Please Neuter

Izzie was spayed at 16 months and she got snarkier and less dog oriented toward 3 or 4. I think it's just a normal personality growth/maturity thing and sometimes it happens to coincide with a spay or other major event.

ETA: I'm glad I spayed her, it makes trialling so much easier because I don't have to worry about heat cycles.
 
sillysally said:
So those of us who have chosen to traditionally alter DON'T want what's best for their dogs? That seems like a pretty sweeping and uninformed generalization...
Click to expand...

If you go around posting that you'll always do a traditional spay because it's cheaper? Sounds like money is your first priority there ;)
 
I agree, I have been told I am cruel for choosing to spay & neuter my dogs, well most I them are rescues so they were fixed before I got them so I didn't have a choice when it comes to them.

Izze was spayed at 6 mos, & she got snarky/bitchy when she hit about 4 or so & I dot think it had anything to do with the fact that she was spayed.

When I nUtered bear at 4 years old I didn't see any change in him.
 
I spayed Hannah at 6 and did see a very distinct change in her behavior to other dogs. She went from being the hall monitor, all dogs must follow the rules to having absolutely no tolerance for any of them.

I can't say for sure if that was a direct side effect but it was something I noticed and to be fair she already leaned in that direction.
 
Laurelin said:
FWIW Mia seems pretty well the same as prior to her spay as far as bitchyness goes. I think she has gotten more snarky in the past 2 years but she's also more mature. I would not attribute snarkiness at 2 or 3 years old to a spay. I would think it was mostly maturity...
Click to expand...

This. I've noticed Jackson has gotten snarkier after he was about 3 1/2. He was neutered at 7 months. Didn't really have much 'snark' until after 3, so I wouldn't attribute that to fixing, but maturity. And I know he's a boy, and we're talking about girls and spaying, but just thought I'd pop in my .02 cents.

I will probably always traditionally spay/neuter my dogs. It's not because I'm taking the cheap route, or don't want what's best for my dogs.... I just don't really think it's as big of a deal as some make it out to be. I personally wouldn't make the effort to get a vasectomy on my dog because I just don't think it would be worth it. It's definitely not about money for me. Heck, I spent $1500 to have basically a 'root canal' on my dog instead of pulling it, because it's a major tooth and I didn't want to. I could've easily saved over $1000 doing it that way.

But I understand people's reasons for doing it, and I guess just like I'm very much against over-vaccination and a lot of people don't see the big deal, it's just different issues people are more passionate about, I guess. Some think I'm crazy when I say I probably won't be getting him vaccinated for anything that's not required by law for the rest of his life. So be it! lol. So I understand when you really care deeply about an issue and respect the decision completely. But I don't think people who traditionally spay/neuter should be looked at as not doing what is best for their dogs.
 
JessLough said:
If you go around posting that you'll always do a traditional spay because it's cheaper? Sounds like money is your first priority there ;)
Click to expand...

I absolutely want what's best for my dogs, but cost of a procedure does factor in for me when opting for an elective surgery. I don't know that the benefits of having a vasectomy are worth traveling a couple of hundred miles and plunking down $1500 when I would be waiting until my male is fully grown to neuter anyway.
 
sillysally said:
I absolutely want what's best for my dogs, but cost of a procedure does factor in for me when opting for an elective surgery. I don't know that the benefits of having a vasectomy are worth traveling a couple of hundred miles and plunking down $1500 when I would be waiting until my male is fully grown to neuter anyway.
Click to expand...

That is my view as well ... Why would I dump money that I have but really don't see the point in needlessly spending on an elective surgery when the cheaper alternative works just as well to achieve the desired effect (sterilizing the dog).

I would much rather save my money in the event there is an ACTUAL real medical emergency with my dogs rather then waste money on an elective surgery. Others might have that kind o money but I do not.
 
Well luckily, I believe that OSS and vasectomies will become more in demand as more studies and education happens and people become more aware to the overall risks vs benefits of spaying and neutering. And if that happens it'll probably become a more common request for vets and be available more widely which would hopefully cut any costs down.

Though at this time it doesn't seem like there is a huge (if any) discrepancy in price if you find a vet who is proficient in them, but finding a vet who is willing and able is harder.
 
I will probably always have a spayed or neutered dog because i will always have at least one rescue or shelter dog at some point or another who will always have the procedure done before they come to me.

But as far as my own dogs, I might wait longer to sterilize, but as long as that remains the cheaper option, that is what I will do.

FWIW for me, who isn't rolling in money, the cheaper option IS the bet for the dogs because I don't want an emergency to catch me short of money because I decided to do the OSS procedure on my female or give my male a vasectomy instead of spay/neuter.

Imagine also how high adoption fees would be if shelters & rescue groups were forced to do OSS/vasectomies instead of the cheaper spay/neuter bdcsuse a few people think that spay/neutering is inhumane or wrong?

Think of me what you like but I will stick with spay/ neutering.
 
Sometimes Dogdragoness it's very difficult to have a discussion on here with you. I don't know if it's because you skim read or don't bother to read the posts but it gets frustrating. But maybe that's just me.

*No one is saying everyone should do that instead of typical altering. At all. Whatsoever. Just that the option is there and slowly becoming more well known.

*No one is saying rescues need to do it either but I do know of rescues other than Blossom that have been allowing people when adopting to do that rather than traditional altering. Which I think is absolutely great. I also thinks it's a valid option that rescues have to look into for puppies instead of pediatric traditional s/n.

*Not looking at low cost s/n clinics it seems like the actual cost of vasectomies and OSS by proficient vets is NOT that much (if at all) more costly than traditional s/n typically.

It's finding a vet that does them that can be difficult and gas bills like SillySally pointed out. But again, more attention payed to it, more people ask for it and I see that changing.

So again, do whatever you want! That's fine! No one is telling you what to do, just to keep your mind open.
 
Dogdragoness said:
I will probably always have a spayed or neutered dog because i will always have at least one rescue or shelter dog at some point or another who will always have the procedure done before they come to me.

But as far as my own dogs, I might wait longer to sterilize, but as long as that remains the cheaper option, that is what I will do.

FWIW for me, who isn't rolling in money, the cheaper option IS the bet for the dogs because I don't want an emergency to catch me short of money because I decided to do the OSS procedure on my female or give my male a vasectomy instead of spay/neuter.

Imagine also how high adoption fees would be if shelters & rescue groups were forced to do OSS/vasectomies instead of the cheaper spay/neuter bdcsuse a few people think that spay/neutering is inhumane or wrong?

Think of me what you like but I will stick with spay/ neutering.
Click to expand...

Have to agree.

Unrelated, I hate the sudden emergence of spay snobbery.

Like I've said before here, and I will maintain saying..... As far as I'm concerned spaying, neutering will always be promoted, because average joe don't give a **** about alternatives.

If someone cares, they will look. If they're interested then point them in the right directions. If they just own a dog, then just spay it.
 
New technology will always lend itself to snobbery. I don't see a reason for alternative altering at this point, I also choose to keep my dogs intact well into adulthood and then probably alter in a traditional way. Maybe my mind will change with time and exposure.
 
Dizzy said:
Have to agree.

Unrelated, I hate the sudden emergence of spay snobbery.

Like I've said before here, and I will maintain saying..... As far as I'm concerned spaying, neutering will always be promoted, because average joe don't give a **** about alternatives.

If someone cares, they will look. If they're interested then point them in the right directions. If they just own a dog, then just spay it.
Click to expand...

Agreed, I have been a victim of spay/neuter snobbery. I mean hey ... If people BOTHERED bothered to ask, my dogs CAME altered, I did not have any control over it.

Even with the emergence of OSS/vasectomies for dogs, I believe that rescues / shelters will always opt to spay/neuter not only because it will prolly always remain cheaper, but it is the only really surefire method to ensure the dog will not be capable of breeding. With legation/vasectomies there is always that small chance the tissues could regenerate (as they can in humans) no matter how small & I don't think that chance, although small is one shelters or rescues would be willing to take.
 
I like to leave my dogs intact till at least 18 months, then alter females. My males stay intact. Personal preference, I've read the chances of something happening health wise and while I see a risk in keeping females intact, I just don't see that risk with males. I've never had a male mark or run off after a bitch in heat, no humping. And even if I did, those are training issues imho.
 
Dogdragoness said:
Agreed, I have been a victim of spay/neuter snobbery. I mean hey ... If people BOTHERED bothered to ask, my dogs CAME altered, I did not have any control over it.

Even with the emergence of OSS/vasectomies for dogs, I believe that rescues / shelters will always opt to spay/neuter not only because it will prolly always remain cheaper, but it is the only really surefire method to ensure the dog will not be capable of breeding. With legation/vasectomies there is always that small chance the tissues could regenerate (as they can in humans) no matter how small & I don't think that chance, although small is one shelters or rescues would be willing to take.
Click to expand...

As was already replied to you...

Shelters ARE doing it. There's not THAT much of a price difference. Youre talking aa though theres hundreds of dollars of difference. Especially for shelters, where they have their own vet on staff, where they don't depend on other vets pricing.
 
CrazyDogLady said:
I like to leave my dogs intact till at least 18 months, then alter females. My males stay intact. Personal preference, I've read the chances of something happening health wise and while I see a risk in keeping females intact, I just don't see that risk with males. I've never had a male mark or run off after a bitch in heat, no humping. And even if I did, those are training issues imho.
Click to expand...

Although my rescued females were spayed early (as puppies) Buddy I thong was left intact before coming into rescue.

If I ever got a dog from a breeder, male or female. I think that I would leave them intact at least until 18 mos of age for males & allow the females to go through one heat before spay. Since I am in an area where I could manage an in heat female
 
Does anyone have actual stats or a quote that states the cost of a vasectomy? The only figure I've seen on the interwebs is $1500, which at least in this area is significantly more than a traditional neuter.
 
sillysally said:
Does anyone have actual stats or a quote that states the cost of a vasectomy? The only figure I've seen on the interwebs is $1500, which at least in this area is significantly more than a traditional neuter.
Click to expand...

Thats what it is here also. depending on the imediate area, some cities can be more. :yikes: which is waaay too rich for my blood.
 
In theory, a vasectomy should be cheaper than a neuter. I need to make some calls, now, because I'm curious.
 
Here's one I found on a quick internet search (it's a holiday weekend, I can't do anything more than this until Tuesday):

After a lot of research, I was able to find a vet nearby who was both experienced and willing to give my puppy beagle a vasectomy instead! I live in CT. The cost for the procedure, monitoring, anesthesia, post-op care, and anti-inflamitories to go home is $378. Required pre-op blood-work is $50.
Click to expand...

That's $428. That's less than it costs at my clinic for a traditional neuter. I'd be 100% fine with that price. Granted, I may as well keep my dog intact and unaltered unless it's a contractual obligation to sterilize him. The ONLY thingit does is prevent puppies, and I can do that on my own. BUT, if AKC accepts vasectomised as neutered for their Canine Partners program, I'd definitely choose that in order to be able to compete with a mixed/non-pedigreed dog.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 84 (members: 0, guests: 84)
Robots: 72
Back
Top