PETA stole dog and immediately euthanized her

[ponderingturtle]

I'm just going to address one small thing - someone wondered why trap/neuter/release is considered viable for cats but not for dogs. It's very simple and known to most people who've lived in rural areas - dogs are pack animals and cats aren't. Dogs don't even need to be feral to form a pack, they just need to be left loose. I lived most of my life on an island where this happened regularly. Pet dogs would run in packs at night and attack livestock.

Having your livestock slaughtered is far different than having the wild rodent population depleted, and has resulted in a lot of dead dogs over the years. It's hard to explain to the kids that their beloved Fido's dead because he ripped the throat out of Fluffy the Sheep.

And no one likes song birds, let me sleep in I say! Best they all get driven to extinction.

 

[tuco]

I agree. And the benefits extend further than reducing/controlling aggression.

In general, I am suspicious of surgery offered as a "cure" for unwanted behavior for a couple reasons. The first is that the envelope of possible modification in animals is limited enough that one should be careful about unrealistic expectations - "My tiger won't bite, ever." The second is related to the first - at some point, one has to wonder how far surgery can be pushed to meet an ideal before you cross the line into some grotesque parody of pet-keeping. I suppose that a bit of a frontal lobotomy might quickly and efficiently reduce aggression in dogs. Does that justify the procedure?

Just how far we will accept modifications for our desires is debatable. There are those who do not like the idea of purebreds and see them as cruel mutants created with terrible congenital flaws simply because of fashion. On the other end of the scale, you might have someone who says that anything at all is permissible, since a dog is an animal whose existence is entirely dependent on my desires anyhow. Sculpt them with abandon. Eat them if you like, fight them, torture them - no moral stain attaches.

I'm closer to the dog-lover side, but even I distinguish between dogs as pets and dogs as companions. I have three dogs now, all adopted, all in the pet category. I am kind and caring toward them. They have a good home. But they aren't "companion" animals. That, to me, is a higher status. More intimate. I'd put it as similar to the difference (in humans) between a close acquaintance and a true friend.

I was thinking some more on the castration .. despite of what was said about safe and common, well, he is my buddy and I try "to grant him as many rights" as I possibly can. In such light, denying him the right to reproduce - which seems to me pretty basic - does not seem right.

I mean I do understand the argument about stray and unwanted dogs/animals but I do not think I believe castration is the solution. I dunno what it is though.

 

[marplots]

I mean I do understand the argument about stray and unwanted dogs/animals but I do not think I believe castration is the solution. I dunno what it is though.

Confinement works. Supervision works. There's the side benefit of avoiding other unwanted dog interactions too - both with other dogs and with road traffic.

It does strike me as odd that we simultaneously advise that animal owners should be responsible for their pet at all times, without exception, and then recommend they modify the dog's genitals "just in case."

I think it has more to do with convenience. Who wants to diaper a bitch twice a year to avoid stains on the carpet?

I've had two purebred Great Danes, unneutered. One male, one female (different times). I allowed neither to breed, although they were valuable dogs and I wanted the option. No accidents. I think being a good chaperon is just part of being a responsible dog owner.

And, frankly, I'm not set against altering a pet. I just don't want to be pressured or shamed into doing so. Weigh the pros and cons and decide for yourself.

 

[DragonLady]

Well.... There are doggie "vasectomies" which *may* be reversible (you'll have to ask your vet), but I believe it's a more extreme surgery.

 

[DragonLady]

I'm usually pretty staunchly pro-neuter because there are so many pet owners who really don't pay enough attention to their animals to be sure they won't make puppies that someone, somewhere will have to take care of -or that will be euthanized without ever getting a chance at all.

As many on this forum know, I "inherited" thirteen puppies when they were born under the house, and had to bottle feed them, care for them 'round the clock, and find homes for them. None of it would have been necessary if someone had simply neutered their dog.

But...if you believe you can contain your dog at all times and never let him stray, and never let a female near enough for a tie, then neutering may not really be needed. Just...think long and hard about it, and do what you think is best for your pet, yourself, and anyone else who may be affected by your choices.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

And again, there are prophylactic concerns. A neutered pet has much less chance of pyometra, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, prostate hyperplasia, testicular cancer, etc.

There is definitely still discussion and study on the issue, even in the US where it is most popular, and even more on sub-issues like early vs traditional timing.

If it was just owner desire, it would have fallen out of favour like ear cropping and tail docking.

 

[marplots]

And again, there are prophylactic concerns. A neutered pet has much less chance of pyometra, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, prostate hyperplasia, testicular cancer, etc.

There is definitely still discussion and study on the issue, even in the US where it is most popular, and even more on sub-issues like early vs traditional timing.

If it was just owner desire, it would have fallen out of favour like ear cropping and tail docking.

You left off the downsides of neutering (from an article last year on the American Veterinary Medical Association Website):
Of males castrated early—defined in this study as before 1 year of age—10 percent had hip dysplasia, double the occurrence among sexually intact males. Cranial cruciate ligament tears were not diagnosed in any of the sexually intact males or females, but in the early age–neutered males and females, prevalences were 5 percent and 8 percent, respectively. Lymphosarcoma was diagnosed in almost 10 percent of males castrated early, three times the rate in sexually intact males.

Additionally, researchers found the percentage of females spayed at 1 year of age or later that developed hemangiosarcoma (about 7 percent) was more than four times the percentages of sexually intact and early age–neutered females that developed hemangiosarcoma. None of the sexually intact females developed mast cell tumors, but nearly 6 percent of females spayed at 1 year of age or later did. (https://www.avma.org/News/JAVMANews/Pages/131101a.aspx)

The picture is mixed and it's one-sided only to look at benefits and ignore the downsides of neutering.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

You left off the downsides of neutering (from an article last year on the American Veterinary Medical Association Website):
Of males castrated early—defined in this study as before 1 year of age—10 percent had hip dysplasia, double the occurrence among sexually intact males. Cranial cruciate ligament tears were not diagnosed in any of the sexually intact males or females, but in the early age–neutered males and females, prevalences were 5 percent and 8 percent, respectively. Lymphosarcoma was diagnosed in almost 10 percent of males castrated early, three times the rate in sexually intact males.

Additionally, researchers found the percentage of females spayed at 1 year of age or later that developed hemangiosarcoma (about 7 percent) was more than four times the percentages of sexually intact and early age–neutered females that developed hemangiosarcoma. None of the sexually intact females developed mast cell tumors, but nearly 6 percent of females spayed at 1 year of age or later did. (https://www.avma.org/News/JAVMANews/Pages/131101a.aspx)

The picture is mixed and it's one-sided only to look at benefits and ignore the downsides of neutering.

Yes, that's why I said it is an ongoing topic of discussion and study. The potential risks were not part of my point, and listing them or not does not negate it.

 

[marplots]

Yes, that's why I said it is an ongoing topic of discussion and study. The potential risks were not part of my point, and listing them or not does not negate it.

What did you mean by this part?
"If it was just owner desire, it would have fallen out of favour like ear cropping and tail docking."

 

[theprestige]

I was thinking some more on the castration .. despite of what was said about safe and common, well, he is my buddy and I try "to grant him as many rights" as I possibly can. In such light, denying him the right to reproduce - which seems to me pretty basic - does not seem right.

So how many females have you let him bang this year?

 

[tuco]

Confinement works. Supervision works. There's the side benefit of avoiding other unwanted dog interactions too - both with other dogs and with road traffic.

It does strike me as odd that we simultaneously advise that animal owners should be responsible for their pet at all times, without exception, and then recommend they modify the dog's genitals "just in case."

I think it has more to do with convenience. Who wants to diaper a bitch twice a year to avoid stains on the carpet?

I've had two purebred Great Danes, unneutered. One male, one female (different times). I allowed neither to breed, although they were valuable dogs and I wanted the option. No accidents. I think being a good chaperon is just part of being a responsible dog owner.

And, frankly, I'm not set against altering a pet. I just don't want to be pressured or shamed into doing so. Weigh the pros and cons and decide for yourself.

Depends of case, convenience, in mine its policy of the organization I got Siki from as I explained earlier.

So how many females have you let him bang this year?

Let me count .. about as many as his Alpha


The thing is, I do not have huge problem with newborn puppies being euthanized, for example, but I have problem with what I view as unnecessary violation of Siki's body integrity.

I used to carry dead kids to morgue. Still warm, taken from bed in front of their parents. From infants to almost adults. Accidents, cancer, not fully developed, etc I noticed one thing, the younger their kids die the better for parents. Once they form bond, relationship, its hard to let go. Newborns, well, sad but no relationship.