# My dog isn't broken. So why should I have him 'fixed'!?!



## DamselChum

I ran into a petstore today and they had some adoptions going on. I brought my dog in with me so he could pick out a toy. One of the people from the rescue group came up and started chatting with me. She seemed nice enough and then she offered me a voucher for a low cost spay/neuter clinic - saying "I noticed you haven't had your dog fixed yet so i wanted to give you this" and I responded with "No, thanks. I don't want to neuter him". She then turned from pleasant to rude. "You aren't going to breed him are you?" She asked in an accusatory tone. I told her no and before I could finish she practically screamed at me "then get him fixed! That way he won't accidently breed or turn aggressive or die of testicular cancer!" As calm as I could I said "My dog is not broken. There is nothing to 'fix'. I am not going to F*** up his endocrine system" and I turned and walked away. She went back to the table they had set up and was steaming mad. She pointed me out to some of her cronies and they were all giving me the dirtiest looks.

I am so friggin annoyed, why do people care so much about my dog's gonads!?! This isn't the first time something like this has happened and I am sure it is not going to be the last.


----------



## raindear

On one hand, you are correct. Neutering your animal is a personal choice and no one has the right to make that decision for you. 

On the other hand unneutered male dogs father large numbers of unwanted puppies every year. In just one community (Las Vegas, NV) more than 10,000 dogs were put to death annually only a few years ago. I can only imagine how many were put to death nationwide. Some people believe that all responsible pet owners must make sure that their animals do not contribute to this problem, and though sterilization is not the only way, it is perhaps the easiest way.


----------



## moonkissed

It is a passionate subject. I've worked with rescues and seen/felt first hand all the heartache when there are so so many animals out there in dire needs of homes and having to turn them away or euthanize them because people are not responsible or because of accidents. 

99% of people need to get their dogs fixed. I have two dogs, the male is neutered, the female is spayed. All of my cats are fixed. I feel most often it is the most responsible thing to do by far.

There are a handful of people who can have an unfixed animal and be responsible, but most cant lol. 

I see every day on groups people looking for homes for accidental puppies because their dog got loose or they are just stupid. 

There are safer ways like chemical neutering you could look into if you wanted to as well. 

Personally i think by far most everyone should get their pets spayed/neutered. But I do think it is a choice but those who choose not to really need to be responsible about it.


----------



## DamselChum

I actually was involved in rescue several years back so i have seen the ugly side of pet over population but in all honesty i find the destruction of shelter animals as a moot point in the decision to neuter my personal pets. 

My responsibility is to my dog first and there have been so many studies in recent years highlighting the long term health dangers of neutering - especially in my breed German Shepherds. There is a significant increased risk of some of the most devestating and least curable cancers; Hemangio, lymphoma and bone cancer. Increased risk of musco-skeletal injuries and diseases ACL tears, fractures, hip dysplasia (especially in males since testosterone plays such a big part in bone density and muscle mass) and even significant increase in anxiety based behavioral issues and age related cognitive functional disorders. Not to mention the immune system depression and the increased vaccination reaction risks. The endocrine system has such wide reaching effects throughout the body messing with it is just not healthy.

I've probably read about every published study done in the past 15 years on spay/neuter effects, and I just cannot do it to one of my dogs. I consider it about as dangerous as allowing a dog to roam at large. 

I do not understand why people are so passionate about putting MY DOG'S health at risk because of hypothetical puppies. I am sick of being treated like scum at dog friendly places because I put my dog's health as a priority. The only place it doesn't happen is IPO club since about 99% of the dogs there are all intact. The funny thing is that is also the only place I've never had problems of other dogs being untrained jerks.


----------



## Grotesque

I'm sure as an animal lover, you can see both sides. The woman was way out of line though - no excuse for that. 

I used to have the mindset of "my girls aren't broken so why fix them?" until they both died of breast cancer which was fully preventable with an early spay. I know it is different with male dogs. Neutering doesn't do as much for boys as spaying does for girls but either way, it comes down to the owner's choice.

Just because a dog isn't fixed, doesn't mean they are going to breed. It IS up to us as owners to be responsible when it comes to that. 

I'm just sorry you had to deal with that woman.


----------



## Rat Daddy

The human mind has a strange need for consensus, we need to think like other people around us do and we need other people to agree with us... Hence the term like-minded. When we come across a divergent opinion, we have a choice whether to reevaluate our own opinion or change the other person's opinion... Usually we choose the second option, unless the consensus is stacked against us... When we can't change the other person's opinion, we need drive the discordant influence out of our consensus... Hence... Romans fed Christians to the lions and the Spanish had an inquisition...

This is perhaps one of the most tragic of human virtues especially when the consensus is wrong... At no point was bombing Pearl Harbor a good idea, but the consensus thought otherwise... and it pretty much took two atomic bombs to change that misguided mindset. 

Currently the consensus among people who do rescues is that everyone should spay or neuter a dog that isn't going to breed and should be sterilized after breeding is over to prevent unwanted pups... If you offer a differing opinion... well you know what happens.

I'm not going into the rights and wrongs of spaying and neutering or the health risks, they don't matter to my point. The fact is that you are dealing with human nature. Oddly it isn't personal, so try and not take it that way.


----------



## drnkbeer

I do completely agree that she was out of line in the accusations made against you, though although you know you're a responsible pet owner, but in her mind she doesn't know this as fact, she considers spaying to the best option when it comes to preventing unwanted pups, and she's stuck in her way that responsible pet owners spay their pets if they don't intend to breed. I also imagine she associates breeding with bad ownership, which is not always the case (probably the breeding for profit situation). Therefore in this mindset you were an outlier, an other and she became hostile, which is not the best way to get someone to see your point of view I'll admit.


----------



## allisonj30

I work for a shelter and I wouldn't take it personally. When you work in a shelter environment, you kind of begin to assume people are irresponsibly breeding when they don't alter their animals. This person was wrong in attacking you for it, but think about where she's coming from. She was trying to make sure more puppies were not surrendered to a shelter. It's your choice to not neuter, and as long as you are good about making sure your dog isn't interacting with females in heat, it shouldn't be a problem. I'm still a big advocate of spay/neuter since I work with hundreds of homeless animals every day from irresponsible people, but I wasn't aware of the health issues associated with neutering. I'm going to do some research now. Thanks for the information!


----------



## RatAtat2693

I have two dogs, both male. One neutered at a young age (seven to eight months), King, and the other at four years, Samson.

I'll admit that the dog neutered at a later date has had far less health problems, but he's a royal pain in the ass to deal with seeing as he still seems to think he's intact. But whatever - at least he's healthy.

King, on the other hand seems to have a persistent UTI, which I can't tie to the neutering, but he also is ten times less likely to try to mate with anything that moves. He's a husky mix, so really his health should be good. Sam's muscle tone and conformation, for a mutt, is far better. (I've seen both parents on Sam's side - more on that later - and met King's mother). I neutered early before I knew about the over all health effects, though having all things considered, I don't regret neutering King. I only wish I had waited until his body was done growing.

Now - on to way I'm a proponent for speuter. Both of my dogs were the result of people who figured their dogs would never escape to elsewhere and get pregnant. Or in the case of Sam, someone (my mother) figured it was too much money to spay her dog and ended up with ten puppies. (Six of which were hit by cars, two of which I suspect were surrendered to a shelter when I wasn't looking.)

King - the seventy pound husky mix, despite being kept on a close watch, is a master escape artist. So much so that I have attached a GPS tracker to his collar in a desperate effort to make sure I can find him before the pound (or a car) does. I've had to install children's locks on my door knobs because he knows how to open doors; he can bust through a wire crate in under a minute; and I've yet to find a tie out that can hold him - fences are a joke. I'm the only one in my family able to contain him, and even then it only takes one moment of inattention or him to utilize his window of opportunity. So I can guarantee you that when he gets out, he would lead to a large number of unwanted litters, much like the one he came from. I run the guy on my bike for 1.5 mi a day and he's still got enough energy for a marathon.

Pennie, Sam's mother, is also suffering from a large growth on her abdomen, which my mother refuses to get an x-ray of, and I can't afford to pay for other animal's vet bills.


----------



## DamselChum

At the end of the day, my dog's health is still the priority over the thousands of dogs in shelters to me. It may be cold and callous - but I would rather have the pups of an accidental litter put down then do something that puts my pet's health at risk. 

In my opinion based on many studies and my knowledge on anatomy - neutering has detrimental effects on the body's health and on mental well being. I've read the studies. I've spoken to men who have been castrated for medical reasons. Plus I've been around many intact dogs. I like the temperament of an intact male best. The confidence. The drive. I find they engage better with me and have better work ethic. I've been more successful at titling intact males and females then neutered animals. I've been able to take their training further. 

I have had intact animals for years and never had an accidental litter. I had one male vasectomied when I had an intact female living in the home. All the intact behaviors can be controlled with training. My young shepherd doesn't hump. He doesn't urine mark. He has been trained that those behaviors are unacceptable. I have even proofed his obedience around females in heat. He is a sweet and loving boy with family and a beast on the field during training. He bites the decoy with glee and does his obedience with enthusiasm and it's the testosterone I can thank for that.

I get that some people prefer to neuter. And I am cool with that. You do what you think is best for your pet and if itba concern of yours - what is best with pet population as a whole. All I ask is not to give me dirty looks when I enter the dog park. Not to accost me while I am letting my dog pick out a squeaky toy at the pet store. Not to lecture me about the benefits of neutering after I have told you I am aware of the risks but find the benefits of staying intact more to my liking. Not to try to guilt me about all the poor puppies and kitties who die every year. And most importantly - not try to pass mandatory spay and neuter laws that limit my freedom to raise my dog in the way that I want and forcing me to do so in a way against the medical advice of my vet and breeder.


----------



## ray

First let me say that person was completely out of line. Second, having heard your thoughts on the matter I did some research and you're right, there are health risks with neutering, especially at an early age. Unfortunately, in a shelter situation when we get these puppies in we can't wait until they're a year old to fix them and adopt them out so they're fixed at 2 months. I think in most cases an animal should be fixed at age one. Most people don't know how to train out undesirable behavior in an unfixed dog and this behavior may lead to the dog being given up. Also, most owners will not ensure that their dog is secure and prevent them from escaping. Furthermore you can never be %100 sure that your dog will never get loose. Now your opinion is that if your dog does and leaves litters of puppies in his wake you don't care, they can all just be killed, and that's up to you if you take that view of things. I personally could never. I will always fix my animals though not nearly as young as a shelter might. Basically, I think it's up to you and it seems like you're capable of handling an intact dog unfortunately most dog owners aren't as competent.


----------



## Rat Daddy

I"m not weighing in on the spay/neuter debate... I don't have a dog now so it's not a decision I need to make. However we have a male rat and found there are apparently health risks associated with neutering him... that kind of surprised me. Although, the health risks didn't to be very significant to be fair. So, in all reality it does come down to a benefit risk model... there are definite benefits and also some risks... but to be fair... that's life isn't it? There's almost always a down side to everything we do. 

The OP only made one point I wasn't entirely on board with... the one about the accidental litter... I think if their dog did get someone else's female dog pregnant, they should be responsible at least in part for the costs and care of the puppies. Again everything has a down side... And if you have an intact dog, you need to be responsible for the consequences. Paying for the female dogs veterinary care, and the costs of raising and finding homes for the puppies is a reasonable cost of having a intact dog. 

Now, if in fact, the dog is properly trained and prevented from creating an unwanted litter... the cost will be zero. And nothing is a pretty good price for anything, including having an intact dog. On the other hand if a person isn't as responsible as they think they are... and nature takes it's course then the price goes up accordingly. And I think that's fair too... 

I mean, as a guy, I've kind of had to live my whole knowing I am responsible for what I do and that I would have to pay for my mistakes... I'm pretty sure that's not a lot to ask for a dog owner to do either... I don't think this is a situation you can have both ways... If someone wants to have an intact dog, that's fine, but with the benefits comes the responsibility and the liability.


----------



## DamselChum

Here's the thing - i am already paying for the costs associated with unwanted litters. 

My yearly licensing fees are significantly higher for my intact dogs then for a neutered pet. The revenue from that funds local government services including animal control and our local pound. 

I grew up in farm country where there are dogs that are pets and dogs that are pests. I have had to shoot stray dogs and loose pet dogs that were harassing live stock. So the idea of putting dogs that are not my personal pets just doesn't bother me as much as some. *shrug*

The actual risk of my boys siring an unwanted litter is so small anyways - they arent allowed outside unsupervised, and I have no intact girls. But there always is the possibility - perhaps someone is less then responsible at a boarding kennel or something but I would still rather that incredibly tiny risk of having 8 unwanted pups humanely put down then watching my beloved pet get a terminal illness or career ending injury - both of which can cost thousands of dollars for me to treat and cause an incredible amount of pain and suffering to my baby. 

Interestingly enough spay and neuter culture is prominent in North America but not in Europe - yet we have far more "dog issues" here.


----------



## LilysPets

I am all for neutering and spaying your pets at the appropriate ages. I'm against early altering, but I do support the opinion of having animals fixed. 

You never know when you may have an accidental litter. Always a chance your dog will get loose, or let's say you saw another unfixed female who was in heat and your dog mounted her briefly. I have a friend who's Siberian husky was not fixed, nor was she ever really mated, but a German Shepherd simply mounted her (Sort of like an excited jump though) and she was pregnant. Accidents happen, and the only way to be 100% safe to avoid accidental litters, is neutering and spaying. 

There's enough over-populated animals in shelters and rescues that are put to sleep. Many due to accidental litters or irresponsible people who breed for the "experience" or "cute babies." I am a firm believer that a breeder should not simply breed for the sake of "experience" or "cute babies", nor should they breed without a mentor. There is so much more to breeding than simply putting a male and female together. 

The woman's reaction was definitely absurd and out of control. You are entitled to your opinion, but I do agree anyone who does not intend to breed should fix their pets at the appropriate age. I cringe when I see people fixing their pets 2-4 months or people saying they want a baby pet already fixed because they can't afford or want to go through the spaying/neutering process. My personal opinion... If you don't have the money to fix a pet, you shouldn't have one. Also, many people do not have the experience or knowledge to handle hormonal behaviours, especially during teenage stages. All of my pets were altered when they fully matured and developed, including their hormonal levels.


----------



## Rat Daddy

I grew up in the mountains and lived on a farm... I've put down my unfair share of animals, for food, or sometimes because some idiot wounded it and then couldn't finish the job... or because they were feral and a danger to people and other animals... And my mom actually did have to get rabies shots when she got bit by a feral cat... and they are dangerous...

People that know me, might be surprised that I work with my rats to give them the best last moments to their lives as I possibly can, because so far, in my heart, it's been the right thing to do... especially as it doesn't cost me anything to put them to sleep instantly and painlessly... It's something I'm good at, not proud of... 

So don't start with the backwoods shuffle... we all have to live in civilized society now... I'm not saying I think it's better, but it's 2015 and the 1860's are gone and 'taint comin' back any time soon... And it's no longer acceptable to toss the kittens into the creek in a feed sack with a big rock at the bottom. Nowadays, if I fool around and leave behind an errand wild oat... I've got to raise it and put it through college... even if that means I have to eat beans the rest of my life... if that's what the mom decides... Compared to that, raising an unwanted litter of pups is a pretty small responsibility... 

As a responsible gentleman, even though I possess the double recessive hillbilly gene, this means I couldn't and can't do as I please, I have to be responsible even when it means making hard decisions with my head that... errm.. my 'heart' might not like... And if I screw up... literally... I've got to back up my mistake with my checkbook as well as my time.

Like I said, if you don't screw up, the price for success is free... your dog gets to keep it's private parts and good health and you don't pay to raise pups... So I guess it pays to get it right... But even the stupidest red neck knows the price of screwing up in the modern world... and last time I saw him, he was working three jobs and re-mortgaging his house to support six of his mistakes and their moms. I used to kid him that if he had any more kids he'd have to register as a cult leader... But red neck or not, that's what responsible people do in the 21st century...

And most of my taxes go to support fatherless kids and their moms... I'm pretty sure that doesn't give me the right to create a few more of my own.... at no extra charge.

I am not weighing in for or against neutering. That's your choice... and as I don't have an intact female dog, it's not my problem... unless of course you dump your puppies at a shelter I'm paying for, or I catch you painting bull's-eyes on puppies and picking them off on the run with a 10/22 where I can see or hear it... I don't recall it being OK when I was a kid in the 1960's and I'm pretty sure it isn't OK today. I remember families that didn't have weekday shoes for their kids that took decent care of all of their dogs even when it meant everyone went to bed just a little hungry sometimes and that was in a rural area and a long time ago... rural never meant irresponsible or heartless when I came from. Toothless... sometimes - heartless... never.


----------



## DamselChum

> And most of my taxes go to support fatherless kids and their moms... I'm pretty sure that doesn't give me the right to create a few more of my own.... at no extra charge


This analogy just doesn't work. Everyone has to pay the same tax amount regardless of their reproductive status. 

A human equivalent would be if the government passed new legislation that made ALL men between 18 and 65 to pay an extra $1000 per year. - just in case they might father a child sometime in the future. I don't see that type of legislation fair at all.

That said I don't have an issue with licensing differentials. I wouldn't have a problem with your system of paying per litter IF the licensing differentials went away and they had a way to fairly enforce it. It would save me a ton of money.

I've had multiple intact males over the past 16 years. I recently moved from an area that's licensing fees for intact animals was over 10 times the amount of that for neutered. It cost me $150 per dog each year. I have literally paid thousands of dollars for my dogs to keep their manhood and womanhood. And none of my dogs have been at large, ran livestock, or had a litter in all that time. 

If by some incredible happenstance - maybe I get abducted by aliens while walking the dog and he happens to find an unsupervised lady dog in heat while waiting for the space men to bring me back - my dog did sire an accidental litter. It would be a once in a lifetimevtype of thing and 
I feel like have paid my dues. 

Besides paying for the litter to be raised and adopted out doesn't solve the 'real problem' of saving dogs anyways. For each of those pups I would theoretically pay to raise and find a home for - Another dog in the shelter ends up killed because that's one potential home off the list. 

My point is, that doesn't bother me, because the chances of my dog actually producing a litter is small, I have paid in advance through licensing differentials for the costs associated with impounding strays or unwanted dogs, and because my dog's life, health and happiness is a greater priority to me then that of other dogs. 

I hate to say it but it's kinda like those horrible 'would you games': Would you trade the life of a random stranger for the life of your child? How about 10? 100? 1000? 10,000?

I will totally admit to being selfish and caring about my kid more then the lives of strangers. Even when you start adding zeros. I feel the same way about my dogs.

My dogs come first, but that isnt to say I am totally a heartless wretch when it comes to stray and unwanted dogs. Ive cleaned kennels at the shelter, I've fostered, I've driven legs for cross country relocates, heck just the other day I saw the collection barrel at the pet store and bought a 40 lb bag to drop in. 

And really the original rant is more about nosey bodies minding their own business and letting me raise my pets the way I see fit. They could atleast wait until I screw up to make my life miserable ya know?


----------



## Rat Daddy

First, you are paying extra taxes to have an intact dog, not to dump extra puppies into the system... if some of that money goes to help dogs in need I don't think that's an awful idea... Just like I pay for relief for other irresponsible people's kids and I still have to pay for everything for my own daughter... Taxes aren't fair... they were never meant to be, but they also aren't an excuse either.

You'll note I didn't take issue with your original rant... and whether you are selfish or not isn't my business either... I'm just saying that if your dog partakes with someone else's dog and creates a litter of puppies, the extra fees you paid doesn't help the owner of the female dog or the pups that are at least your joint responsibility. And I understand you're caring more about your own dog... but by that same logic you will have a whole litter, or at least half a litter of "your own dogs" to care for when your dog does what comes natural to him... 

It's perfectly fine to have an intact dog... but it's people who have intact dogs who don't take responsibility for the pups that started the problem you are paying extra for in the first place. If you said, you have an intact dog and tens of thousands of dollars to raise any accidental litters if they happen... I'd applaud you... But you sort of make one point people can support and follow it up by sounding a lot like the kind of people that really should spay or neuter their dog... 

In the end... people aren't offended by intact dogs, they are offended by people who aren't responsible for the pups their intact dogs produce... and I'm not picking on you... and I'm saying this with love... but by saying you don't need to be responsible for your dog's pups... you are making a better argument against yourself than anyone else is likely to make... 

Think about it...


----------



## DamselChum

I do not pay extra taxes for intact dogs. I pay a permit and licensing fee. There is a difference. 

But regardless - dogs are not people. The same morals do not apply. You may not find it fair - but the responsibility for litter care ends up falling on the dam's owner. Most accidental matings happen unsupervised matings go unnoticed. Even if a tie IS noticed that does not mean the mating was successful. There are often multiple sires to a litter. Do you propose paternity testing for every pup? Who pays for that? That costs more then a a few bags of puppy chow and wormer. How would you enforce the owner of the sire paying for the pups? Erecting doggie family courts across the land? What about purposeful breedings? The same "issues" concerning over population applies to those too...

I have males now, but when I had intact females - the "risk" of having to pay for litters was one that I accepted and 100% would be responsible for puppy care. I would happily pay for the best food and vet care i could. I would also adopt the pups out with a return to me clause in the contract. Or a far more likely course of action I personally would take would to be to take my dog to the vet and terminate the litter before it was born. That is the cost of having an intact female and the motivator to make sure that girl is on total lock down twice a year when she is in heat. 

And once again it's a moot point as my dogs do not have the opportunity to produce accidental pups.

And honestly, the issue of pet over population is less about puppies being born - and more about people's lack of lifetime commitment to their pets. The vast majority of dogs in shelters are not puppies. It's the people that get that pup and give up on it when it stops being cute and they have an untrained hooligan on their hands.


----------



## Grotesque

Both my female Pug and my female Boston Terrier were intact. I never let them have litters. They both died of completely preventable breast cancer that they wouldn't have gotten if they had been spayed early. 

The way my vet explained - spaying before the first heat means 0% chance of breast cancer and that chance goes up with every heat. I decided that I would get my next dog spayed before her first heat.

Then I got Lucy as a 15 week old puppy. I made the appointment for a spay. She started her first heat ONE DAY before her spay appointment so we had to cancel. I cried and cried thinking I doomed my poor little Lucy to a painful death by breast cancer later in life. I decided to wait about 4 months after her heat ended to get her spayed. 

Looking back on it... I think letting a female have one heat cycle is the healthiest option. Gives her body time to mature without increasing the breast cancer risk too much. I think after the first heat it is only 4% chance.


----------



## Rat Daddy

When people talk about taking responsibility for something... it somehow immediately turns into a discussion about laws, enforcement and courts. Seriously can't we ever talk about simple human responsibility... I have a friend who's been supporting the result of a one night stand since the 1980's... and he's proud of his daughter even if he never lived with her mom... And another friend who married his one night stand and has been raising her kids along with his.... That one seemed pretty odd, but amazingly it worked out better than any one of us expected... he was a drunk and we all had doubts whether she was even sentient, but together they have built a successful business... and even had more kids... He's sober, and occasionally she speaks, and although she doesn't string too many words together at a time, she makes a lot of sense. Good things can happen when people do the right thing and it doesn't take a judge to tell everyone what's right.

If you are willing to take the risks, then you have to take the responsibility... that's only fair and reasonable... That would be the moral and ethical backbone of your argument. If your dog sires a litter, you do what it takes to care for the pups and find them good homes and if the female's owner's are also responsible people, you have a team effort and you can have a good outcome for everyone... including the pups and their future humans.

I'm not for or against spaying or neutering... but I'm all for responsibility when it comes to animals. The people who are arguing for neutering and spaying are arguing that they are being responsible... And you are arguing against spaying and neutering and saying you shouldn't be held responsible... even if you have reasons.... your argument puts you at a disadvantage... 

I know you aren't like the irresponsible people that toss dogs out at the curb and drive away or those that let their intact dogs roam free to procreate... or I wouldn't bother to participate in this discussion... But when you say that if your big dog jumps my fence and gets my little dog, who can't jump the fence pregnant, and that isn't your problem too, we'd have a problem... Luckily, I don't have a dog right now. But when I did have dogs, I'd let them out to roam the woods to their hearts content on their own... Our mixed girl liked to visit the shut in neighbors in the morning and our German Shepherd boy preferred to stay out all night and stay far away from houses or people, which was a good thing because he could be a little bit intimidating, but they were neutered and spayed, so no harm, no foul. Our dogs could have a great time running free, and I could be responsible and not worry...

I don't think people should be forced to do anything, and if everyone took responsibility no one would have any reason to complain. 

As to taxes and licenses... the government needs our money so they can spend it... the reasons they take our money are arbitrary for the most part, taxes, fees, licenses are just names they put to charges added to almost any human activity to make the taxation seem somehow fair... In the US, if you can't afford health insurance, now you even get a "surcharge" for being broke... But a surcharge isn't a tax either...


----------



## DamselChum

Animals are not human. The same morals do not apply. 

The burden of litter care falls on the owner of the female. Female dogs can only get pregnant during a small window 2x a year. 

Leaving a female in heat out alone in yard you are taking the risk and assuming the responsibility. Every male dog, stray, owned and even of other species - will be trying to get at her. This is the risk you take by keeping a female intact. Who are you going to have a problem with if a coyote jumps your fence and gets your female pregnant? (It happens) What about the reverse situation where a female climbs the male's fence? (Happened to someone I know)

When I had my intact female, I made sure she never got pregnant. Not try to envision a world where other people would be partially responsible for my mistake. That was my burden alone. 

As for no harm no foul because your free-roaming dogs were neutered. I'm not buying it. Harassing wildlife, urinating/defecating on other people's property, other property damage, traffic disruption, other nuisance behavior and being intimidating toward people - all count as fouls in my book. 

Those are also things my intact dogs don't have the opportunity to do because they are confined to my property, or on leash until they have reliable off leash obedience.


----------



## Rat Daddy

OK.... I get your point, you have a dog and your not responsible for what he does... or the puppies he produces... because dogs aren't people, but you are annoyed by people who think it's irresponsible not to neuter dogs.

Everyone has a right to their opinion.


----------



## DamselChum

I am annoyed by people who don't mind their business about how I raise my dogs considering that they do NOT roam at large, that they do NOT produce unwanted puppies and that they do NOT exhibit nuisance behavior. 

All i want is to do the best thing for the health of MY DOG - which modern literature points to keeping him intact.


----------



## Andromeda

I think the problem is that she doesn't know you. She doesn't know you're a responsible owner or that you aren't going to let your dog run around off leash, and as someone who works in a shelter and is constantly having to deal with the fallout of idiots who don't neuter and spay their pets and then do let them run around unchecked, I can understand why she would be upset.

Honestly though, I could also show you a dozen articles on the benefits of neutering, and I'm sure you could show me the same number of articles showing the detriments. True, people shouldn't go around acting like you HAVE to neuter your dog, but you also can't go around saying that neutering him is definitely bad for him, because there's no concrete proof either way.

The problem with not neutering your dog, is that even though you are a good owner, things happen. Leashes break, doors are left open, fences are jumped, and sometimes dogs get stolen (specifically because they aren't spayed or neutered, especially purebreds). Whether or not you neuter your dog is 100% your decision, but don't make it out like this lady was crazy for suggesting that you neuter your dog. She has no idea what kind of owner you are, and honestly is just trying to do her part to fix a massive pet overpopulation problem.


----------



## DamselChum

Andromeda said:


> I think the problem is that she doesn't know you. She doesn't know you're a responsible owner or that you aren't going to let your dog run around off leash, and as someone who works in a shelter and is constantly having to deal with the fallout of idiots who don't neuter and spay their pets and then do let them run around unchecked, I can understand why she would be upset.
> 
> Honestly though, I could also show you a dozen articles on the benefits of neutering, and I'm sure you could show me the same number of articles showing the detriments. True, people shouldn't go around acting like you HAVE to neuter your dog, but you also can't go around saying that neutering him is definitely bad for him, because there's no concrete proof either way.
> 
> The problem with not neutering your dog, is that even though you are a good owner, things happen. Leashes break, doors are left open, fences are jumped, and sometimes dogs get stolen (specifically because they aren't spayed or neutered, especially purebreds). Whether or not you neuter your dog is 100% your decision, but don't make it out like this lady was crazy for suggesting that you neuter your dog. She has no idea what kind of owner you are, and honestly is just trying to do her part to fix a massive pet overpopulation problem.


The problem was her attitude. She didn't respect that having my dog neutered was MY decision - not hers. She was rude and raised her voice to me after I *politely* declined her spay/neuter clinic coupons. 

Yelling at a complete stranger, that has done absolutely nothing to warrant that treatment, IS 100% crazy lady behavior. 

And we will have to agree to disagree about the actual benefits of staying intact and going head to head with numbers of articles - been there, done that, got the T shirt. There have literally been thousands of studies about the importance of hormones for long term health across dozens of species. There are a small handful of health conditions that neutering will prevent, and exponentially more that neutering will exasperate. Ask any doctor about how important testosterone is for men, and then ask what would happen if the man under went an orchiectomy without hormonal replacement therapy. Biological systems are pretty consistent across all of us mammals. The proof of that is pretty concrete.


----------



## Andromeda

Except, you did do something to warrant it, at least in her opinion. You have to remember, this woman has probably seen literally DOZENS of litters of dogs and cats brought in by people who didn't neuter/spay their animals. She's likely done the all night feedings, the extreme vet bills, the massive fundraising, the adoption campaigns, and has likely also had to put down more than a few animals that just couldn't find homes. For someone who takes rescue seriously, that's heartbreaking. I don't think she was mad at you specifically, but more likely the kind of people who don't neuter their animals because they just don't care. You are obviously not one of those people, but she doesn't know that.

Let me give you an example. I (and many of my friends) are part of the queer community, and one of my biggest pet peeves is when someone uses the term 'that's so gay' to indicate something is lame or uncool. I have met so many people who genuinely believe that something being 'gay' is the worst thing in the world, so when I hear that term, it really sets me off and makes me mad. Now, there are also people who use that term, but don't mean to hurt people. They don't realize it's offensive, and they're not trying to make anyone feel bad about themselves. Regardless, I still get angry when I here that term. I know some people don't mean it to be derogatory, but because of past experiences, it sets me off.

This woman probably has just had so many horrible experiences with people who don't care, that she jumped to conclusions, which isn't fair to you. But you can't say that she's crazy or that it's completely unwarranted. The truth is, having a dog or cat that isn't neutered or spayed while living in the city is irresponsible in the grand scheme of things. I understand your reasons, and I honestly think they're valid and you are absolutely right when you say it's your decision. But, you have a much higher chance of contributing to the pet overpopulation problem than I do with a neutered dog. That's just the truth.


----------



## DamselChum

Andromeda said:


> Except, you did do something to warrant it, at least in her opinion. You have to remember, this woman has probably seen literally DOZENS of litters of dogs and cats brought in by people who didn't neuter/spay their animals. She's likely done the all night feedings, the extreme vet bills, the massive fundraising, the adoption campaigns, and has likely also had to put down more than a few animals that just couldn't find homes. For someone who takes rescue seriously, that's heartbreaking. I don't think she was mad at you specifically, but more likely the kind of people who don't neuter their animals because they just don't care. You are obviously not one of those people, but she doesn't know that.


None of that makes her behavior acceptable in any way shape or form. No one has the right to get into someone's face who isn't _actively harming them _and _harass them_ because of their past experiences. 

The crazy lady is lucky that A.) My protection trained dog heeded my command to not touch her. B.) That I didn't call the cops and C.) That I didn't even bother reporting her and her organization to the store management and had her thrown out so she would miss out on opportunities to find all those rescue pets homes.

I've been involved in rescue, heavily in the past, periodically in the present. There are definitely some crazy's in the scene that go too far. I've seen a lot of the "adopt don't shop" crowd become practically rabid at the discussion of purebred dogs. There is a definite "I'm more superior than thou" mindset within that community. That and issues with pit bulls is why I gave up rescue work on the scale that I used to do it. This lady was one of those crazies. 



> Let me give you an example. I (and many of my friends) are part of the queer community, and one of my biggest pet peeves is when someone uses the term 'that's so gay' to indicate something is lame or uncool. I have met so many people who genuinely believe that something being 'gay' is the worst thing in the world, so when I hear that term, it really sets me off and makes me mad. Now, there are also people who use that term, but don't mean to hurt people. They don't realize it's offensive, and they're not trying to make anyone feel bad about themselves. Regardless, I still get angry when I here that term. I know some people don't mean it to be derogatory, but because of past experiences, it sets me off.


A more accurate analogy to the situation I faced would be if you were sitting there with your partner, minding your own business, holding hands and just enjoying each other's company, and then an ultra conservative right wing highly religious woman sees you and approaches. Then she starts a pleasant conversation with you, during which she says "I noticed you are gay! Here's a pamphlet about a homosexuality reprograming camp near by, I've got a coupon too so it won't cost you so much to get your self fixed!". Then after you _politely decline _she raises her voice, yelling at you, and telling you how evil you are and that you are damaging society by being gay and spreading aids. 

You'd definitely think she was crazy. You'd probably view her harassment as a hate crime. 

An even better analogy would be a vegan who yells at you after you decline coupons for vegetarian cat/dog food. Even though cats and dogs are biologically carnivores and the cannot thrive on a vegan diet (survive maybe, but not be in optimal health) they should be eating vegetarian because millions of cows, sheep, and fish DIE every year to make pet food.

What the hypothetical gay basher, vegan dog food pusher, and my crazy lady did boils down to the same concept - _trying to force your morals onto another person who has made it perfectly clear they have no interest in what you have to say. _



> This woman probably has just had so many horrible experiences with people who don't care, that she jumped to conclusions, which isn't fair to you. But you can't say that she's crazy or that it's completely unwarranted.


Oh it absolutely was unwarranted and crazy. Verbal harassment is unacceptable and actually _illegal _in many jurisdictions. Like I said. Crazy lady is lucky I did not call the cops. 

An actual on the books law: 

 "it is illegal for anyone to communicate with you in a harassing manner or to repeatedly commit an act or acts that harass you. The statute defines harassment as “conduct that is directed at a specific person and that would cause a reasonable person to be seriously alarmed, annoyed or harassed _and_ the conduct in fact seriously alarms, annoys or harasses the person.”

Her raising her voice, waving her papers in my face, and not leaving me alone until I had to vacate the immediate area is not acceptable in no way, shape or form. Not by civil people. Not by law. 



> The truth is, having a dog or cat that isn't neutered or spayed while living in the city is irresponsible in the grand scheme of things.


Only if you purposefully let your dog run at large. Actually there is less of a risk in cities. Animal control presence enforces leash laws at a much high rate then in rural communities. Less people allow their dogs to run at large because of the higher traffic hazards. 

Several of my local rescues actually have to import dogs from rural areas to meet the adoption demand. Our animal control doesn't have many dogs that people want (I check every few days so I can pull any german shepherds) it is easily 75% pit bulls and 15% elderly little dogs that are owner surrenders. 



> I understand your reasons, and I honestly think they're valid and you are absolutely right when you say it's your decision. But, you have a much higher chance of contributing to the pet overpopulation problem than I do with a neutered dog. That's just the truth.


My dogs have such an incredibly small chance of actually contributing to pet over population it is practically zero. That's the truth. They are never allowed to run at large. They are always under my control. They only time they are ever outside un-supervised is in a concrete floored kennel with a roof, which I keep padlocked. It is escape proof. I have literally put thousands of hours into training them - including proofing them around females in heat. It would literally take some extraordinary circumstances for them to contribute to over population. Like a truck running off the road and through my living room wall leaving a big bloody opening and them just happening to find a female in heat... A much higher chance? It's like comparing a 0.057% chance to a 0% chance. 

Besides that...

My responsibility is to my dogs first. Their health is far more important to me then dogs in shelters. I do what I can to help pets in need _but never to the detriment of my personal dogs.

_To me it is like asking parents of children to put the health and well being of their child on the back burner so they can redirect their resources to help the sick, starving, children in over populated and poverty stricken areas of the world. I know many people who are active in that cause, but they always take care of their own children first and foremost.


----------

