Do you like dogs with docked tails?

[tessa_s212]

No it was only me, and it was only you and GO. (tho I think GO and I understood eachothers points and while we don't agree respect each other's opinion.

Well, the only thing I was going by was your statement, which suggested that it was a greater number than just two. *sigh* If I misunderstood it or you conveyed it wrong, my reply was nothing more of genuine opinion with lack of any disrespect. If you took it that way, then I am sorry, but there is just truly little to go on when making that claim.

Umm I have worked in a shelter.. my child hood best friend's mom has worked at our local shelter for as long as I can remember. I know lots of horrors. But they are due to irrisponsible pet ownership.. not the fact that the animals still have all the parts they were born with.

I never said they were but I would hazard people are less vigilant.. simply because such vigilance is not needed with s/n dogs. Not everyone WANTS to put forth that much effort.

And if those people understand that they were not capable of maintaining an intact dog so instead decided to spay/neuter, those puppies of those dogs wouldn't land in that situation.

Its not about effort, it is about being reasonable enough to understand that accidents happen, no matter how vigilant you are. Not all things in life go 100% according to plan. Many people that s/n, wishing to do the responsible thing, don't even chance it. I think by covering all ground and possibilities to prevent litters IS being vigilant and putting forth effort, even if it equates to money spent and helping the animal recover, rather than managing and hoping for no accidents the rest of its life.

 

[Dekka]

Yes and I state again.. I am not anti s/n.... :/

Accidents happen. So do deaths on the vets table. It goes both ways.

Yes some people know they are not likely going to be able to put forth enough effort to look after intact dogs so they get them s/n. That is a responsible decision. But it is for the owners benefit.. they can put in less effort. Trust me its much MUCH easier to s/n that it is to maintain and look after an intact dog for the rest of its life. Does that make it wrong? NO. But it is about what is easiest for the owner...

 

[Doberluv]

I will never own a pet dog or cat that is not spayed or neutered. I may not do it as early on as I have in the past. And then I'll have to be very diligent. It's for my convenience so that I don't have to be hyper vigilant all the time. I don't believe the health benefits are a super strong point for me anymore as I've read of some more common and more serious health problems in neutered/spayed animals. Why I will always s/n is so I (personally) don't have to worry if my dog would go visit the neighbor's dog, which it shouldn't anyhow, but what if? And of course, the other hassles with intact dogs, females especially....diapers, other dogs coming around, pms LOL....whatever...I don't want to deal with it.

I do believe for the general public that s/n is over-all the only way to fly because the vast majority of people, at least in this country are not careful at all with their dogs. Where I live, people have intact dogs and let them wander as a matter of course. It's disgustingly irresponsible and makes me sick that those dogs are out there impregnating all kinds of females and producing more unwanted, homeless puppies. Just sick.

So, in theory, no...one shouldn't have to automatically s/n his/her dogs. But unfortunately, theory doesn't apply very well to the general public and you can tell that is true by our catastropic over population of dogs and cats. So in general, with some exceptions, of course, I do believe in s/n of all pet dogs and cats.

 

[tessa_s212]

Yes and I state again.. I am not anti s/n.... :/

Accidents happen. So do deaths on the vets table. It goes both ways.

Yes some people know they are not likely going to be able to put forth enough effort to look after intact dogs so they get them s/n. That is a responsible decision. But it is for the owners benefit.. they can put in less effort. Trust me its much MUCH easier to s/n that it is to maintain and look after an intact dog for the rest of its life. Does that make it wrong? NO. But it is about what is easiest for the owner...

I think it can be said with almost 100% that there are far more deaths caused by accidental or purposeful irresponsible breeders than deaths on a vets table due to s/n. It may go both way, but it is leaning largely to one side.

You continue to say what is easiest, I say what is the responsible thing. No matter how vigilant, accidents can happen. To be the most responsible owner I can be, NOT about the easy way out, is to s/n. If you agree that accidents can happen, then this shouldn't be an argument you can't agree with. I will prevent it from 100% from ever happening in order to do the responsible thing, instead of just try my best and hope it doesn't happen. It might be easier than life long trying and hoping, but the easy aspect is not what influences my decision, it is to be 100% responsible to prevent litters.

 

[Dekka]

purposeful irresponsible breeders

are not likely going to s/n. That is like saying millers would s/n all their dogs.

Accidents can happen.. but how many pups do you know of that were TRUE accidents. As in not plausibly foreseen?

 

[Dizzy]

are not likely going to s/n. That is like saying millers would s/n all their dogs.

Accidents can happen.. but how many pups do you know of that were TRUE accidents. As in not plausibly foreseen?

Erm... mine.

 

[Gustav]

Erm... mine.

Yeah, yeah.. Her mother was just some tarty bit that was gaggin for it.. You're not fooling anyone..

This is all starting to sound like an episode of the Jeremy Kyle show..

 

[Romy]

lol at this thread

Tessa, you and Dekka are agreeing. Both of you agree spay/neuter is a good thing for most people. It makes managing dog reproduction much more convenient.

con·ven·ience (kən-vēn'yəns) Pronunciation Key
n.
1. The quality of being suitable to one's comfort, purposes, or needs: the convenience of living near shops, schools, and libraries.

2. Personal comfort or advantage: services that promote the customer's convenience.

3. Something that increases comfort or saves work: household conveniences such as a washing machine, an electric can opener, and disposable diapers. See Synonyms at amenity.

4. A suitable or agreeable time: Fill out the form at your earliest convenience.

5. Chiefly British A lavatory.

Nowhere in that definition are the words "irresponsible", "lazy", "cop out" etc.

Spaying and neutering animals is convenient. It can also be responsible. It can also be irresponsible, as in the case GO talked about where the owners and vet decided to perform the operation on an older animal despite the risks and lost her.

That being said, spay and neuter, just like cropping and docking, are individual choices. They shouldn't be left to government to decide. Those decisions should stay in the hands of the people who have the dogs in their hands.

For what it's worth, I know of only one "oops" litter and the owner of the dogs later admitted she let them do it on purpose because she was curious as to what beagle blue heeler puppies would look like. I know of a lot of "oops" litters being born, but they all happened because the owners didn't care to contain their dogs and had mentality that they could just sell the puppies for $50 when they were born. Like most issues with dogs, it's an ownership issue. Either you are responsible or not. Leaving an animal intact or neutering it does not make you irresponsible or responsible either way, it is just a different method of dealing with the issue, and one requires a lot more work for the human.

 

[joce]

I agree that altering is for the persons convince. Of course I would never send a rescue out unaltered,even large breed pups are altered early(which makes me cringe) because I would rather them not make more pups than them loose a couple years later in life.

My dobe was never altered. Honestly it hasn't been much more work for me. There wasn't even much of an issue when my female corgi was still intact-just kept them separated like we usually do anyway

I didn't set out to not have byron neutered. But he had a lump removed as a pup and I did not like how he came out of it. after looking at all the medical sides there's more chance something goes wrong from altering/early altering than leaving a dog intact and caring for it properly.

and we did alter my corgi purely for our convince. We wanted to be able to let her loose to go potty and couldn't do that while she was in heat. So she got fixed. Another reason I like males better is not having to worry about diapers!

It always baffles me people say a spay(which is a huuuge surgery) is ok to do but not a crop which is removing some ear skin?

And don't read this wrong-I do think 95% of the people out there have no idea how to care for an intact dog-but that speaks more in general of americas dog owners and not really it being a hard thing to do.

I still wonder all the time if my ginger would have lived longer if she hadn't been altered so young. Vet told me not to worry about it but her cancer was what early altered dogs get(just usually at a younger age).

 

[Dizzy]

Yeah, yeah.. Her mother was just some tarty bit that was gaggin for it.. You're not fooling anyone..

This is all starting to sound like an episode of the Jeremy Kyle show..

Well.... she is a scouser!

 

[Vintage Boxers]

Dekka--if it means anything I AGREE with you, but am glad that irresponsible people do s/n at the same time. (not labeling everyone as irresponsible, that is not what was intended)

i also think that some people like to dictate, i also think that bringing up shelters is great, but at the same time if those owners were as diligent and dedicated as the ones that DON'T abandon or let their intact animals run free, we would have less issue..thing is, NOBODY HOLDS THE OWNER RESPONSIBLE! Not only that, but it is sad to think of but in the US people seriously have to learn that we have become a throwaway society, which has led us to where we are now..in MANY aspects!

 

[Dekka]

lol Thanks guys.. that was what I was trying to say.

 

[Sweet72947]

I have a question. Do you think it is hard on a dog to have a sex drive and not be able to do anything about it? Dogs are individuals and some may have less sex drive than others, but I wonder. I knew a border collie mix at FOHA a few years ago who came in intact, and quickly got the nickname "The Mad Humper" because if you took him out of his run he latched on to your leg and would not stop for anything. He would also hump other dogs and objects. He was neutered before adoption, and the people who adopted him said in their update that after a few weeks he finally calmed down and barely humped anything anymore.

Sometimes I think its kinder for dogs who aren't going to be bred to be s/n because I'd think it would be annoying to have those urges all the time and not be able to satisfy them!

 

[Dekka]

Perhaps in that case yes, but most dogs don't seem to be that way. Kaiden is 5 and has never even tried to hump anything than the 2 bitches he has bred. So in his case I don't think its an issue for him.

As I said there are 'few' reasons. A dog with an over abundance of sex drive.. that is a problem, even for a breeding dog as they may only get to have sex a few times in their whole lives.

 

[dr2little]

There's a reason that shelter population INTACT intake numbers are so dramatically larger. Food, water, sex....it is absolutely unnatural to keep an animal intact and not allow it to breed.

This is today at our local shelter - same every day of the year. Far too many intact animals wandering in search of SEX!!

http://www.calgary.ca/portal/server...erid=2&in_hi_ObjectID=267&in_hi_OpenerMode=2&

Stats speak for themselves.

Sorry if this post is out of place, I only read that last few pages but am a very strong believer in speuter. Responsible owners of intact animals are sadly in the minority.

 

[Dekka]

There's a reason that shelter population INTACT intake numbers are so dramatically larger. Food, water, sex....it is absolutely unnatural to keep an animal intact and not allow it to breed.

Is it because they are intact or because people who can't be bothered to get their dogs fixed can't be bothered to worry about where they run off too?

 

[dr2little]

Is it because they are intact or because people who can't be bothered to get their dogs fixed can't be bothered to worry about where they run off too?

I'm not sure what you mean but I believe you sort of answered your own question and really illustrated my point. Intact dogs do wander in search of sex and too many owners of intact animals can't be bothered to worry about where they run off too.

Note the percentage of intact VS speutered in any shelter anywhere in the world and you'll see what I mean.

Not everyone is as responsible as you are and that's such a shame, but a fact that proves the case for speuter time and time again.

 

[ACooper]

For the record (since sweet brought it up) I know more than a couple "fixed" humpers. I mean they have been fixed for years and still hump any and everything they can, period.

That's all, over and out, LOL

 

[MafiaPrincess]

Cider has been spayed since she was 6 months old. she can be awfully inappropriate and endlessly humpy unless removed from the situation.

 

[dr2little]

Yup, nutless maniacs abound....I've seen them tie with intact females too. Even my little Tinker used to hump Sophie's head if she thought it'd get her to move out of her desired carpet sunray.

The big difference between intact animals and speutered humpers is that the latter do not wander due to the natural and drive for sex