preggers. Or how about the person who assumed that their littermate dogs (one boy, one girl) couldn't reproduce. People are stupid. Some people just need to be told that this is the best option for their situation. If they have additional questions, fine, information is great and I would love for everyone to be able to make informed decisions. But the majority of our clients just want to be told what to do, when to do it and not worry about the extra stuff.

Wow, someone's sense of humour left the building! Grab your coats! Jeeeeeeez. If you were my other half I'd ask if you were having your period but you're not, so ill skip over that.

Think you're being a bit naive thinking most people care about dogs health. If they did they wouldn't let them stray or breed them

I still think you're missing my point entirely.

It's not about freedom of choice. It's about risk assessment. And understanding joe public.

I would LOVE a world were dog owners were all responsible and kept their intact dogs healthy and didn't allow them to breed. They aren't and they do. Most byb's are totally ignorant, they're not monsters.

I think the health implications of spaying vs over population and breeding warrant promoting spaying.

And..... The funny thing is, your argument isn't making me change my mind... Why do you think it is going to stop people breeding their dogs?

It's not. So lets just stop them being able to breed. Easy peasy.

Lol, your response is so venomous it actually made me do a lol a proper one, not an Internet one

Because it's impossible for a dog to reproduce when males are vasectomised and females don't have a uterus. Absolutely impossible. Sure, they can go through the motions, but it will not make puppies. THAT is why it will stop people breeding their dogs.

I'm so confused.

So you agree dogs should be altered, you're just debating how they should be done.......?

The how doesn't interest me as much as the just blooming get it done. I'm not going to drain myself offering alternatives to people who probably don't care, and many can't afford it... Let them decide that themselves.

Or I'll leave you to fly that flag

I'm not so sure you'd pass that test you want to give yourself

I want the hormone-makers left in place. But the boy half of the seed needs to not get to the girl and/or the girl needs to not have a place for the baby to grow.

There's a big difference between ovaries and testicles being left in but unable to reproduce, and taking full organ systems that produce important chemicals out completely.

I find it hilarious that you're agreeing with me and arguing with me because you can't comprehend what I'm saying. Also, you have an intact male.

Yep and yep

I think it is great that responsible dog people can leave their dogs intact. My family almost always had intact dogs. However I am seeing it more and more often being presented in a way that I believe is dangerous.

I agree that 90% of the dog owning public needs their dogs altered; I think vasectomies and OSS are nice options for some people, but I also think that the majority of owners also don't need to be dealing with hormone related behaviors. Most people can't get their altered-young dogs under control.

Of course you can train around the hormones. People can and do and it is grand. Most people aren't going to put that much effort into training their dog. I enjoy training, and I still wanted to grab Gusto by the throat more than once when his hormones were kicking in.

People want to go to the dog park and stand around while their dogs play. They want to put their dog out in the yard and not worry about it while they cook dinner. They want to walk the dog off leash to the mailbox and not worry about it wandering off after the scent of a female in heat. And they don't want to work to make those things happen.

I agree that traditional spay/neuters are the ideal default for most owners. Those who are likely to research further into the other options are those who are most likely to be able to judge if they can handle those options. I don't support false information (on either side - if one more person tells me hormones don't affect behavior, I'm moving in with them for a particular 3 days of the month), but I also don't think encouraging average owners to leave their dogs intact is the answer.

I'm not arguing, you're the one who jumped on my responses.

I know what goes where, I just didnt understand what you were writing, I was so distracted by the tone I read it in (it appears very angry and zomg I'm having a srs meltdown). I find it hard to take in the message when the the tone is so.... Off.

And again, I think you're missing my point completely

It's not about people owning intact dogs when they are capable of looking after them and being responsible for those parts.

Read what Sara said.

I don't care HOW they alter them. That really is of no consequence.

And honestly, if people are doing the research to that advanced level, I'm pretty sure they'd be responsible with their dog.

And yes, I own an intact male, he's only 9 months old, and if I never show him again, they'll be chopped off at some point in the future too but if they weren't, then I know I'm not average joe public dog owner, for one.

They're ugly, I can't face looking at them getting older and wrinklier and more saggy.

I'm just grabbing a quote from you BB, this isn't directed just at you!

I have no issues with people altering their dogs be it if they've done the research or not. What I DO have a problem with is lying to the public "for their own good" and having it rather hard if you aren't completely computer savvy or happen to have a 'good' vet to get information about spaying and neutering.

If you go and say "I want to alter my dog" and don't care about anything else to look deeper that's fine, it's probably for the best (though I still agree with Sael about alternative s/n options) . But saying that because people weren't able to find the minuscule amount of information out there about the pros and cons of altering or were told by their vet, who they trust on their dogs health, or by the million and one flyers passed out from every organization that you should ALWAYS alter a dog unless it's being bred? I find that just wrong. If they care enough to try and look or ask they should be given information. They should be EDUCATED. They should be told the options, they should be given the resources. That's what I'm trying to say.

I think the mass amount of misinformation out there about altering IS an issue. The idea that taking out the hormones does nothing but good things and only prevents terrible things is misleading and does in fact end up hurting dogs in my opinion. And maybe, just maybe if people had more information given to them about what a heat looks like and how to take care of an intact dog rather than just a "DON'T DO IT" people might just happen to become dog owners that could, quite easily own and care for an intact dog.

I find it wrong that the women that came into my store was telling me how she did a lot of research and decided to keep her large breed puppy not fixed until she was at least 18 months but was starting to worry that because her vet, the store people and most of the things online said it would be the worst thing ever. That's not right. Someone who tries to put in the effort shouldn't be getting scared away because she's worried she's going to end up hurting her dog.

I may have more faith in people than a lot of you, I don't necessarily think that's wrong or right. But I do know that the bad stories stick with us. Jo down the street breeding his mutt because she's cute is the story we remember. Mary up the block though that's never had a litter, never bred a dog but always had her dogs intact (known or unknown to us) doesn't get a blip on the radar. I know as many, if not more people that have kept intact dogs with no issue and no puppies and they aren't DOG PEOPLE. They are just people.

So I guess what I'm saying is that no, not everyone or maybe even the majority of people should or want to own an intact dog and I'm cool with that. But I do think the information should be more readily available and lying to them about the realities of altering both pro and con just sets up a self fulfilling prophesy because they remain ignorant, and not necessarily by choice.

:hail: :hail: :hail:

I would like to see vasectomies and ovariectomies become more popular, but they aren't right now, and also they are rather expensive.

Some people freak out just at the normal price of a spay or neuter - that's why low cost spay/neuter programs exist.

I doubt they will ever become popular with the general public.

BTW Beanie, ovariectomies = full spay when it comes to hormones. I think you're thinking about hysterectomies, aka ovary sparing spay.

I think the alternative sterilizations might catch on more, though, and I hope they do. I know of one shelter in Canada that vasectomized a dog instead of neutering when the rescue asked - no arguments, no drama, just "sure, we'll get him on the schedule tomorrow" - and imo that is a huuuuge step.

If I do a hysterectomy with Snipe it'll be about $400 vs $200 for a regular spay, but a large part of that is that we have to go to a specialist. For reference, the specialist charges $350 for a regular spay. If regular vets could do them, I'm sure the price would drop. Heck vasectomies might even be cheaper because I bet they take less time than a full neuter...

The vet that did Blossom's hysterectomy was exceedingly reasonable, and is a highly regarded repro vet. I was VERY lucky in that respect. A traditional spay for Blossom at my choice of vet in the city was going to cost me almost $700, excluding pre-op blood work. At Dr. Greer's, I paid $532 all said and done, including pre-op blood work and an echocardiogram, a microchip, and post-op lazer therapy (for pain)...and I only paid $69 extra dollars for the ovary-sparing spay. This is for removing the uterus down to the cervix, and is the same fee she charges for a female in heat/pregnant.

I actually saved money on my dog's hysterectomy. I was extremely fortunate to have access to this vet like I did. She's very much "pro" alternative sterilization procedures and I feel that she makes a point not to charge a prohibitive amount for them. She also told me that vasectomies are "so simple, SO SO simple!"

I only hope such an attitude catches on, that's all I can say!

A regular spay at the clinic where I work is $400, maybe a little more. I haven't asked about hysterectomies, since I don't have a bitch.

I asked the specialist about how she charges and she said the only difference is it takes just a little more of her time to do the hysterectomy than a traditional spay since she has to be more careful about removing all the uterine tissue. It uses the same tools and everything, so you just pay for the additional time the vet spends.