You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Toby the Boston Terrier has been with us for 5 months and is nearly 7 months old.
He is definitely on the frisky side during these past few weeks (he will literally hump anything!), and started to mark his territory (only when out on walks, but we don't want him to start indoors).
We had previously been advised to leave him in tact as long a possible by the breeder, and to get him done asap by the vet.
When in doubt, always consult the STW experts!
Any pros and cons to getting him 'done' now? Obviously he isn't yet fully grown and we don't want to harm his development, and we don't want his temperament to change, but we also want to do the right thing.
Listen to the vet.
Do it quickly...
Pictures first.
Not of his bits though, obviously.
His testicles are quite impressive, but not particularly photogenic. He is such a great little chap. Feel a bit mean in some respects, but it's for his benefit in the long term.
Maybe it will help him grow into his ears.......
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
We were advised by our retriever’s breeder to wait until he was skeletally mature, eg about 12-14 months. We had him done at 14 months which our vet was happy with but had said if he had shown any signs of male dominant behaviour to have it done sooner. It will depend on the dog obviously.
The vet had said that any time after about 7-8 months would be safe enough.
We had previously been advised to leave him in tact as long a possible by the breeder, and to get him done asap by the vet.
Which of those two professionals do you trust more with regards to medical issues?
Ask them both why and why.
OP, you say: "...it’s for his benefit in the long term." But I'd suggest having a look at all the research that suggests that it's better for the individual dog to leave him intact.
You'll find other research that says the opposite too of course.
But I'd think carefully about getting him done. Even if you are to go ahead, I'd leave it a lot longer and wait till he's fully mature. He's just a pup at the minute.
If you do leave him intact, you'll have to do a lot more training with him because it's not fair to allow male dogs to bother female dogs when out on walks. I only mention this because many people seem to find this hilarious. "Dogs will be dogs," they say. Or, "let them sort it out themselves," as my spayed female dog (she is a rescue so came to me spayed) is set upon by a pack of males and is clearly distressed.
As for taking the vet's advice, pet owners really need to move away from this default position. Vets are there to make money. They may not go into the profession thinking I want to do unnecessary procedures on animals and sell their owners drugs they don't need and give them flawed advice so I can make money for shareholders, but the way the industry is set up, that is exactly what they end up doing.
Lovely dog btw. Best of luck whatever you decide.
As for taking the vet’s advice, pet owners really need to move away from this default position. Vets are there to make money. They may not go into the profession thinking I want to do unnecessary procedures on animals and sell their owners drugs they don’t need and give them flawed advice so I can make money for shareholders, but the way the industry is set up, that is exactly what they end up doing.
What, all of them? Wow.
I'm with Thepilot on this.
My experience with vets is the same. They make up a good portion of their takings from these procedures. We took our 2nd Boston to their puppy classes to socialise and they talked non stop about nueturing to everyone there.
I had my male Boston castrated years ago but I've not had my female spayed after wising up to them and doing a bit of reading up on it. We do not plan to breed her btw so it's not for that reason.
Yes the equipment that the vet has to buy is very expensive but they charge well over the odds for everything and I'm not convinced they always give the best non profit advice.
We got ours done at 9 months, can't remember what advice that was based on but presumably vet / dog walker - he's not had any issues as a result anyway. Triggering factor for us was the incessant humping of the crusty jizz-soaked bed that was his main victim! He has a really nice temperament now but is quite unassertive - not sure how much of that is his personality vs the loss of his knackers.
@ IHN Pretty much, yeah.
When an industry/profession goes through massive corporatisation as the veterinary sector has in the past 20 years, then this is what happens.
The vets are caught in the middle. On the one hand they deal with unwanted and poorly cared for dogs. They're the ones putting them to sleep. Imagine what that's like. On the other hand, they know the role of sex hormones in development - which is not that different to us.
https://dogsfirst.ie/health-issues/dog-neutering/
Has a good overview.
As for taking the vet’s advice, pet owners really need to move away from this default position. Vets are there to make money.
You could say the same about private dentists in the uk for the same reasons. However I wouldn’t agree with you on either count based on my own personal experience. Perhaps we are lucky with our vet with whom we have dealt with for nearly 30 years.
Sure drugs etc. are expensive from a vet if you compare to an NHS prescription but I guess most people don’t really know the true costs of their scripts. It cost us £95 to have our dog neutered three years ago. We didn’t feel that was excessive tbh. It does cost more for a spaying as it is a more complex operation.
Our vet said (on first vaccinations) that it would be best to get him done when he is about 6months old, or when he starts being inappropriate (i.e. romancing everything)
He is nearly 9months, but has been too poorly for the procedure, but also too poorly for humping.
We will get him de-knacked once he is well enough, it isn't fair to keep them.
It was once put to me "how would you like it if you couldn't do anything with yours?"
@jimw
I'm not talking about what vets charge for individual procedures. You're right, we have no idea what the true cost of our own healthcare is.
I'm talking about the way the veterinary industry is set up which demands vets do more rather than less. There's also no money in talking to you about preventative care so they don't bother. I realise being a vet can't be a lot of fun much of the time. Sadly, suicide rates are pretty high in the industry and rising.
I also agree there are some individuals out there who still manage to be good vets but they are pretty few and far between imo.
They make up a good portion of their takings from these procedures.
Our two were both done on a voucher scheme which the rescue shelter had set up and mostly paid for.
Not sure the vet was exactly laughing all the way to the bank after we retrieved our dogs from them.
@dethbeard
I've heard that argument and I'm not saying it's not valid.
To be honest, I find male intact dogs a bit of a nuisance with my female dog so i'm not advocating one thing or the other.
What would you choose though: never be able to do anything with yours but keep them? Or have been done when you were young and become a castrato?
Just a thought.
I think there are enough dogs in need of homes already without risking adding more accidentally if he gets jiggy out of our sight.
Plus the behaviour that it is meant to stop is not exactly adding much to our life (humping, territory marking, general friskyness).
Plus I understand it can reduce the risk of some cancers.
The question is not if, but when. Do we wait until he is fully developed (and risk this behaviour becoming habit forming) or have him done now (and risk some of his development). He has such a lovely nature and we don’t want to inhibit him.
On the subject of vets, they do a great job and I don’t begrudge anybody earning a living from what they do. I don’t think it encourages unnecessary treatments. Sure they have a fairly unemotional medical view on what is right for animals and the broader animal community (they have to deal with the medical consequences, unwanted litters, abandoned animals and behavioural issues every day), but that doesn’t mean that their view is totally monetary.
He has a really nice temperament now but is quite unassertive
Sounds about what you want from a pet dog.
Have a look here:
https://www.greenbayvets.co.uk/2019/03/20/proud-to-be-independent/
All I'm saying is don't take the vet's word as gospel. Think of your vet as you would a used car salesman. They may not want to behave in this way but many are forced to.
As for your individual dog, I'd wait and be prepared to put in bit of extra work in.
As I say, lovely looking dog, good luck whatever you decide.
Do we wait until he is fully developed (and risk this behaviour becoming habit forming) or have him done now (and risk some of his development). He has such a lovely nature and we don’t want to inhibit him.
I'm going to get flamed for this I think, but (and I speak as a dog-owner and lover):
Stop anthropomorphising, it's a dog, not a child. If you love him, walk him and feed him, he'll be happy.
Humping isn't strictly related to testicles. My wife's a dog walker, and one of the dogs she walked was a female spaniel who humped other dogs. She also walks a little Bijon thing that was neutered early, and he's a total hump-machine. Google it, there's plenty of info out there.
As mentioned above, there is growing research into the benefits of leaving dogs intact from a behavioral point of view. In relation to unwanted pups, if you have an intact female, the only time there is a risk is when they are in season. And if you are taking your in-season female out and not in control of where she is, then it's your fault if anything happens.
Also, that link by stripeysocks is good. Plenty of links to actual research for more information.
None of the above is anthropomorphing him. I wasn’t wanting advice about which outfit to dress him in, or my hilarious ascertations that he can actually talk.
We aren’t suggesting not loving, walking or feeding him. We’ll continue to do that sans or avec knackers. The question is whether whether he is better with or without his bits. Like most animals his main purpose in life is recreation. Since that would be unwanted in this case, is it not fairer to deny him that possibility?
The dilemma is part of responsible dog ownership, whichever side of the argument you sit.
Thanks for the kind comments about Toby btw. He’s a cracking little mutt.
As above. My spayed female dog humps other dogs sometimes. It can be caused by excitement, stress, trying to assert dominance. Any number of things.
Intact male dogs are definitely more work, you'd have to be careful with him around non spayed females especially. No right and wrong answer and it's not an easy decision.
We ask our new owners to wait until the puppy is full developed, you can feel the growth plates in their legs - ask your vet to show you how to check.
we also ask them not to have bitch puppies spayed until they've had a season.
Dogs and bitchs both hump , its a stage in their development.
Attitudes to this vary hugely around the world, even among vets. My daughter is a vet and is horrified that (for example) declawing cats and removing scent glands from pet ferrets are common procedures in the US. Procedures which are nothing to do with animal welfare and everything to do with the convenience of the owner.
Routine spaying or castration of dogs is viewed in exactly the same way in other countries. Interesting article here. Brief extract below, the whole article goes into the pros and cons in a fairly balanced way.
"Globally, the approach to neutering of dogs varies considerably. Although surgical neutering is considered part of responsible pet ownership in the UK (similar to vaccinations) and performed routinely across the country, in Germany and Scandinavia, for example, surgical neutering is considered “mutilation” and is prohibited by law. Britain has one of the highest neutering rates in the world"
It a complex subject. We have an intact 5 year old cocker spaniel. Initially that was because we thought we would breed from him but have decided against it. By and large it's not an issue, we don't let him roam, he's not particularly humpy. He did have a bad period recently of howling at the door for about 10 days because a bitch half a mile away was in season! At times we have considered it, but he is quite an anxious dog and some reports say neutering can make this worse. As stated above, it's also not always a "cure" for humping etc.
One option to discover if it's right for your dog is temporary chemical castration which lasts about 6 months. Something we have mulled over.
All of my dogs have been male. All have remained complete until they died of old age.
Never saw the need for it . Seems a bit fashion driven sometimes, i.e "all the guys on the forum said do it ".
I’m going to get flamed for this I think, but (and I speak as a dog-owner and lover):
Stop anthropomorphising, it’s a dog, not a child. If you love him, walk him and feed him, he’ll be happy.
Why is it anthropomorphising to think of a dog as having emotions and feelings that are driven by sex hormones?
Got ours done at about 1yo. A a fellow male I wasn't very comforatable with it, (my first dog as an adult) but tried to look at it from a purely logical point of view, i.e.
1) No intention of breeding him
2) Potentialy avoiding certain health conditions
3) Calming him down a bit/avoid undesireable behaviors
Why is it anthropomorphising to think of a dog as having emotions and feelings that are driven by sex hormones?
Well, talk of 'emotions and feelings' for a start. If you mean behaviours, then fine.
we're both mammals, both social, have almost all the same hormones running through us. Both evolved to look after ourselves, survive threats, fight, kill, find mates, form bonds, find our place in a social structure, look after others in a pack and raise offspring.
Why do we get to have feelings and emotions and they don't? Just because we can describe ours using words?
Why is it anthropomorphising to think of a dog as having emotions and feelings that are driven by sex hormones?
Well, talk of ’emotions and feelings’ for a start. If you mean behaviours, then fine.
The physiological foundations of basic emotions are shared by humans and other mammals. There's also a fair degree of recognising emotions shared by other species. Details and refs in e.g.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-52938-4