Neutering Age?

[Rosebud]

[quote name='3ofakind']The only long term effect found in multiple studies on both dogs and cats is that the early s/n often ended up being taller. [color=red]In the absense of the hormones it takes the growth plates longer to close and causes to grow slightly taller. [/color]Some also believe that pups neutered early get "puppy brain". Basically they think removing the hormones too soon effects mental maturing. Depends on the owner if this will be a problem.[/quote]

Erin - this is not a simple problem, it is a serious problem. A lot of bone and hip problems are a result of how these growth plates develop. Any alteration should actually be done on a dog AFTER the growth plates have finished developing, this is usually well after a year of age. During the growth stage any dog is susceptable to serious growth related injuries, this risk is magnified if for any reason, especially early alteration slows down the growth rate of the bones and plates.

[quote]Recovery time will be almost nil, the new anesthesias used now are much easier to measure and administer in small doses.

In fact the ONLY reason (except for thats just what they learn in school) most vets say to wait is because of the administration of the anesthesia. [color=red]Many feel it is too difficult and unsafe to administer the anesthesia in such small dosages.[/color] Years ago, with the form of anestesia they used, this was true. However, new anesthesias are much easier and complications are rare.[/quote]

The reason most responsible vets want to wait is because the dogs neurological system is not developed enough to handle even the smallest amout of anethesia, even the new ones. While we are not really seeing any significant signs in our pets, the damage is there and under certain circumstances can be very harmful.

:angel:

[Guest Anonymous]

It is clear to see that opinions are very divided. My "opinions" are based on information from my vet (who is extremely talented and intelligent) and from the various studies of early s/n that I read from multiple colleges. The things I have spoken of, are things I learned from my research.

I am sure that there are exceptions, there always are. I do however hold more value in factual studies than simple opinion. It is hard to change the way people have thought for years.

Rosebud - in response to the growth plate issue. It was indicated that the length of time is minimal as is the extra growth. If you are vigilant, as you should be anyway, this should not cause a problem. No distinction was made between large and small breeds in the studies I read.

This is JMHO, I think in this case, if I were a breeder, I would rather early s/n than rely on anyone to fullfil a contract that is virtually impossible to enforce. I think the pros outweigh the cons when it comes to early s/n both to the individual dog and to society as a whole. Early s/n plays a very important role in control over population.

[3ofakind]

Oops that was me.

[KathyM]

Hi everyone :)
I used to be a vet nurse, and my view is that early spaying and neutering is a good thing in the majority. Anaesthetics have never been safer, and many tiny baby animals need them for other ops and are just fine. I think its safer that the testicles are descended, but I have never met a vet that would neuter early if they werent. Most will leave the dog til they descend, or until they are nine months old (ish) and then do a cryptorchid neuter.
My local cat rescue routinely neuter kittens as soon as they are 8 weeks old, so as to combat the problem of the masses of unwanted cats. It works very well, and if tiny kittens are safe to be operated on, then pups should be too. I think its an option that most rescues would welcome.
I have read a US veterinary study on early neutering which showed that urinary tract problems in bitches were not linked to early neutering. I wish I could remember where I put the link!
My cat Grace was spayed at 12 weeks old, and wouldve been spayed earlier (at 8 weeks) if she hadnt have had to have surgery on her eye at 9 weeks old. That operation (a third eyelid flap) was much lengthier and risky than a 10 minute spay op, and she recovered fine from both.
Given the option I would have any pet I get in the future neutered before 12 weeks, as the benefits far outweigh the tiny risks.
I do agree however that larger/giant breed owners should consult their vets about any misgivings they have about growth. Neutered dogs do get lankier because they grow for longer, but that happens whether they are neutered at 12 weeks or 6 months.

[Aonir]

[quote name='Kiwi']Another thing I was considering doing, was a $100 rebate on the presentation of a signed certificate from the vet stating that the dog had been speutered or alternatively I could pay for the op myself :-? Many breeders I have spoken to about that, have told me they don't think it'll work :-? so I'm still thinking about that one[/quote]

The humane society in my hometown did that. They gave around $30 or so dollars in contribute to an unspayed/neutered dog/cat that they sold. They were to small to do it themselves, sadly.

[mouseatthebusstop]

[quote]Another thing I was considering doing, was a $100 rebate on the presentation of a signed certificate from the vet stating that the dog had been speutered or alternatively I could pay for the op myself [/quote]
I think it will work

[Guest Anonymous]

some resources for those of you who are interested in reading about it.

[url]http://www.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/whatsnew/article2.cfm?id=1010[/url]
[url]http://arbl.cvmbs.colostate.edu/hbooks/pathphys/reprod/petpop/early.html[/url]
[url]http://www.bestfriends.org/nmhp/printresources/pdf/juvenilespayneuter.pdf[/url]
[url]http://www.tica.org/earlyspayneuter1.pdf[/url]
[url]http://www.critterhaven.org/earlyspay.htm[/url]
[url]http://www.danesonline.com/earlyspayneuter.htm[/url]
[url]http://www.cvm.uiuc.edu/ope/ivb/spay-neu.htm[/url]
[url]http://www2.dgsys.com/~ermiller/earlys-n.html[/url]
[url]http://www.catvet.homestead.com/files/Protocols_for_Early_Age_Altering.doc[/url]
[url]http://regaliapyrs.tripod.com/early_spay_neuter.htm[/url]

while i haven't heard much about puppies being done at 7 weeks, i know many dogs and cats who have been spayed or neutered as early as 8 weeks, simply because it is required procedure in the city and county shelters around here if you want to adopt an animal. not a single one of the rescue people i know personally has had any issues so far with either cats or dogs they fostered or adopted out.

i'd rather see an animal spayed or neutered at such a young age than it becoming pregnant and the whole litter including the mom dumped at a shelter and euthanized because nobody wants them. accidents happen, so the "but [b]i[/b] would never let that happen" excuse doesn't count. i know of a good number of otherwise responsible pet owners who could have avoided a litter if they had had their dog or cat fixed a few weeks earlier instead of pushing it off.

[Malamum]

I really don't have enough medical knowledge to offer an opinion on spaying or neutering at an early age.

We had Indy done at 7 months. Our vet said the best time was from 6 months...we waited the extra month because we were still umming and ahhing about showing him.

Though with males I think I would prefer to wait till both testicles have dropped or to see if they do. I know a neuter with a retained testile can be quite invasive surgery. I know someone whose dog went through this and the lost nugget was hiding right up in the abdomen.

[b]
Kiwi wrote[/b]..
[quote]Every week I go through the newspapers, sort through those ads, and give them a ring (Yes I know I have too much time on my hands ) I find at least 2 litters a week (might not seem like much to you lot, as you're all from larger countries) that have not honoured their "Pet Only" endorsed Contracts and are now making money out of their pets.
I usually report them to the breeders that they got the pup from, and those people usually get blacklisted from ever owning a NZKC Pup from that breed again. [/quote]

Good on you.

[b]Kiwi wrote..[/b]
[quote]Another thing I was considering doing, was a $100 rebate on the presentation of a signed certificate from the vet stating that the dog had been speutered or alternatively I could pay for the op myself Many breeders I have spoken to about that, have told me they don't think it'll work so I'm still thinking about that one[/quote]

I think that is an excellent idea. Why don't other breeders think it would work?

[gooeydog]

Kiwi, the only thing I can see going wrong with your idea is that people would be able to get probably at least 4 times that for EACH pup they got from the litter... so really a $100 s/n "deposit" wouldn't be enough to deter people hoping to make some cash, or even who are just thinking about casually breeding. I know some breeders hold back papers on their pups until they've reached an age where they can be evaluated to see whether they get snipped or shown, as well as some who keep a co-ownership on the dogs until they reach that point, then sign over the papers once the dog's been fixed. Of course, here in the US, there's a problem with people just forgoing the "real" KC papers and just getting them from any sham registry they can find. I wouldn't think that would be a big problem there though, since you only have one KC?

[KathyM]

We have the sham registries here in the UK too :(

[KathyM]

Bu you'd be able to gage their reaction to the offer, and act on that? If I was a breeder, and a potential owner was against neutering, or sniffed at the offer, I wouldnt sell them a pup. I know its different for those who are selling specifically for breeding, but if that was the case, firstly the offer wouldnt have been made, and secondly the potential owner wouldve been asking for a pup for breeding. I know this doesnt rule out the sneaky gets that pretend its for a pet home then dont follow it up, but if they have signed a breeders contract saying they will neuter, I would imagine that would hold legally if in the future you found out they were breeding, and you would have some right to get the dog back?

[Malamum]

My contract has the following two clauses:

* The breeder retains all stud and breeding rights.

* Any progeny produced by the dog/bitch without the breeder's consent will automatically become the property of the breeder (xxxxx) to dispose of as she sees fit and the dog forfeited and returned to the breeder with no refund to the purchaser.


What about using something like that as well.

[KathyM]

I'm pretty sure that if a solicitor reads through a contract and deems it lawful, it stands in court? I would make sure there is a clause whereby the new owners give up rights over their dog should they breed from it, and the dog becomes legally yours again. :-?

[Malamum]

It's the breeders personal contract. I have always wondered how legally binding it is. I don't really know. To tell the truth I haven't put much thought into it since I have no intention of doing anything contrary to any of the clauses.

[KathyM]

Unless a clause in the contract specifies that the owner gives up the dog if bred from (or whatever you want to happen should they break the contract), then I cant see it being legally binding at all. You have to specify what you want to happen should they break it.

[Black GSD]

All those contracts are well and fine. BUT, do you REALLY think that the puppy buyer will even let the breeder find out IF they decide to breed the pup? (I sure don't.)

AND, IMO, most breeders wouldn't enforce it anyway. They are generally not made of money and therefor could NOT afford to take the puppy buyers to court to get the dog back.

IMO, the best way to do it is, if the breeder has ANY reason to believe that the buyer won't get the pup altered. DON'T SELL THEM A PUP IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!!

[courtnek]

[quote]* The breeder retains all stud and breeding rights.

* Any progeny produced by the dog/bitch without the breeder's consent will automatically become the property of the breeder (xxxxx) to dispose of as she sees fit and the dog forfeited and returned to the breeder with no refund to the purchaser.
[/quote]

A contract like this IS enforcable, because it's been stated what will happen to both the dog AND the puppies if the owner does not comply.
Of course, there are court costs, but here in the states if the owner
loses, he pays them, not the breeder.

Another thing to make it more enforcable is to have it sealed by a notary public, an outside "witness" that also has to sign the contract, so that if it
becomes a legal case you have someone who witnessed the signatures
who is not part of the breeders program or the owners interests.