# Neutering puppies (or not)



## Widgeon (25 April 2017)

Would anyone like to attempt to persuade me either way re. the pros and cons of early neutering, particularly with regard to physical development? Our vet seems to be keen on parting boys from their boy bits ASAP (and I'm sure they have good reasons for this, which I will obviously talk to them about), but I'm aware that's not everyone's opinion and based on what I've read, I'm still unsure whether it's a good idea. If I'm going to end up disagreeing with the vet I want to be confident of my own opinion....so can anyone provide their opinions and experiences and/or point me at some useful resources? If it makes any difference, the puppy in question is a male Cairn terrier. 

Thank you all!


----------



## MissTyc (25 April 2017)

Following. 

We have a Cairn X puppy boy just come in, so am interested as well. 

Haven't had a male dog for many years, and never a neutered one. But times have changed and neutering seems to give them better opportunities and playtime these days!


----------



## Alec Swan (25 April 2017)

Your vet is a disgrace to their profession if their advice is ASAP.  No need to disagree or give your reasons,  your dog your choice.  There are a host of reasons why castration should be a last resort,  and google can supply them to you.

I'm totally opposed to the needless neutering of dogs,  but if you must do it,  then at least wait until the pup is 12 months,  and then find a different vet to carry out the procedure,  would be my advice to you.

Alec.


----------



## Widgeon (25 April 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			Your vet is a disgrace to their profession if their advice is ASAP.  No need to disagree or give your reasons,  your dog your choice.  There are a host of reasons why castration should be a last resort,  and google can supply them to you.

I'm totally opposed to the needless neutering of dogs,  but if you must do it,  then at least wait until the pup is 12 months,  and then find a different vet to carry out the procedure,  would be my advice to you.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you - I thought there would be some strong opinions out there! Yes, I was starting to come to the conclusion that it would be best to just leave it and see how things go - then if we're having major problems that neutering might solve (which I would like to think is unlikely - I'm hoping that better training will be the answer to everything) it can always happen later.


----------



## Thistle (25 April 2017)

Extensively covered in this http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?747272-Spaying-keyhole-vs-traditional recent post


----------



## Widgeon (25 April 2017)

Thistle said:



			Extensively covered in this http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?747272-Spaying-keyhole-vs-traditional recent post
		
Click to expand...

Thanks very much - I thought that might be the case but my forum searching skills were clearly not up to the job...I will take myself over there and have a read.


----------



## CorvusCorax (25 April 2017)

If you must do it, please wait until the dog is mature.


----------



## blackcob (25 April 2017)

Some resources I've found useful:

http://www.2ndchance.info/cruciatelongtermneuter.htm
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4096726/ (breed specific but gives you an idea of the issues at stake)
http://www.caninesports.com/uploads/1/5/3/1/15319800/spay_neuter_considerations_2013.pdf

My opinion, for what it's worth, is that routine neutering of bitches is essential - pyos and mammary lump surgeries are daily occurences at work. The jury is out on when is the best time to do it, however. As per the other thread I had a bitch done early and I've no idea if I'd make the same decision again, the next one will be another dog. 

For dogs, I would leave 'em unless they cause a problem, then review with vet/trainer/behaviourist as necessary. Be prepared for castration in an older dog if/when BPH occurs. I'm a little biased on this one as my childhood dog died of a testicular/rectal cancer that could probably have been prevented by castration (the one entire dog currently in the family therefore endures having his testicles checked regularly, poor sod) but I can see that the evidence is stacked against routine early neutering of dogs.


----------



## gunnergundog (25 April 2017)

Came across a new one (for me) the other day: the link between neutering and auto-immune issues   https://bmcvetres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12917-016-0911-5


----------



## fburton (25 April 2017)

Is it generally considered that neutering improves temperament, or can it also have undesired effects?


----------



## Thistle (25 April 2017)

If a dog is submissive then neutering can make it even worse, things like fear aggression can get worse, submissive peeing can become a problem. Early neutering can stop a dog growing up mentally, leading to constant puppy behaviour.


----------



## Equi (25 April 2017)

Hormones play a huge part in all animals development, both physically and mentally. Anyone who says otherwise is frankly an idiot. There is however a fine line, for example you want them to be physically and mentally mature, but not get to the point they are testosterone fueled devils who only ever think about humping, but as with stallions you train them and manage them - neutering is great for stupid owners who haven't a clue, but for anyone with half a brain and some inclination to actually train can manage an entire dog just fine. 

My rescue lab was only recently castrated because he did get a swelling in one testicle, at about 11..but before that his behaviour and mental state was typical labrador (i.e. a big lovable goofball)


----------



## Alec Swan (25 April 2017)

fburton said:



			Is it generally considered that neutering improves temperament, or can it also have undesired effects?
		
Click to expand...

In a word,  No.  The only certain thing that castrating a dog *_will_* do is that it'll prevent it from siring pups.  Castration *_may_* also reduce the desire to mate,  though that's far from certain.
When humans were routinely castrated and to form eunuchs for Court purposes,  they were always 'cut' pre-puberty.  This had the effect that they had very little in the way of male characteristics or appearance often,  and that they often reached heights of well in excess of six feet.  They showed no signs of masculinity because they no longer produced testosterone in sufficient quantity.  Rather like horses,  cattle,  sheep and it seems humans,  the result with dogs is that the effect of being asexual is achieved,  when they are cut pre-pubesence.  

They may also,  and like humans and horses,  grow to outlandish size and certainly taller than one might expect from the parentage.  Have we ever wondered why we produce so many 17-18hh geldings from parents which are of 16hh?  Early gelding is often the answer.

Alec.


----------



## Equi (25 April 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			They may also,  and like humans and horses,  grow to outlandish size and certainly taller than one might expect from the parentage.  Have we ever wondered why we produce so many 17-18hh geldings from parents which are of 16hh?  Early gelding is often the answer.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

My lad is 17hh and was a BOGOF out of a 15.2 tb mare, father is most likely a cob cause i don't know too many 16hh++ coloured stallions that are breeding tb mares willy nilly! Hes a total wuss and has zero interest in any mares so i can only assume he got cut early.


----------



## SusieT (25 April 2017)

There are arguements either way but for well behaved boys there's no harm in leaving it til their older and may be harm doing them younger - but if he starts doing naughty boy things best to whip them off asap
Big dogs I'd personally leave til 1yr +


----------



## SusieT (25 April 2017)

The argument for early neutering causing animals to grow enormous is a bit debunked by the fact that people have gradually grown taller over the centuries - and they weren't neutered!


----------



## Equi (25 April 2017)

SusieT said:



			The argument for early neutering causing animals to grow enormous is a bit debunked by the fact that people have gradually grown taller over the centuries - and they weren't neutered!
		
Click to expand...

Evolution and abnormal height from lack of testosterone are two completely different things. Unfotunately you can not research how large an animal would have been if it was not castrated, but ive been part of staffordshire bull terrier groups for a long time and a hell of a lot of the time the neutered animals are taller and narrower than the unneutered animals.


----------



## Cinnamontoast (25 April 2017)

Testosterone does encourage the growth plates to close, though, so you could expect entire males to be taller than neutered siblings. I'll see if I can dig out the study I like, it's pretty balanced and the health benefits are fairly pro/con for both sides.

Copy and paste link into your browser: http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf


----------



## Elsbells (25 April 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			Your vet is a disgrace to their profession if their advice is ASAP.  No need to disagree or give your reasons,  your dog your choice.  There are a host of reasons why castration should be a last resort,  and google can supply them to you.

I'm totally opposed to the needless neutering of dogs,  but if you must do it,  then at least wait until the pup is 12 months,  and then find a different vet to carry out the procedure,  would be my advice to you.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree with Alec and it one of my hates about over zealous and over bookish vets! I have never had any if my dogs "done" and why should I. They have never posed a problem and unless stupid bitch owners choose to walk their in season bitch away from home or past mine, there shouldn't be. My bitches however, I have spayed by having the ovaries removed only and that has been difficult at times to find a practise that will do as I ask until I've asked the vet their reasons to remove everything? 
Once they've gone away and researched they've agreed to do it. Would you advocate removing the make parts of a 7 year old human boy and if you did what would be the outcome on his life do you think?


----------



## Equi (25 April 2017)

cinnamontoast said:



			Testosterone does encourage the growth plates to close, though, so you could expect entire males to be taller than neutered siblings.
		
Click to expand...

Your statement is a bit contradictory, was there a typo?


----------



## Equi (25 April 2017)

Elsbells said:



			Absolutely agree with Alec and it one of my hates about over zealous and over bookish vets! I have never had any if my dogs "done" and why should I. They have never posed a problem and unless stupid bitch owners choose to walk their in season bitch away from home or past mine, there shouldn't be. My bitches however, I have spayed by having the ovaries removed only and that has been difficult at times to find a practise that will do as I ask until I've asked the vet their reasons to remove everything? 
Once they've gone away and researched they've agreed to do it. Would you advocate removing the make parts of a 7 year old human boy and if you did what would be the outcome on his life do you think?
		
Click to expand...

I wanted to keep my staffy bitch entire but never planned to breed her as i didn't think she as worthy and she was much too game, but after she was stolen (and i got her back thankfully) i wanted just one more thing that would make her more "useless" to anyone. God forbid she got stolen again i would never have wanted her to end up in some garden shed firing out pups for the ring.


----------



## madmav (26 April 2017)

Hilarious. No idea what the science is behind that, maybe someone was nicking the gonads of dinosaurs and that's why they got so freakingly big.


----------



## Equi (26 April 2017)

madmav said:



			Hilarious. No idea what the science is behind that, maybe someone was nicking the gonads of dinosaurs and that's why they got so freakingly big.
		
Click to expand...

Or maybe someone needs to read about history and evolution omg hahhaha seriously watch Nat Geo or something because you need an education


----------



## Cinnamontoast (26 April 2017)

equi said:



			Your statement is a bit contradictory, was there a typo?
		
Click to expand...

Oh god, yes, multi tasking, sorry! Was thinking of my freakishly tall springers who were cut late. Teach me to proof read!


----------



## fburton (26 April 2017)

cinnamontoast said:



			Testosterone does encourage the growth plates to close, though, so you could expect entire males to be taller than neutered siblings. I'll see if I can dig out the study I like, it's pretty balanced and the health benefits are fairly pro/con for both sides.

Copy and paste link into your browser: http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

Click to expand...

A great overview - thanks!

I did some library research into the effect of testosterone on growth plates and found the paper I quote here:

http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/foru...nformation&p=12690243&viewfull=1#post12690243

with the conclusion being that castration delayed growth plate closure but didn't affect growth rate, with the result being longer bones.


----------



## ester (26 April 2017)

Elsbells said:



			Absolutely agree with Alec and it one of my hates about over zealous and over bookish vets! I have never had any if my dogs "done" and why should I. They have never posed a problem and unless stupid bitch owners choose to walk their in season bitch away from home or past mine, there shouldn't be. My bitches however, I have spayed by having the ovaries removed only and that has been difficult at times to find a practise that will do as I ask until I've asked the vet their reasons to remove everything? 
Once they've gone away and researched they've agreed to do it. Would you advocate removing the make parts of a 7 year old human boy and if you did what would be the outcome on his life do you think?
		
Click to expand...

He might have a very successful career as a castrato? 

Actually wiki even mentions the effect on their ribs being longer improving breath capacity  rubbish source obv


----------



## Widgeon (26 April 2017)

cinnamontoast said:



			Testosterone does encourage the growth plates to close, though, so you could expect entire males to be taller than neutered siblings. I'll see if I can dig out the study I like, it's pretty balanced and the health benefits are fairly pro/con for both sides.

Copy and paste link into your browser: http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

Click to expand...

Interesting document - thanks. Made me wonder why very early neutering is still so commonly recommended? Perhaps that is a very naive question.


----------



## ponyparty (26 April 2017)

As an owner of a (recently neutered - last week!) male Manchester Terrier, I was concerned about having him done too early. The breed can display nervous traits, so I was worried about the loss of testosterone making him nervous/submissive. However, with his balls on, he was becoming a pain; humping any dog he came across in the park, I mean really trying to go for it, licking bitch pee off the grass, becoming deaf to my commands, and the final straw was when confronted with a potentially aggressive dog, he would retaliate rather than ignore as previously. 

As I was so worried about potential negative effects of neutering, I had him implanted with a temporary (6 months) testosterone inhibiting implant - he was 12 months old by this point - to see how he fared. It took about 4-6 weeks to kick in. I did notice him become slightly more nervous at first (afraid of loud noises e.g. when unloading the dishwasher) but he grew in confidence over time, started responding to my commands again, stopped reacting to other dogs - would check in with me as to whether he was allowed to go over to them, and would come away from them immediately I called him... 

It lasted pretty much dead on 6 months, and within a few weeks of the 6 month date he was back to his entire dog behaviours, so I have gone ahead with the neuter now as a permanent solution.

I cannot WAIT for the effects of the neuter to kick in haha he has gone from the obedient, easy going little dog I had been enjoying for 6 months or so back to a tearaway, randy, bitch-obsessed little monster! He's rubbed a bald patch onto my mum's Maltese bitch's tail base because he follows her around sniffing her arse so much! :-/

ETA: implant name if you're interested is Suprelorin


----------



## MotherOfChickens (26 April 2017)

ponyparty said:



			As an owner of a (recently neutered - last week!) male Manchester Terrier, I was concerned about having him done too early. The breed can display nervous traits, so I was worried about the loss of testosterone making him nervous/submissive. However, with his balls on, he was becoming a pain; humping any dog he came across in the park, I mean really trying to go for it, licking bitch pee off the grass, becoming deaf to my commands, and the final straw was when confronted with a potentially aggressive dog, he would retaliate rather than ignore as previously. 

As I was so worried about potential negative effects of neutering, I had him implanted with a temporary (6 months) testosterone inhibiting implant - he was 12 months old by this point - to see how he fared. It took about 4-6 weeks to kick in. I did notice him become slightly more nervous at first (afraid of loud noises e.g. when unloading the dishwasher) but he grew in confidence over time, started responding to my commands again, stopped reacting to other dogs - would check in with me as to whether he was allowed to go over to them, and would come away from them immediately I called him... 

It lasted pretty much dead on 6 months, and within a few weeks of the 6 month date he was back to his entire dog behaviours, so I have gone ahead with the neuter now as a permanent solution.

I cannot WAIT for the effects of the neuter to kick in haha he has gone from the obedient, easy going little dog I had been enjoying for 6 months or so back to a tearaway, randy, bitch-obsessed little monster! He's rubbed a bald patch onto my mum's Maltese bitch's tail base because he follows her around sniffing her arse so much! :-/

ETA: implant name if you're interested is Suprelorin
		
Click to expand...

thanks for posting-I remember when you asked about the implant initially and glad it worked for you. I do believe neutering a dog can reduce certain behaviours as I've seen it in a friend's lab (neutered at 6yo. he had been the poster boy for not routinely neutering the family dog - a really lovely boy. but he started getting reactive on walks for not reason they could think of-as she had two young girls in tow on walks they decided finally to get him done-the reactivity stopped). Of course he had the benefit of being done late, the family made the decision based on their situation and time available for the dog. 

worth mentioning though that from what I've read the implants have the same effect on growth plates as actual neutering although there arent (yet) any long term studies on this effect in implanted dogs.


----------



## galaxy (26 April 2017)

The way I deal with this is to not bring it up with the vet!!  If a vet mentions it I don't enter into a 'discussion' about it I simply say he will be 'done' once he is fully grown. Quite flatly. No tone for an opening opportunity for them to give me their opinion.

Exactly the same tone I have if a vet tries to talk to me about canine (or equine!) nutrition! Lol


----------



## MotherOfChickens (26 April 2017)

people can always change vets. my last two practices haven't been pro early neutering and partner at current practice doesnt want me to do either of mine-plus I got him thinking about diets and better kibbles (he hadnt heard of MWH or Eden etc). Its a proper rural mixed practise though-maybe they are just more realistic (and their charges are very good!).


----------



## ponyparty (26 April 2017)

MotherOfChickens said:



			thanks for posting-I remember when you asked about the implant initially and glad it worked for you. I do believe neutering a dog can reduce certain behaviours as I've seen it in a friend's lab (neutered at 6yo. he had been the poster boy for not routinely neutering the family dog - a really lovely boy. but he started getting reactive on walks for not reason they could think of-as she had two young girls in tow on walks they decided finally to get him done-the reactivity stopped). Of course he had the benefit of being done late, the family made the decision based on their situation and time available for the dog. 

worth mentioning though that from what I've read the implants have the same effect on growth plates as actual neutering although there arent (yet) any long term studies on this effect in implanted dogs.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting MoC - it would be logical that the effects on the growth plates would be the same as neutering (potentially worse, as the implant stops testosterone production in both the testes and the brain, whilst neutering stops production in the testes only, by their removal...). Either way, I held out as long as poss due to wanting him to be physically and mentally/emotionally mature... Would have left him for longer but he was just getting out of control, walking him was becoming stressful rather than enjoyable! My reason for having the implant was purely so that, if there were any negative effects, this would be reversible when it wore off. Once you whip dem balls off, there's no going back haha!


----------



## MotherOfChickens (26 April 2017)

ponyparty said:



			My reason for having the implant was purely so that, if there were any negative effects, this would be reversible when it wore off. Once you whip dem balls off, there's no going back haha! 

Click to expand...

absolutely-I think its a useful thing to know about as it gives owners more options.


----------



## twiggy2 (26 April 2017)

fburton said:



			Is it generally considered that neutering improves temperament, or can it also have undesired effects?
		
Click to expand...

Many dogs that are fear reactive with others benefit from having the testosterone boost that remaining entire gives. There are times when removing the testosterone boost is beneficial but most dogs are dog reactive through fear.


----------



## Widgeon (26 April 2017)

twiggy2 said:



			Many dogs that are fear reactive with others benefit from having the testosterone boost that remaining entire gives. There are times when removing the testosterone boost is beneficial but most dogs are dog reactive through fear.
		
Click to expand...

Presumably if you get them well socialised early on then you're giving yourself the best possible chance at avoiding this problem? Or is it possible that a previously fairly well adjusted dog would become fear reactive following being neutered?

Edited to clarify, I mean being neutered at an older age, say 18 months


----------



## CorvusCorax (26 April 2017)

Socialisation is important but a lot of issues are genetic and will manifest themselves with maturity. It's not an excuse not to train but it is worth bearing in mind.
The genetics of desired traits are recognised widely, not so the undesired ones. That's why I wish people would put more thought into breeding.


----------



## twiggy2 (26 April 2017)

Widgeon said:



			Presumably if you get them well socialised early on then you're giving yourself the best possible chance at avoiding this problem? Or is it possible that a previously fairly well adjusted dog would become fear reactive following being neutered?

Edited to clarify, I mean being neutered at an older age, say 18 months
		
Click to expand...

Of course early socialisation is best, but if you have a well balanced dog and something happens to scare it and make it reactive, historically everyone would say castrate it and it has been proven this often makes things worse.
The locking bitches pee that someone mentioned is nothing to do with testosterone,  my last Un neutered bitch used to do it as well as cooking a leg and marking as high as possible, my current bitch (speyed far too early in rescue before 5 months) licks pee as well- then they both chatter their teeth.
I would castrate at 6-8 yrs providing there were no issues that meant it was needed sooner. The reasons;
Testicular cancer is ruled out.
Prostate cancer is dramatically reduced.
They are not so old that the aneasethia is high risk.
Testosterone has been there long enough that behaviours are well established so unlikely to change.
Physicality is well established.

For me reasons to do them earlier would be severe dog to dog aggression that is not fear based ( this is very rare)
Becoming a target for other dogs, it does seem that some dogs give off poor body language and others are less forgiving if the dog is entire.
Dog to human aggression that is not fear based.
Other physical conditions that can be improved with castration. 
Dogs that wander in search of in season bitches, IME this stops once castrated especially if the dog is not repeatedly allowed to practice straying before surgery.
If an owner is struggling despite trying if there is any inkling that castration may help


----------



## Cinnamontoast (26 April 2017)

Widgeon said:



			Interesting document - thanks. Made me wonder why very early neutering is still so commonly recommended? Perhaps that is a very naive question.
		
Click to expand...

I made myself unpopular on a pet forum by suggesting that just possibly, routine neutering is a vet's bread and butter. I hope that future generations of vets will not trot out the 'When are you getting him neutered?' question. On balance, I don't see the point but I did it for my hump everything in sight dog, he was a serious pain.

I think it's a bit like nutrition: my vet stocks and recommends Hills. I don't rate the brand and I'm not sure if the vet has much clue about canine nutrition. Hopefully with handy websites being available, owners can make semi-educated choices and do their own research.


----------



## Alec Swan (26 April 2017)

CorvusCorax said:



			Socialisation is important but a lot of issues are genetic and will manifest themselves with maturity. It's not an excuse not to train but it is worth bearing in mind.
The genetics of desired traits are recognised widely, not so the undesired ones. That's why I wish people would put more thought into breeding.
		
Click to expand...

It's very rare today that simple common sense,  borne of logical argument,  is accepted.

Alec.


----------



## ponyparty (27 April 2017)

twiggy, it was me that mentioned licking bitches pee  all I can go on is my own experience, which is that Frank used to lick bitch pee and chatter his teeth prior to having the implant; once the implant kicked in, this behaviour stopped; and  after it wore off, he started doing it again. 
Not a negative/undesirable behaviour as such, it doesn't bother me unduly - dogs will be dogs! But just an observation that the implant definitely did change the behaviour.


----------



## Moobli (27 April 2017)

Like MoC, my vet practice is a rural mixed practice and they never ask the "neutering" question of us.  I assume they credit us with enough common sense and experience to make our own minds up.  Not sure if that is the case throughout the practice or whether the pet owners are still encouraged to neuter early.  I will ask next time I am in.

Like CC points out, genetics play such a large role in the adult temperament and traits of our dogs that it really is wise to thoroughly check the lines when searching for a puppy.  

I really like this article on the subject ...

http://www.dog-secrets.co.uk/why-i-hate-socialisation/


----------



## Widgeon (27 April 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			It's very rare today that simple common sense,  borne of logical argument,  is accepted.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

Too true. This terrifies me on a daily basis!


----------



## s4sugar (27 April 2017)

fburton said:



			Is it generally considered that neutering improves temperament, or can it also have undesired effects?
		
Click to expand...

In one of my breeds which is prone to same sex aggression neutering can make the dog aggressive towards both genders.


----------



## blackcob (27 April 2017)

WorkingGSD said:



			I really like this article on the subject ...

http://www.dog-secrets.co.uk/why-i-hate-socialisation/

Click to expand...

Really interesting article. Is it just me that finds it a little bit depressing though? Only because it's so difficult to educate people in the context of a 10 minute vet appointment or a casual discussion in passing - you can see why people, even professionals, fall back on the old socialisation checklists/puppy parties etc. because it is otherwise so broad and complex a subject to tackle with a new owner who will probably end up offended about you questioning where, how and why they obtained their beloved puppy. 

I've got both ends of the spectrum at home, two second hand dogs of the same breed. One is resilient as hell and can have anything thrown at her, one is an absolute pansy who can't be pushed out of his comfort zone. I won't ever know but it'd be really interesting to see how each of them came about!


----------



## Hexx (27 April 2017)

So why do rescue centres insist on speying/neutering the dogs that come in?  they seem to neuter as soon as the dog has got a new home, regardless of age (unless they are little pups).  I see on American animal rescue programmes that they neuter as early as 10-12 weeks - which does seem far too early to me.

Three of my dogs were rescues, two were done at an early age at 6 months when they got into rescue, Bell at at 6 months and Jasper at 5 months.  Bertie went into rescue at 15 months so he was neutered.  Neither of them have any behavioural problems, they were both socialised and trained, in fact, both were a pleasure to own - sadly Bella was pts at 14 with cancer - but Jasper is still going strong at 12.  He is extremely affectionate and loves cuddles, a little overweight, but he does enjoy sleeping.  The only thing I really notice about him is that he has a very small sheath!  The one that was done at 15 months old is a terror (!) but that is probably down to his upbringing as a puppy as he had no socialisation with anything - human or canine - until I got him.

My sister's puppy was speyed after her first season.


----------



## MissTyc (27 April 2017)

Hexx said:



			So why do rescue centres insist on speying/neutering the dogs that come in?  they seem to neuter as soon as the dog has got a new home, regardless of age (unless they are little pups).  I see on American animal rescue programmes that they neuter as early as 10-12 weeks - which does seem far too early to me.
		
Click to expand...

Because they're already dealing with the surplus dogs and the one thing they definitely don't to do is create more dogs to add to the rescue population!


----------



## Thistle (27 April 2017)

Because rescues have to think of the dog population as a whole rather than individual dogs.


----------



## Alec Swan (29 April 2017)

WorkingGSD said:



			&#8230;&#8230;..

I really like this article on the subject ...

http://www.dog-secrets.co.uk/why-i-hate-socialisation/

Click to expand...

I wonder how we managed to rear sane and normal dogs before we had puppy parties.  It was an interesting argument and supported points which were established many years ago,  even though the more modern and new wave 'behaviourists' and the occasional uni lecturer will attempt to debunk the fact that previously we didn't seem to have so many maladjusted dogs.

All so often we hear and read of those,  often those who've taken on rescues,  who claim that the dog which they have was mistreated as a pup.  It's been long understood and accepted that the state of mind of the bitch carrying the pups,  her level of contentment whilst they're in her womb and the environment in which she rears her young are all of vital importance in the forming of a well adjusted dog which is able to interact with mankind in an acceptable fashion.  I've never really understood what use puppy classes are because they will probably only serve to reinforce how the pup sees the world,  and for better or not.

Genetics also have a huge influence,  and the greater aspect will come all so often,  from the bitch.  A nervous,  sharp or 'difficult' bitch will be likely to replicate herself.

The Jesuits will tell us 'Give me a child to the age of 7 and that's how the child will grow to be an adult'.  I firmly believe that what we see in a pup at,  more or less 16 weeks,  is what we will have as the dog matures.  We can tweak and adjust perhaps and for better or worse,  but by that age how the dog views the world and mankind,  will be formed.

Is our world now a better place for us to to rear our dogs in?  Do we over-think and complicate matters?  Would we be better off if we returned to the days when we saw dogs for what they are?  I suppose that we all answer those questions and in our own way.

Alec.


----------



## Luci07 (29 April 2017)

All mine are Staffords or Stafford X's from rescue. Due to the vast number of these poor dogs being bred, no rescue would let you have an entire dog (or sign to say you will spay). Information is so conflicting though as to when to have your dog spayed. First one went through a season (on vets advice) boy was already done, 3rd one was 18 months and her owner paid for her to be spayed before I took her on, last one I had at a puppy and she was done at 7 months (again vets advice) as I needed her front paws to be X rayed.


----------



## pippixox (29 April 2017)

I do think some vets are good at spreading myths about the effects- like reduced aggression and less hyper behavior. 
My last dog was a 2yo GSD who had not been socialized much until we got him at 2. He was also entire. We had him done at the same time as his giant hind dew claws got removed. It did not change his behavior at all- but he was reactive due to fear, so more or less testosterone wont do much to change that. But they are vets, not dog trainers/ behaviorists.

my MIL has a 5 month old german spitz who is a nutter! But I personally feel it is nothing to do with being entire- there is no humping for example- he is just a puppy and full of beans. She has had older dogs for ages and I think has forgotten how much energy puppies have! the vet is happy to do him ASAP. She has also recently got 2 sheltland sheltie bitch puppies (I know madness in my opinion- 3 puppies within 2 months! she also has 3 older small dogs) and the vet has said she doesn't even need to wait for a season. 

I know someone with a GSD who she refuses to neuter for many of the reasons people have talked about. She has had GSDs all her life- most rescues- but when she lost one of her 3 and decided to rescue another the rescue she contacted would not let her as she had an entire male. Even though she had years of experience and had never and would never breed.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (29 April 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			I wonder how we managed to rear sane and normal dogs before we had puppy parties.  It was an interesting argument and supported points which were established many years ago,  even though the more modern and new wave 'behaviourists' and the occasional uni lecturer will attempt to debunk the fact that previously we didn't seem to have so many maladjusted dogs.
.
		
Click to expand...

excluding the rather brilliant dog trainers that we have on this forum who always have had and always will have well adjusted dogs, I believe that the general dog owning public have less well adjusted dogs now for a variety of reasons. There were more mongrels, you never saw a collie or a husky in a town, one parent was generally at home, dogs were allowed to roam more freely etc etc. Plus there are now many more dogs and many more people. 

And besides, I don't believe everything was rosier in the 70s/80s (which is as far as I can go back). It depends on your personal experience.


----------



## Kaylum (29 April 2017)

Yes dog breeding has got rather out of control so has the price of puppies. I run #rehomehour on twitter and the main breeds we get advertised that are in rescues are just not suitable for families. These dogs do need neutering because idiots breed them for easy money. You might have seen the story on facebook about Wanda dumped in a garden in a shocking state having been used for breeding. Well there are thousands of other Wandas out there being used for breeding and so it goes on.


----------



## Fellewell (29 April 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			I wonder how we managed to rear sane and normal dogs before we had puppy parties.  It was an interesting argument and supported points which were established many years ago,  even though the more modern and new wave 'behaviourists' and the occasional uni lecturer will attempt to debunk the fact that previously we didn't seem to have so many maladjusted dogs.

All so often we hear and read of those,  often those who've taken on rescues,  who claim that the dog which they have was mistreated as a pup.  It's been long understood and accepted that the state of mind of the bitch carrying the pups,  her level of contentment whilst they're in her womb and the environment in which she rears her young are all of vital importance in the forming of a well adjusted dog which is able to interact with mankind in an acceptable fashion.  I've never really understood what use puppy classes are because they will probably only serve to reinforce how the pup sees the world,  and for better or not.

Genetics also have a huge influence,  and the greater aspect will come all so often,  from the bitch.  A nervous,  sharp or 'difficult' bitch will be likely to replicate herself.

The Jesuits will tell us 'Give me a child to the age of 7 and that's how the child will grow to be an adult'.  I firmly believe that what we see in a pup at,  more or less 16 weeks,  is what we will have as the dog matures.  We can tweak and adjust perhaps and for better or worse,  but by that age how the dog views the world and mankind,  will be formed.

Is our world now a better place for us to to rear our dogs in?  Do we over-think and complicate matters?  Would we be better off if we returned to the days when we saw dogs for what they are?  I suppose that we all answer those questions and in our own way.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...


Agree with what you say here Alec.

What puzzles me is the number of puppies needing surgery these days. While genetics obviously play a part in this I do wonder about the musculoskeletal and cardiovascular state of these dogs. We know that exercise is essential for physical and mental wellbeing especially in juvenile dogs. How is bone density improved and maintained when designer puppies are routinely caged to prevent them from messing up designer homes?

As for temperament I think it's time to start proper temperament testing for all breeding pairs. Not just enough to get them to stand for a judge but a proper test in various settings. Health and temperament tests should be given equal weighting IMO.

One of the happiest dogs I know belongs to a man who lives in a one-bed council flat with no garden. The dog goes everywhere with him and is never on a lead. He does the odd gardening job and the dog ground ties until he's finished. A rehoming centre wouldn't consider him but that is one happy dog who gets to be with his best mate all day.


----------



## Dobiegirl (29 April 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			I wonder how we managed to rear sane and normal dogs before we had puppy parties.  It was an interesting argument and supported points which were established many years ago,  even though the more modern and new wave 'behaviourists' and the occasional uni lecturer will attempt to debunk the fact that previously we didn't seem to have so many maladjusted dogs.

All so often we hear and read of those,  often those who've taken on rescues,  who claim that the dog which they have was mistreated as a pup.  It's been long understood and accepted that the state of mind of the bitch carrying the pups,  her level of contentment whilst they're in her womb and the environment in which she rears her young are all of vital importance in the forming of a well adjusted dog which is able to interact with mankind in an acceptable fashion.  I've never really understood what use puppy classes are because they will probably only serve to reinforce how the pup sees the world,  and for better or not.

Genetics also have a huge influence,  and the greater aspect will come all so often,  from the bitch.  A nervous,  sharp or 'difficult' bitch will be likely to replicate herself.

The Jesuits will tell us 'Give me a child to the age of 7 and that's how the child will grow to be an adult'.  I firmly believe that what we see in a pup at,  more or less 16 weeks,  is what we will have as the dog matures.  We can tweak and adjust perhaps and for better or worse,  but by that age how the dog views the world and mankind,  will be formed.

Is our world now a better place for us to to rear our dogs in?  Do we over-think and complicate matters?  Would we be better off if we returned to the days when we saw dogs for what they are?  I suppose that we all answer those questions and in our own way.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

I dont think there was so many maladjusted dogs years ago for lots of reasons, years ago it was common for dogs to be let out in the morning when the owners went to work and they would have socialised with other dogs. It was also uncommon for mums to work so the dog was never left on its own for very long. The most common problems dogs have now is dog on dog aggression and separation anxiety which would have been rare years ago for the above reasons.

I dont believe in neutering puppies either for all the reasons other people have given, I was lucky when I adopted my male Dobermann at 18months, the rescue trusted me enough to have him neutered at 2 years old which I did. He is a big boy and is a real clown, I would hate to think what his problems would have been if he had been neutered at 6months.


----------



## Alec Swan (29 April 2017)

Dobiegirl said:



			I dont think there was so many maladjusted dogs years ago for lots of reasons, years ago it was common for dogs to be let out in the morning when the owners went to work and they would have socialised with other dogs. It was also uncommon for mums to work so the dog was never left on its own for very long. The most common problems dogs have now is dog on dog aggression and separation anxiety which would have been rare years ago for the above reasons.

&#8230;&#8230;.. .
		
Click to expand...

Thinking about it,  I think that you've just hit the nail on the head.  I'm sure that just about every contributor to AAD is serious about dog ownership,  including the attendant responsibilities,  but so many buy pups without giving any real thought to the relationship which they'll have with the animal.  Many may just as well have a budgie in a cage,  for all the level of commitment.

As you also say,  and rightly,  so many today buy in a pup whilst working full time and wonder why they have the problems that they do.  Perhaps the problems have always been there,  and perhaps it's a case that with internet connection and people,  strangers talking to each other,  that we're becoming more aware.  I'm really not sure,  but I know for certain that it was only about 5 or 6 years ago that I heard the term 'Separation anxiety'!!

Alec.


----------



## Alec Swan (29 April 2017)

Fellewell said:



			&#8230;&#8230;..

What puzzles me is the number of puppies needing surgery these days. While genetics obviously play a part in this I do wonder about the musculoskeletal and cardiovascular state of these dogs. We know that exercise is essential for physical and mental wellbeing especially in juvenile dogs. How is bone density improved and maintained when designer puppies are routinely caged to prevent them from messing up designer homes?

As for temperament I think it's time to start proper temperament testing for all breeding pairs. Not just enough to get them to stand for a judge but a proper test in various settings. Health and temperament tests should be given equal weighting IMO.

One of the happiest dogs I know belongs to a man who lives in a one-bed council flat with no garden. The dog goes everywhere with him and is never on a lead. He does the odd gardening job and the dog ground ties until he's finished. A rehoming centre wouldn't consider him but that is one happy dog who gets to be with his best mate all day.
		
Click to expand...

You raise points worthy of thought.  I've no real answers but considering that health tests,  no matter how rigorous seem to have little effect upon the wellbeing of what we produce,  and the decline seems to continue,  I suspect that diet is the only other path to consider and how we rear our pups.

Temperament Testing?  Who would carry this out?  With work dogs,  mostly we don't really care what they look like,  temperament is everything and self selecting.  For the show bench,  then the emphasis is on 'looks' and conformation,  and despite the claims to the contrary,  lip service is paid to temperament and often by those who don't really understand about temperament because their dogs are rarely tested under conditions of work.

Dogs,  mostly,  have been designed as our companions.  When they're with us all but 24/7,  then they tend to be the better adjusted dogs.  When I lived alone,  except for my sheep dogs,  we were together at all times.  They lived in the house with me,  and I never had better work dogs.  It sounds as though the guy who you mention has,  as you say,  a mate and it's probably a relationship which has grown because they're together.

Alec.


----------



## MotherOfChickens (29 April 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			Temperament Testing?  Who would carry this out?  With work dogs,  mostly we don't really care what they look like,  temperament is everything and self selecting.  For the show bench,  then the emphasis is on 'looks' and conformation,  and despite the claims to the contrary,  lip service is paid to temperament and often by those who don't really understand about temperament because their dogs are rarely tested under conditions of work.
		
Click to expand...

character tests are carried out in dogs in Scandinavia for dogs used in breeding (possibly in Europe as well, I don't know). Interestingly, they are also not for  routine neutering.


----------



## CorvusCorax (29 April 2017)

As above, common in Europe.

There are plenty of judges and breed surveyors qualified to carry out the tests.
The new ZAP test is being introduced for the German Shepherd as a prerequisite to breeding along with the standard health tests. It used to be IPO1 (which cannot be attained without the BH traffic safe companion dog test, which is a little like the KCGC Gold on steroids) but this will act as an alternative apparently. It's pretty exhaustive.


----------



## Moobli (30 April 2017)

Inbreeding and closed gene pools could well be one of the biggest causes of health issues in modern pedigree breeds.  The main problem being that inbreeding does not provide the offspring of a mated pair with a substantial genetic variation. 

http://www.dogbreedhealth.com/the-problem-with-pedigree-dogs/


----------



## Moobli (30 April 2017)

Regarding the various behaviour issues seen in modern day dogs, I agree with earlier posters who have pointed out that our lifestyles have altered beyond all recognition in many cases and there are now far more pet dogs in homes where the household are out all day at work/school whereas traditionally the mother of the family tended house and so the dog had company all day, latch key dogs were also common (dogs allowed to roam wherever they wished during the day, only coming home again at teatime).  

There are less working roles for dogs that were once traditionally only kept for work and they have become popular as pets when really all their inherent instincts are drives for work are still intact.  Some working breeds or individuals will adapt, whereas others won't - and this manifests itself in behaviour issues which the average owner struggles to cope with.  

The breeding of dogs appears to be at an all time high - often without due thought and consideration given to health, temperament, and purpose of the parents and whether there are enough suitable homes for the offspring.

The UK has become a busier, noisier and more demanding place for humans and their dogs are just expected to fit in and tow the line - often with negative consequences for the poor dogs.

On the positive side, we have come a long way in learning about how dogs think and learn and so are, in general, better equipped to teach them in a more understanding  and constructive manner than the old jerk and drag methods of Barbara Woodhouse et al.  Dogs have the ability to experience positive emotions, like love and attachment, which means that they have a level of sentience comparable to that of a human child. 

There has also been positive progression for the modern dog in things like diet, veterinary care and medicine etc so it isn't all doom and gloom!


----------



## Fellewell (30 April 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			You raise points worthy of thought.  I've no real answers but considering that health tests,  no matter how rigorous seem to have little effect upon the wellbeing of what we produce,  and the decline seems to continue,  I suspect that diet is the only other path to consider and how we rear our pups.

Temperament Testing?  Who would carry this out?  With work dogs,  mostly we don't really care what they look like,  temperament is everything and self selecting.  For the show bench,  then the emphasis is on 'looks' and conformation,  and despite the claims to the contrary,  lip service is paid to temperament and often by those who don't really understand about temperament because their dogs are rarely tested under conditions of work.

Dogs,  mostly,  have been designed as our companions.  When they're with us all but 24/7,  then they tend to be the better adjusted dogs.  When I lived alone,  except for my sheep dogs,  we were together at all times.  They lived in the house with me,  and I never had better work dogs.  It sounds as though the guy who you mention has,  as you say,  a mate and it's probably a relationship which has grown because they're together.

Alec.
		
Click to expand...


Well I'm a bit of a sucker for a good looking dog and I don't agree that a dog in a show ring isn't capable of working too. Even our beloved Foxhounds have beauty shows!

 I know you don't like Crufts but all other things being equal, at the end of the day, the judge has to decide on a best in show based on which dog is still showing its socks off. He has to decide whether he's looking at stamina or nervous energy. Dogs don't always perform well in noise and heat so that shows something regards temperament and/or staying power but everything else is open to too many variables, such as a bitch who may be protecting her rear end against an ardent male in best in breed and not showing her true potential despite hip/elbow scores being well within normal parameters.

I've got two here; one show lines, one working lines. The show bred one is the one with the brains. When I took on my first shep in 1968 he was beautiful, from show lines and had been holding a very nice family hostage for six months. He didn't think anything through, much like the working line dog I have now, who was also a reject. One day I hope the breeders will get it right, but you can get lovely dogs from any kind of breeding IME. There will always be throwbacks.


----------



## Alec Swan (30 April 2017)

Fellewell said:



			&#8230;&#8230;.. . Even our beloved Foxhounds have beauty shows!

 &#8230;&#8230;.. .
		
Click to expand...

The show ring isn't their raison d'être.  Without function,  there would be no form for the Foxhound.

It isn't Crufts specifically which I find depressing,  but the entire breeding and breed standard system.  Perhaps the problem started when breed standards were set,  and then mistakenly in my view,  the stud books were closed.  Breed Standards?  It seems to me that with the possible exception of any specific breed peculiarities,  perhaps a roman nose or a squashed face,  they're all but identical!  I challenge anyone to read a Breed Standard,  without knowing the specific breed and then tell me which breed of dog it refers to!

Considering the Irish Draft as a horse,  the bulk of them (all?) carry out-cross blood and usually to TBs.  This is an excellent example of a breed of animal which continues to evolve.  Where do we see this in any breed of KC recognised and registered dog?  We don't,  is the answer.  I stand to be corrected,  but does anyone know of any breed of dog which is of Show focussed breeding where it's accepted that a similar breed has been used to create a degree of vitality?  

Let's consider the Scottish Deerhound;  always a breed of limited numbers,  but surely a breed which is in decline and in every way imaginable.  Were I to suggest to the breed society that a judicial entry of greyhound in to their breeding plans would almost certainly assist with an improvement,  they'd all need smelling salts!

Consider dogs which are of supposedly working lines and those which are purely show bred,  as the work-bred dogs evolve,  so they become all but unrecognisable when stood against a dog of pure show breeding.  The GSD,  or so it seems to me,  is one of the few breeds where there is a splinter section where the focus is on the dog's working ability but they also have their own self-contained shows.  This is a hugely positive influence because in the show ring,  conformational flaws will show up to the experienced eye,  and when breeding from dogs which are conformationally as correct as there are,  then the best of those pups will (or should) go on to compete.

The Breed Societies,  supported by a bunch of be-tweeded old duffers from the KC are wholly responsible for the narrow minded approach which we currently enjoy,  and we only have to look at those two appalling GSDs at Crufts a couple of years ago to wonder just who describes a judge as Highly Respected,  beyond the Kennel Club.  The KC would benefit were they to consider the mantra &#8212; Oh to have the gift,  to see ourselves as others see us.

Finally!   I too enjoy a good looking dog,  but I suppose that it depends upon where and in what form we see beauty.  I would consider skeletal and musculature structure and an animal's ability to make use of it's assets,  before the often falsely presented offerings which are on display.

Alec.


----------



## gunnergundog (30 April 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			Considering the Irish Draft as a horse,  the bulk of them (all?) carry out-cross blood and usually to TBs.  This is an excellent example of a breed of animal which continues to evolve.  Where do we see this in any breed of KC recognised and registered dog?  We don't,  is the answer.  I stand to be corrected,  but does anyone know of any breed of dog which is of Show focussed breeding where it's accepted that a similar breed has been used to create a degree of vitality?
		
Click to expand...

The English pointer has been used in dalmations both here and in USA to aid the uric acid issue.  Only one or two dogs granted and I'm not close enough to the breed to know the ins and outs but it was only six or seven years ago I believe.


----------



## blackcob (30 April 2017)

There's also been an outcross programme in Irish red and white setters, using Irish setters, since 2011/12.


----------



## Moobli (30 April 2017)

I am not against out-crossing in pedigree breeds to increase genetic diversity, as long as it is done sympathetically to keep the working drives required - in my breeds at least (GSD and Border Collie).


----------



## ester (30 April 2017)

Assuming judges don't take into account the health test status of a dog presented? I think health testing would work just fine if the kc limited the registration of affected dogs/their offspring


----------



## Alec Swan (30 April 2017)

gunnergundog said:



			The English pointer has been used in dalmations both here and in USA to aid the uric acid issue.  Only one or two dogs granted and I'm not close enough to the breed to know the ins and outs but it was only six or seven years ago I believe.
		
Click to expand...




blackcob said:



			There's also been an outcross programme in Irish red and white setters, using Irish setters, since 2011/12.
		
Click to expand...

Do either of you know if the results were thought to be satisfactory?

Alec.


----------



## Clodagh (30 April 2017)

ester said:



			Assuming judges don't take into account the health test status of a dog presented? I think health testing would work just fine if the kc limited the registration of affected dogs/their offspring
		
Click to expand...

If the KC only registered litters from health tested (and with good results) parents they would probably go bust. It would absolutely the right thing to do if they were genuinely concerned about healthy breeding and not just getting rich. Temperment testing would be a plus, but as hopefully the sort of people who only breed from decent parents would hopefully not breed from dodgy tempered ones? The trouble is with many breeds poor temperament is so often down to frustration and bad handling, rahther than actual neurosis. The working bred collie shut in a flat may well get herdy and nippy, for instance.


----------



## ester (30 April 2017)

The pointer Dalmatian has resolved the problem and the offspring are now registrable uk and USA as Dals so yes successful I should think despite much flapping by the Dalmatian bunch at the time.


----------



## Clodagh (30 April 2017)

And another thing...
Last week we went up to a game fair and yes there were lots of gundogs there. There were also shed loads of English bulldgos, pugs and French bulldogs. Some were OK but many were panting and distressed. It was not a hot day. The English bulldogs are a travesty, especially. While we have a population of people who want to own a dog that can neither walk nor breathe there is really no hope at all.


----------



## Alec Swan (30 April 2017)

ester said:



			The pointer Dalmatian has resolved the problem and the offspring are now registrable uk and USA as Dals so yes successful I should think despite much flapping by the Dalmatian bunch at the time.
		
Click to expand...

That's excellent news.  I wonder if any of the other breed societies would consider the idea. There would be those breeds,  thinking Pekinese for instance and just how the deformities would be adjusted,  and using which breeds,  I'm not sure.

It would be fun to link breed to the suitable outcrosses,  wouldn't it?  The Bulldog which Clodagh mentions,  for instance &#8230;. Staffy?

Another point of concern and considering the influence of what we'll call the back-yard-breeders and those who seem to produce the designer misfits,  I wonder if the breeders of the truly show-bench influenced breeds are on the decline.

Considering the now healthy numbers of GSDs which are being used in sport and for their original purpose,  I wonder if those which are bred purely for the show ring are declining in breeders,  and so the volume of pups produced.

Any thoughts anyone?

Alec.


----------



## Moobli (1 May 2017)

Alec Swan said:



			That's excellent news.  I wonder if any of the other breed societies would consider the idea. There would be those breeds,  thinking Pekinese for instance and just how the deformities would be adjusted,  and using which breeds,  I'm not sure.

It would be fun to link breed to the suitable outcrosses,  wouldn't it?  The Bulldog which Clodagh mentions,  for instance . Staffy?

Another point of concern and considering the influence of what we'll call the back-yard-breeders and those who seem to produce the designer misfits,  I wonder if the breeders of the truly show-bench influenced breeds are on the decline.

Considering the now healthy numbers of GSDs which are being used in sport and for their original purpose,  I wonder if those which are bred purely for the show ring are declining in breeders,  and so the volume of pups produced.

Any thoughts anyone?

Alec.
		
Click to expand...

It is a really interesting concept and I do hope that more breeders open their eyes to the possibility in future.  It would not mean a move away from pedigree breeds, but outcrossing for one or two generations and using new bloodlines could only help the genetic diversity in many breeds.  

I speak to an American dog breeder who breeds healthy, longer lived Irish Wolfhounds.  His aim is to produce dogs that look like pure wolfhounds, but with much more genetic diversity and you would be hard pressed to tell some of his dogs from purebred IWs.  He outcrosses with Alaskan Malamutes and also uses some North American wolf cross blood.  He breeds for healthy pets though and so I would imagine to outcross breeds designed for work needs a similar set of traits and drives in both parents.

There was a recent study which claimed that working line GSDs and their West German show line counterparts are genetically different animals, and so to cross working lines with show lines could help improve the structure and conformation of the WGSL but for greater genetic diversity an outcross to Malinois or Dutch Herders could prove worthwhile in the working strain of the GSD.

In Border Collies they could possibly be outcrossed to Kelpies, although in most cases their working styles are different so there would have to be a lot of thought and experimentation.  You also have to bear in mind that would there be enough homes for the pups in the interim - which may not be such an issue with working or pet dogs, but clearly wouldn't be favoured by those wanting to show.

I am not against the breeding of crossbreeds per se - and the sudden popularity of crossbreeds such as the cockerpoo, cavapoo, labradoodle etc seem to be filling a gap in the market for a family friendly pet.  Of course crossbreeding should be undertaken with as much care and diligence as pedigree breeding - so health tests done on both parents, temperament suitable for purpose etc and unfortunately that just doesn't seem to be the case at the moment in many crossbred litters.

Regarding a decline in the number of pups bred for the show ring, I haven't seen any evidence of that.


----------



## ester (1 May 2017)

Of course the dalmation would have been much more quickly sorted with a bit of GM 

couple of links if you are interested Alec http://www.luadalmatians.com/index.html
http://www.dalmatianheritage.com/about/nash_research.htm

Alec I think it really rather depends whether you are trying to resolve a single genetic trait or a group of 'form' traits,  and the issues when it is the form that is  associated with 'disease' that is a key part of the breed standard.


----------



## CorvusCorax (1 May 2017)

To be honest I don't think the average pet purchaser and sometimes even some breeders can see what is staring them in the face.
I see so many nervy, environmentally unsound, reactive, fearful dogs now, who's owners think their dogs have lovely temperaments because they are 'good as gold at home' and love cuddles and sleep on the bed.
And then people breed from them.


----------



## CorvusCorax (1 May 2017)

A fairly comprehensive and very German explanation of temperament testing

https://youtu.be/7Z8mEQ_qqjs


----------

