Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
July 23, 2014, 06:56:54 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: BILL NUMBER: AB 1634 - Mandatory spay & neuter - BILL DROPPED - kinda  (Read 9288 times)
Max_Rep
Max Rep
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3969

It’s about how hard you can GET hit...


View Profile WWW
« Reply #25 on: May 24, 2007, 01:12:45 PM »

Countless people let their un-spayed, un-neutered dogs and cats have liters and then give the kittens, puppies away to people they barely know. These kittens, puppies end up on the street to breed like crazy. I've had countless cats fixed at 8-9 weeks with no health problems what so ever.

Maybe large breed dogs are different.

If not THIS bill then some better one needs to be written and passed. There are just to many irresponsible idiots out there.
Report to moderator   Logged

and keep moving!
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3582


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: May 24, 2007, 01:21:14 PM »

Countless people let their un-spayed, un-neutered dogs and cats have liters and then give the kittens, puppies away to people they barely know. These kittens, puppies end up on the street to breed like crazy. I've had countless cats fixed at 8-9 weeks with no health problems what so ever.

Maybe large breed dogs are different.

If not THIS bill then some better one needs to be written and passed. There are just to many irresponsible idiots out there.


 I agree their is a lot of irresponsible idiots out there.  And if you just glance at the general concept of this Bill it does seem like a good idea, but when reading what this Bill would actually mean, it should not pass.  It just has too many flaws IMO.

  If nothing else the proposal of this bill has gotten people thinking.  Somewhere down the line a compromise may be made that can benefit everyone.

 
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3582


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: May 24, 2007, 02:35:41 PM »

Here's a thought:

  Why no leash laws for cats?  How much would the cat population drop if cats had to be on a leash and not allowed to roam free?  People would most likely spay or neuter their indoor cat so it doesn't spray or they have to deal with all those heats, so even if the cat got out, no population growth. 

  You have a better chance of getting rabies from an outdoor cat than from a  dog (wildlife and bats are the major concern for rabies), my dog couldn't go crap or dig up my neighbors yard, but their cat can to mine.  So why no leash laws for cats.

  You still would have problems enforcing this, and exemptions may have to be made for farm and barn cats possibly, but couldn't this put a big dent in the number or cats euthanized every year?

  I would support something like this.

Report to moderator   Logged
knny187
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21925



View Profile
« Reply #28 on: May 24, 2007, 03:56:17 PM »

Cats are like rabbits...I can see where this may apply to help control their population.

For dogs....I do think it's unhealthy.....espeically for the larger dogs.
Report to moderator   Logged
Max_Rep
Max Rep
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3969

It’s about how hard you can GET hit...


View Profile WWW
« Reply #29 on: May 25, 2007, 12:33:11 AM »

AB 1634

Sorry Amy some of your points (on your ten reasons) don't even make sense. Dozens and dozens of rescue groups are behind this. So are veterinarian groups. Ed Boks has a stellar reputation and supports it. I talked to many vets about when is the right time to spay and neuter and never got “its unhealthy” as an answer. Most felt about 5 months was healthy. Sooner for cats.

From the desk of Ed Boks

Thursday, May 17, 2007

Three Reasons to Support AB 1634
http://laanimalservices.blogspot.com/2007/05/three-reasons-to-support-ab-1634.html

Assembly Bill 1634 – The California Healthy Pets Act – continued on its path to the Governor’s desk Wednesday, May 16th when it was passed by the Assembly Appropriations Committee on a B roll call vote.

AB 1634 is designed to serve as a significant tool in helping end the incalculable suffering of lost and homeless dogs and cats in the State of California.

There are many reasons for supporting AB 1634. I want to highlight just three:

1. Public Health: According to the American and California Veterinary Medical Associations, dogs and cats have many transmitted diseases, many of which are fatal and some are potentially contagious to humans. Spayed and neutered pets are rarely exposed to these diseases.

The number one killer of cats and dogs, after euthanasia, is cancer. Spaying and neutering can prevent most of these deaths. Medical research shows that spayed and neutered cats and dogs live longer and healthier lives. For these and many other reasons, the American Veterinary Medical Association recommends early spaying and neutering because younger animals recover faster and with less pain.

This modest one time expense can save an incalculable amount of money in veterinary care as well as all the heartache resulting from unnecessary illnesses over the life of an animal.

2. Public Safety: Spaying and neutering reduces the dangers caused by roaming stray animals, the transmission of rabies, and injuries from dog and cat bites. Over 30,000 dog and cat bites are reported in California annually. Over 23,000 involve dogs. Unaltered dogs are three times more likely to attack humans and other pets.

According to the Center for Disease Control, California has the highest occurrence of dog bites, animal attacks and attack-related fatalities in the nation -- and children are the most common victims. In fact, 50% of all children are bitten by a dog or cat by age 12 according to the CDC. People over 70 years of age comprise 10% of all dog bite victims and represent 20% of those killed by dogs. 75% of all dog bites, attacks and fatalities involve intact male dogs.

The insurance industry estimates it pays more than $1 billion each year in homeowners’ liability claims resulting from dog bites. Hospital expenses for dog bite-related emergency visits are estimated at $102.4 million. There are also medical insurance claims, workmen’s compensation claims, lost wages, and sick leave and other associated business costs that have not been calculated.

3. Fiscal Responsibility: In 1998 the State enacted the Animal Shelter Law, SB 1785, commonly called “The Hayden Bill”. Since its enactment the provisions of the Hayden Bill have generated the third largest reimbursable fiscal mandate in the state. To date the Hayden Bill has cost the state $121.6 M and is conservatively growing at a rate of $30M a year.
Report to moderator   Logged

and keep moving!
Max_Rep
Max Rep
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3969

It’s about how hard you can GET hit...


View Profile WWW
« Reply #30 on: May 25, 2007, 12:35:02 AM »

Ed Boks

Ed Boks was executive director of both Maricopa County and New York City Animal Care & Control, the two largest animal care and control programs in the United States each rescuing over 50,000 lost pets, exotic, and wild animals annually. Maricopa County became one of the largest pet adoption agencies in the United States adopting nearly 22,000 pets into loving homes every year. Ed also established the first municipal no-kill shelter in the United States while in AZ. Ed was recruited by Mayor Bloomberg to replicate his programs in New York City in 2003. While there, pet adoptions increased 125% and euthanasia decreased 30%. Ed established strategic no-kill plans in both communities and now plans to do the same in Los Angeles. Ed brings over 25 years of experience in the animal welfare and control field to LA Animal Services. Ed and his team are working hard to transform the traditional catch-and-kill mentality into a recognition of the inherent value of the lives of the more than 50,000 animals LA shelters care for each year. To achieve this goal he plans to work with the community to institute a host of innovative programs to meet specific community challenges.
Report to moderator   Logged

and keep moving!
Max_Rep
Max Rep
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3969

It’s about how hard you can GET hit...


View Profile WWW
« Reply #31 on: May 25, 2007, 12:39:30 AM »

 

SPONSORS
· California Animal Control Directors Association
· California Veterinary Medical Association
· City of Los Angeles
· Social Compassion in Legislation
· State Humane Association of California
 
ELECTED OFFICIALS
· Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, City of Los Angeles
· Mayor Dick Riddell, City of Yucaipa
· Councilmember Brian Calhoun, City of Fresno
· Council President Henry T. Perea, City of Fresno
· Councilmember Val Lerch, City of Long Beach
· Councilmember Tonia Reyes Uranga, City of Long Beach
 
LAW ENFORCEMENT
· City of Beverly Hills Police Department
· City of Capitola Police Department
· City of Fremont Police Department, Animal Services Unit
· City of Los Angeles Police Department
· City of Santa Ana Police Department
· City of Salinas Police Department

CITY AND COUNTY AGENCIES
· City of Clovis Animal Services
· City of Elk Grove, Animal Services
· City of Fremont Animal Services Unit
· City of Lathrop Animal Services
· City of Los Angeles Animal Services
· City of San Jose Animal Care Services
· City of Stockton, Animal Control
· City of Turlock, Animal Control
· County of Contra Costa, Animal Services
· County of Madera, Department of Animal Control
· County of Riverside, Department of Animal Services
· County of San Bernardino Animal Care and Control
· Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority
· Southeast Area Animal Control Authority
 
Report to moderator   Logged

and keep moving!
Max_Rep
Max Rep
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3969

It’s about how hard you can GET hit...


View Profile WWW
« Reply #32 on: May 25, 2007, 12:41:41 AM »


Humane Societies and SPCA's
· Contra Costa Humane Society
· Animal Assistance League of Orange County
· County of Monterey SPCA
· East Bay SPCA
· Friends of Auburn/Tahoe Vista Placer County Animal Shelter
· Glendale Humane Society
· Inland Valley Humane Society and SPCA
· Lake Tahoe Humane Society
· PAL Humane Society
· Pasadena Humane Society & SPCA
· Placer SPCA
· Rancho Coastal Humane Society
· Sacramento SPCA
· San Clemente/Dana Point Animal Shelter
· Santa Cruz SPCA
· Santa Ynez Valley Humane Society
· Tehachapi Humane Society
· Victorville PAL Humane Society
· Friends of Long Beach Animals
 
Veterinarians & Veterinary Hospitals
· Dr. Darcey Barnes, DVM
· Dr. Alan Drusys, DVM
· Dr. Madeline Graham, DVM
· Dr. Jean Swingle Greek, DVM
· Dr. Barry Kipperman, DVM, DACVIM
· Dr. Paula Kislak, DVM
· Dr. Peter V. Mangravite, DVM
· Dr. Leticia Obledo, DVM
· Dr. Kristin Polci-Moger, DVM
· Dr. James Schulke, DVM
· Dr. Scott Smith, DVM
· Bellflower Veterinary Hospital
· California Animal Referral & Emergency Hospital
· Madera Veterinary Center, Inc.
· Your Neighborhood Pet Clinic
Report to moderator   Logged

and keep moving!
Max_Rep
Max Rep
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3969

It’s about how hard you can GET hit...


View Profile WWW
« Reply #33 on: May 25, 2007, 12:45:23 AM »

ANIMAL WELFARE ORGANIZATIONS (NATIONAL)
· American Humane Association
· Animal Protection Institute
· Association of Veterinarians for Animal Rights
· Doris Day Animal League
· Humane Society of the United States
· In Defense of Animals
· Last Chance for Animals
· United Animal Nations

CA STATE RESCUE ORGANIZATIONS
· Ace of Hearts
· Adopt-A-Chow Los Angeles
· Ali's Animail
· All Creatures Great & Small Animal Rescue
· Alpha Canine Sanctuary
· American Tortoise Rescue
· Animal Acres
· Animal Advocates
· Animal Advocates Harbor City
· Animal Alliance
· Animal Avengers
· Animal Friends Rescue Project
· Animal Kind Rescue
· Animal Kingdom Welfare
· Animal Lovers of South Bay
· Animal Match Rescue Team
· Animal Place
· Animal Rescue of Fresno
· Animal Rescue Volunteers Inc
· Animal Rules Placement Foundation
· Animal Shelter Assistance Program
· Animal Switchboard
· Animal Welfare Committee - Studio City
· Animals Anonymous
· Animals, People and Environment
· Another Chance Animal Welfare League
· Auburn Area Animal Rescue Foundation
· Baja Animal Sancturary
· Bardwell's Boneyard, Alhambra
· Bay Area Doglovers Responsible About Pit Bulls
· Beagles and Buddies
· Bill Foundation
· Boston Buddies
· Boxer Rescue
· Boxer Rescue Fund
· Boxer Rescue Los Angeles
· Bumper Foundation
· Bunny Bunch
· B-Wood-Dogs
· Canine Crusaders
· Canine Connection
· Cat Adoption Service
· Cat Assistance Referral and Education
· Cat Care Network of Colorado and New Mexico
· Cat Connection
· Cat Crossing
· Cat House on the Kings Rescue
· Cat/Canine Assistance Referral & Education
· Catherine Fund
· Cats At The Studio, Inc.
· Center for Animal Protection and Education
· Central Valley Coalition for Animals
· Chateau DuMeow
· Chico Boxer Rescue
· Chula Bella Dogs, Los Angeles
· Coalition for Cats and Dogs
· Collie Love
· Community Animal Network
Report to moderator   Logged

and keep moving!
Max_Rep
Max Rep
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3969

It’s about how hard you can GET hit...


View Profile WWW
« Reply #34 on: May 25, 2007, 12:50:35 AM »

· Dana Point / San Clemente Animal Rescue
· Dachshund Rescue
· Death Row Dogs Rescue
· Deborah's Rescues and Fosters
· Dedicated Animal Welfare Group
· Dog Adoption and Welfare Group
· Dog's Life Rescue
· Downtown Dog Rescue
· Echo Park Animal Alliance
· Emmie's Animal Rescue - Fresno
· Feral Cat Alliance
· Feral Cat Coalition - San Diego
· Forte Animal Rescue
· Friends of Fred
· Friends of Life Animal Rescue, Inc., Eureka
· Friends of Madera Animal Shelter
· Foundation for the Care of Indigent Animals
· Garfield Pet Alliance
· German Shorthaired Pointer Rescue
· Give a Dog a Home Rescue
· Got Boxers?
· Happy Tails Sanctuary
· Heaven on Earth Society for Animals
· Helping Out Pets Everyday
· High Desert Angels for Animals
· HMB Catworks, Penn Valley
· Hopalong Animal Rescue
· HOPE Animal Foundation
· It's The Pits
· K-9 Rescue
· Karma Rescue
· Kellen Rescue
· Kinder4Rescue
· Kitten Rescue
· Kris Kelly Foundation
· Lange Foundation
· Leg Up Rescue
· Lhasa Happy Homes
· Life 4 Paws
· Linda Blair WorldHeart Foundation
· Little Angels Pug Rescue
· Little Company of Mary San Pedro
· Little John Rug Rats
· Love of Animals Inc
· Lyons Perea Chihuahuas
· Many Little Cats Inc.
· Marley's Pit Stop Rescue
· Matchmaker & Adoption Center
· Matilija Canyon Wildlife Refuge
· Miss Kitty's Rescue
· Missing Pet Partnership
· Much Love Animal Rescue
· New Beginnings for Animals
· New Leash on Life
· Noah's Bark
· NorCal Aussie Rescue
· NorCal Boxer Rescue
· North Star Pet Assistance
· Open Arms Network
· Orange County Boxer Rescue
· Pacific Coast Dog Rescue
· PAL Animal Sanctuary
· Passion for Paws Rescue
· Paw Project
· PAWS San Diego County, Inc.
· People and Cats Together
· Pet Adoption Fund
· Pet Adoption League
· Pet Assistance Foundation
· Pet Care Foundation
· Pet Orphans of Southern California
· Pet Press
· Pet Project Foundation
· Pet Rescue of Unwanted Dogs
· Pet Save Foundation
· Peter Zippi Fund for Animals
· Pets 90210
· Pickett's Pets
· Pit Bull Rescue - San Diego
· Pocket Dogs
· Pooch Potty
· Progressive Animal Welfare Society
· Pryor's Planet
· Purr-fect Solutions Feline Rescue
· Quartz Hills Dog Lovers
· Rescue & Humane Alliance - Los Angeles
· Rescue House
· Rescue House - San Diego
· Rescue Me Inc
· Rescue Train
· Responsible Humane Force
· Resqcats
· Reva Foundation
· River City Cat Rescue
· Robin and Friends Rescue
· Rover Rescue
· Ruff Riders Animal Rescue
· Shelter Animals of Los Angeles Rescue
· San Diego Animal Advocates
· San Diego Special Needs Rescue
· Santa Ana For The Animals
· Santa Monica Boxer Rescue
· Sara Ford Foundation Rescue Group
· Saving Grace
· Second Chance Canine Rescue
· Shelter Pet Alliance
· Shelter Pet Partners
· Shelter Watch Inc
· Sisters Animal Sanctuary
· Small Paws Rescue - Tulsa, Oklahoma
· Sounds of Silent Spirits Rescue and Sanctuary
· Southern California Labrador Retriever Rescue
· Southern California Siamese Rescue
· Southland Collie Rescue
· Southland Sheltie Rescue
· Sparky & The Gang
· Stray Cat Alliance
· Streetsmarts Rescue
· Surfer Dogs
· Tahoe Dogs
· Take Me Home
· Thumping Tails Rescue
· TopCats on the Ridge Inc.
· Underdog Rescue
· Westie Rescue
· Westside German Shepard Rescue
· Wish For Animals
Report to moderator   Logged

and keep moving!
Max_Rep
Max Rep
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3969

It’s about how hard you can GET hit...


View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: May 25, 2007, 12:51:23 AM »

OTHER INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS
·   Keeley Shaye and Pierce Brosnan
·   Emmylou Harris
·   INXS
·   Diane Keaton
·   Jane Valez-Mitchell
·   Naren Shankar, Exec. Producer, CSI
·   Arkin Disc Dogs
·   Bark Avenue Foundation
·   California Federation for Animal Legislation
·   California Lobby for Animal Welfare
·   California Wildlife Center
·   CaliMax
·   Canine Communications (Trainers)
·   Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
·   Cesar Millan Inc. (Trainers)
·   Cesar and Ilusion Millan Foundation
·   Citizens for a Humane Los Angeles
·   Coalition for Pets & Public Safety
·   Coast Dermatology Medical Associates
·   Commonwealth Action
·   Custom Canine Quilts
·   Dale's Doggie Daycare
·   Dawnwatch
·   Directors of Animal Welfare, Studio City Neighborhood Council
·   Dog Land Spay & Neuter Hotline
·   Dog Psychology Center of Los Angeles
·   East Bay Animal Advocates
·   Erika Brunson Design
·   Fight for Animal Rights
·   Firehouse Dogs
·   Four Legged Friends Foundation
·   Fox Companion Care
·   Halt Overpopulation with Prevention and Education
·   Herald Publications
·   Home for Every Living Pet
·   Humane Education Network
·   Independence Alliance
·   Jacqueline Green Public Relations Inc
·   K-9 Pals - Santa Barbara
·   Katcep Associates
·   Keller Williams Realty
·   League of Human Voters - California Chapter
·   Lohr Insurance Agency
·   Los Angeles Directors of Animal Welfare
·   Ma Snak Superior Treats
·   MacDonalds Trust
·   Mariners Village Community Services Committee
·   MaryJo and Hank Greenberg Animal Welfare Foundation
·   Milo Foundation
·   Network of Humane Organizations
·   No Voice Unheard
·   Orange County People for Animals
·   Palisades Park Dog Walkers
·   Pam's People Pals
·   Panzar, Inc.
·   Paws and Cues Dog Training
·   PearlParadise.com
·   Primo Love
·   Production Line Design
·   Responsible Humane Force
·   Roy Dunlap Spay/Neuter Foundation
·   Sacramento Area Animal Coalition
·   Sauthier, Steele & Associates
·   Seeds for Change, Humane Education
·   Senior & Special Needs Animal Assistance
·   Senior Citizens for Humane Legislation and Education
·   Senior Dogs Project
·   Senior Special Needs Animal Assistance
·   Sherman Oaks Neighborhood Council
·   Social Compassion
·   Southern California University People for Animal Welfare
·   Spay and Neuter Intermountain Pets and Pet Placement
·   Spay Neuter Action Program
·   Spay Neuter Action Project
·   Staged to Move
·   Stop Torture Abuse & Neglect of Dogs Foundation
·   Taxpayers for Responsible & Ethical Animal Treatment
·   Teaching Everyone Animals Matter
·   Tehama Wild Care
·   The Pacific Pooch
·   Tower Rescue Trainers, LLC
·   Voice for Animals
·   Volunteers for Inter-Valley Animals
·   Weil Public Relations
·   Walk With Wendy (pet sitting/hiking)
·   WillyB
·   Winchester Retriever Club
·   Winogradsky Company
·   Woody's House
·   Xponent
Report to moderator   Logged

and keep moving!
onlyme
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 19351


Don't Fuck With Bears


View Profile WWW
« Reply #36 on: May 25, 2007, 02:15:17 AM »

Dave put in 1,000,000 yes votes for me. 
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3582


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: May 25, 2007, 04:01:25 AM »

AB 1634

Sorry Amy some of your points (on your ten reasons) don't even make sense. Dozens and dozens of rescue groups are behind this. So are veterinarian groups. Ed Boks has a stellar reputation and supports it. I talked to many vets about when is the right time to spay and neuter and never got “its unhealthy” as an answer. Most felt about 5 months was healthy. Sooner for cats.


These same vets that think it is okay to spay/neauter and vaccinate at the same time? The same vets that think feeding a carnivore like a carnivore is not right? According to those vets nothing will harm your pet.    Roll Eyes   Not overvaccinating, crap food, now early altering.   There are also a lot of vets that are against this bill.  Please don't blur the line between spaying and neutering and EARLY spaying and neutering.  Did you read the link on early spaying and neutering, and health consequences? Why should responsible people be forced to  have their pets altered and face health problems down the line? 

  One of the points mentioned in your post was this:

 
"The number one killer of cats and dogs, after euthanasia, is cancer. Spaying and neutering can prevent most of these deaths. Medical research shows that spayed and neutered cats and dogs live longer and healthier lives. For these and many other reasons, the American Veterinary Medical Association recommends early spaying and neutering because younger animals recover faster and with less pain."


   Early altering increases the rate of bone cancers.  As the owner of giant breeds already at risk for osteosarcomas, altering at 4 months is wrong.  You are replacing some health risks for others with this bill, and not giving a person a choice in the matter.  4months for dogs?   It used to be most vets said 6 months, so where did 4months come from?  Responsible owners who would alter their pets but waited til they were mature for their breed would have that taken away.  They would be forced to take on the future cost for health problems and have to watch quality of life problems with their companions. 

  What about guide dogs and helper dogs?  Police dogs?  This law would affect them.  They can't judge a dog by 4 months to see if it will fit in those programs.

 Same for responsible breeders.  You can't do health certs on 4 month puppies to test for eyes, hips, etc, or even temperament.   What puppies that will be available could have more and more health problems as time goes by because of this. 

   
   6. Prevents Rescue Organizations from saving cats and dogs.
      These practices become illegal under this legislation. Animal rescuers in California will face civil penalties of $500 per animal and possible criminal penalties for possessing unneutered or unspayed dogs or cats. AB 1634 Article 2, Section 122336.1 (a) and (b)


  What are rescues going to do?  Only rescue altered animals? 


  This bill is flawed, the reasoning behind it may be a good one, but it needs to address these issues.   

  As a person who has tried to raise HEALTHY animals despite the uniformed, uneducated, close minded thinking views the majority of the veterinary profession go by, I say no way to forcing a potentially unhealthy surgery on my companions.

  Responsible owners need to vote NO for the health of their companions.

 
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3582


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: May 25, 2007, 05:22:35 AM »

originally posted by knny in the other thread:

Impact of AB 1634 on Working Dogs
April 5, 2007
Though we often think of dogs today only as pets, in California tens of thousands of dogs are employed to do useful work. Despite it's name, AB 1634 "The California Healthy Pets Act" would affect working dogs as well.
Working dog breeding requires selection for the specific traits required to do a job, in every generation. Otherwise, working abilities will gradually diminish over successive generations until they fall below the level required to do the work.   
To produce useful working dogs, breeders must selectively breed from among the dogs with the best demonstrated working abilities.  "You need to breed to the extreme [workers] to produce good workers" is a commonly understood maxim of working dog breeding.
Working abilities in dogs are generally not apparent until dogs are about 1 - 2 years of age, and sometimes even older. Dogs need to mentally and physically mature into adults before their working abilities are established.  It's also necessary to wait until a dog is an adult to do many important genetic health screening tests for breeding purposes, including orthopedic tests of hip soundness.
Because of the need to selectively breed from among the best working dogs, and because there's no reliable way to select dogs for working dog breeding when they are puppies, it's mandatory to keep many more working dogs sexually intact into adulthood than end up being bred. These intact dogs are for the most part owned by working dog handlers, not breeders. This way, there is an adequate pool of intact working dogs from which to select the best breeding candidates. This time-proven process cannot work if only a tiny percentage of dog owners are allowed to keep intact dogs on account of mandatory spay/neuter laws and limited access to "intact permits".
Here's some examples of how AB 1634 would affect working dogs:
Police Service Dogs
A police service dog works with his human partner to search for and apprehend criminal suspects. AB 1634 appears to have an exemption for working police dogs, allowing an intact permit to be issued if
The dog is trained, or is documented as having been appropriately trained and actively used by law enforcement agencies for law enforcement and rescue activities.
This is totally inadequate to protect law enforcement in California:
Most of the breeding dogs that create working police dogs are not themselves police dogs, but are bred and used in the protection dog sports where their working abilities are tested. These dogs are pet dogs under the law. Because they are not themselves police dogs, they would not be eligible for an intact permit under this exemption. Most would not be eligible under any exemption and so would have to be spayed or neutered.
 AB 1634 would only protect the current generation of working police dogs from mandatory spay/neuter. Future generations would have to qualify for an exemption by 4 months of age to avoid mandatory sterilization. But there is no such thing as a 4 month old puppy who is "appropriately trained and actively used by law enforcement".  A dog has to mature into adulthood before meeting that criterion. So future generations of police dogs would be spay/neutered before they even became eligible for this exemption. Spay/neuter cannot be undone, so the exemption doesn't help police dogs at all.
Nearly all working police dogs were once somebody's pet dog.  They were bought as a young pup, raised, but were rehomed as young adults. If they pass all the working and health tests, eventually they may end up with a police department. Few of these dogs come with registration papers. Because working police dogs spent their first year or two of life as somebody's pet dog, there's no way to create a bright line in the law between the future supply of police dogs and other pet dogs. Most of these future police dogs, perhaps nearly all, would be sterilized before even making it into police work, if AB 1634 passes.
A few breeding dogs or potential future police dogs might qualify for an intact permit. The increased cost and bureaucratic hassle will cause many of these pet owners not to bother, further reducing the availability of these dogs. Remember, before a dog becomes a police dog, he's a pet.
For police service work, nearly all of the dogs are intact males. There may be no other K9 work where testosterone plays such an important role in the development of the dog's working abilities. Because of the demonstrated benefit of testosterone in the working ability of Law Enforcement dogs, leaving even non-breeding males intact plays an important role in the success of these dogs. The lives of police officers and citizens may be put at risk by the reduced working ability resulting from early neuter. Neuter these dogs when they are 4 months old, and it will massively reduce their odds of growing up to be police service dogs. Few would make it.
It is already very difficult for law enforcement to find dogs who are suitable for police work. A very large majority of dogs who are evaluated fail to pass the screening tests. Dogs have to be imported from all over the world just to supply the need in California. AB 1634 would make an already difficult task many times more difficult. AB 1634 would increase costs to the taxpayers to purchase dogs from a shrinking supply of suitable dogs. Crime could increase as there would not be enough dogs to fill all the law enforcement jobs.
So while it appears that AB 1634 has adequate protections for law enforcement work, it does not. There's really no way to create a mandatory spay/neuter law that would not do serious harm to law enforcement in the state of California.
Stock Dogs
Stock dogs are used to herd livestock or protect them from threats such as predators.  California has thousands of working stock dogs. The dogs are bred from lines that have been used and proven in demanding stock work for decades, sometimes centuries.
 Almost none of the working stock dogs in California would qualify for a spay/neuter exemption under AB 1634. Most of these dogs are unregistered, and many are mixed breeds. Of those that are registered few working stock dogs are trained for or compete in trials. As a result almost none would qualify for an intact permit. AB 1634 would destroy working stock dog breeding in California.
A number of stock dog breeds would simply go extinct in California.  They would not be eligible for an intact permit at any price.  Ironically, this includes the McNab, a working stock dog developed in California over 100 years ago. This unique part of our state heritage, handed down from generation to generation for over a century, would disappear in just over a decade if AB 1634 becomes law.
Agriculture is a multi-billion dollar industry in California.  California's beef cattle industry alone, which uses stock dogs, is a $1.42 billion dollar business. AB 1634 would harm California agriculture by decimating stock dog breeding.
Other Working Dogs
It might be tempting to try to carve out more exemptions in AB 1634 for working dogs to try to address the deficiencies in the current language of AB 1634. This approach cannot protect working dog breeding.
One reason is that there is no way to write a law that can distinguish working dog breeding programs from pet dog breeding. There is no bright line that can separate them, as we see most obviously in the example of police dogs (above).
Another reason is that there are so many types of working dogs, that it's impossible to list them all in a law. New roles for working dogs are being developed all the time, as we learn more about the amazing talents of man's best friend.  For example, cancer detection is a brand new working role for dogs.
Some of the many roles that working dogs are used for include those listed below. AB 1634 would harm all working dog breeding programs in California, and it would harm the citizens in California who depend on their working dogs.
Tracking/trailing Search & Rescue dog
Airscent Search & Rescue dog
Urban Search & Rescue dog
Water search dog (drowning victims)
Water rescue dog (retrieve swimmers in distress)
Avalanche dog
Guide dog for the blind
Signal dog for the deaf
Mobility assistance dog
Service dog for the disabled
 Police service dog
Police trailing dog
Dual purpose police dog
Evidence dog
Narcotics detection dog
Explosives detection dog
Guard dog
Watch dog
Accelerant (Arson) detection dog
Military working dog
Cadaver dog / Human remains detection dog
Termite detection dog
Mine detection dog
Natural gas detection dog
Lost pet search dog
Sled dog
Sighthound
Wildlife detection dog
Cancer detection dog
Seizure alert dog
Livestock herding dog
Livestock guardian dog
Multipurpose farm dog
Agricultural produce detection dog
Terrier
Upland hunting dog - pointer
Upland hunting dog - spaniel
Hunting retriever

 
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3582


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: May 25, 2007, 05:23:52 AM »

From Laura Sanborn of saveourdogs.net:

Yesterday I made the rounds at the state capital to visit the offices of the Assembly Business & Professions Committee members to discuss AB 1634. I was accompanied by two police officers who discussed the harmful impacts AB 1634 would have on law enforcement. Also with us was the person in charge of
the breeding and training program at Canine Companions for Independence (CCI), who discussed how AB 1634 would harm programs that assist blind and disabled Californians. He also represented Assistance Dogs International, Inc., an umbrella organization over many guide/service/hearing dog organizations.

Similar to guide dog programs, CCI breeds and trains dogs to assist disabled people. They use Golden Retrievers, Labrador Retrievers, and Golden/Labrador
mixes. CCI breeds over 600 dogs a year.

My jaw nearly hit the floor when the CCI representative started describing research that CCI did in the early 1990s to understand spay/neuter impacts. CCI wanted to know if early s/n (less than 6 months of age) would yield results at least as good as their traditional spay/neuter age, which is usually over 12
months of age (typical is 17 months of age). So CCI did a controlled prospective research study... the gold standard of research. They assigned half the pups
in a number of litters to be s/n early, while the remaining pups in these litters were s/n at their traditional age. The results were very unexpected. The early age spayed females were significantly more dog aggressive than the traditional age spayed females. Urinary incontinence was a much bigger problem in the early spayed females compared to the traditional age spayed females. The early age neutered males were more fearful than the traditional age neutered males. The bottom line is that the early age spay/neuter dogs had a significantly higher failure rate in CCI's program... a smaller percentage of them grew up to be working dogs. CCI will not spay/neuter dogs before 6 months of age, and usually wait until dogs are more than 12 months old to spay/neuter. The CCI rep said this research has been repeated by others. I believe one of them may be Guide Dogs for the Blind, as I was told by one of their trainers that they recently stopped doing early apay/neuter owing to results they were seeing that they don't like.

I spent 6 years poring over the veterinary medical research literature trying without success to find research of this type, and here I was sitting in the office of a state Assembly member, listening to a scientist describe the work that his group did. It has not been published anywhere. Needless to say, I spent
the rest of the day bugging him to get this published.

This has implications far beyond AB 1634 and guide/assistance dogs. It has implications for the health and well being of most dogs. There are very few
controlled prospective research studies of dogs in veterinary medicine examining spay/neuter impacts. They are too costly for almost all researchers to do. Guide & assistance dog programs may be in a unique position to do these kind of studies, as they breed many dogs and they maintain a degree of control over their dogs that is beyond what other breeders can do.

CCI's work is summarized in their letter to the California state
Assembly opposing AB 1634. Quoting from CCI's letter:

Calling AB 1634 the 'California Healthy Pets Act' is a misnomer Surgical sterilization of preadult dogs has been shown to increase the risk for several significant behavioral and health problems. CCI did a study on the effects of
prepubertal gonadectomy (i.e.,sterilization) in 1990, and found significant increases in failure rates due to both medical and behavioral reasons in those dogs that had been sterilized early. This research has been repeated elsewhere with the same results. Increased incidence of health problems such as urinary incontinence, osteosarcoma, hemangiosarcoma, obesity and orthopedic problems as well as behavioral problems such as environmental fear and interdog  aggression are strong arguments against prepubertal sterilization for any dog, but especially those destined for a working role.

http://saveourdogs.net/documents/CCIPosition.jpg

Laura Sanborn



Note the bolded portion, so dogs may actually become MORE aggressive because of early spay/neutering.  And female dogs can get dumped or put down when they start to dribble in the house.    Great news for pets. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Max_Rep
Max Rep
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3969

It’s about how hard you can GET hit...


View Profile WWW
« Reply #40 on: May 25, 2007, 10:36:50 AM »

Amy… first let’s agree that we BOTH want fewer and fewer animals entering shelters and facing certain EXTERMINATION. Let’s not call it pretty words like euthanasia. 

Your comment on rescue groups:
It is NOT going to prevent these organizations from rescuing. I’m involved with one dog rescue group and three cat rescue groups who all endorse this Bill. Part of the responsibility of all the rescue groups in to have the animals altered as soon as they are able and before the animal is adopted out.

I see the effects of irresponsible pet owners EVERY single night. I see countless un-altered dogs and cats that have been abandoned out on the street breeding like crazy. Most are completely un-adoptable and always will be. I rescued a terrier last year that had been abandoned in an alley. I took him through Petco’s obedience training and with the help of Rover Rescue he was adopted to a great family and now he lives in a mansion in Palos Verdes, CA. But THAT is one of the few success stories compared to the horrible living conditions most of these animals live in.   

The rest of what you say makes sense. I think that you also have to realize that the practicality of enforcing this Bill or any other is going to be difficult if not impossible. I don’t see this as a Bill AIMED at responsible people. There simply aren’t enough animal controls officers to go after all the “offenders”.

As a practical measure I see this as a Bill that would be enforced when there are other issues brought to light. Example; an animal control officer is called out to a home because of a barking dog or a dog not being licensed etc.   

Report to moderator   Logged

and keep moving!
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3582


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: May 25, 2007, 11:41:12 AM »

Yes, I would like less animals abandoned and killed, but not at the cost of companion animals owned by responsible people to face health consequences. 


Quote
The rest of what you say makes sense. I think that you also have to realize that the practicality of enforcing this Bill or any other is going to be difficult if not impossible. I don’t see this as a Bill AIMED at responsible people. There simply aren’t enough animal controls officers to go after all the “offenders”.

As a practical measure I see this as a Bill that would be enforced when there are other issues brought to light. Example; an animal control officer is called out to a home because of a barking dog or a dog not being licensed etc.

 So we should actually say yes to this bill because it probably won't be enforced anyways?   In some states they are trying to make vets notify the county when they see a dog so the county can make sure it's licensed, you don't think that vets may be required to notify the authorities when they see an unneuterd animal?   Or a responsible person who is going to alter but wants to wait till the dog is breed mature is afraid of pissing of a neighbor that will report them?  Aimed or not at "responsible people" it will affect them.   This is a pet extermination bill, or at least a HEALTHY pet extermination bill if passed.

http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html

Early Spay-Neuter Considerations
for the Canine Athlete
One Veterinarian's Opinion
© 2005 Chris Zink DVM, PhD, DACVP

Neuter or not?
Those of us with responsibility for the health of canine athletes need to continually read and evaluate new scientific studies to ensure that we are taking the most appropriate care of our performance dogs. This article provides evidence through a number of recent studies to suggest that veterinarians and owners working with canine athletes should revisit the standard protocol in which all dogs that are not intended for breeding are spayed and neutered at or before 6 months of age.

Orthopedic Considerations
A study by Salmeri et al in 1991 found that bitches spayed at 7 weeks grew significantly taller than those spayed at 7 months, who were taller than those not spayed (or presumably spayed after the growth plates had closed).(1) A study of 1444 Golden Retrievers performed in 1998 and 1999 also found bitches and dogs spayed and neutered at less than a year of age were significantly taller than those spayed or neutered at more than a year of age.(2) The sex hormones, by communicating with a number of other growth-related hormones, promote the closure of the growth plates at puberty (3), so the bones of dogs or bitches neutered or spayed before puberty continue to grow. Dogs that have been spayed or neutered well before puberty can frequently be identified by their longer limbs, lighter bone structure, narrow chests and narrow skulls. This abnormal growth frequently results in significant alterations in body proportions and particularly the lengths (and therefore weights) of certain bones relative to others. For example, if the femur has achieved its genetically determined normal length at 8 months when a dog gets spayed or neutered, but the tibia, which normally stops growing at 12 to 14 months of age continues to grow, then an abnormal angle may develop at the stifle. In addition, with the extra growth, the lower leg below the stifle likely becomes heavier (because it is longer), and may cause increased stresses on the cranial cruciate ligament. In addition, sex hormones are critical for achieving peak bone density.(4) These structural and physiological alterations may be the reason why at least one recent study showed that spayed and neutered dogs had a higher incidence of CCL rupture.(5) Another recent study showed that dogs spayed or neutered before 5 1/2 months had a significantly higher incidence of hip dysplasia than those spayed or neutered after 5 1/2 months of age, although it should be noted that in this study there were no standard criteria for the diagnosis of hip dysplasia.(6) Nonetheless, breeders of purebred dogs should be cognizant of these studies and should consider whether or not pups they bred were spayed or neutered when considering breeding decisions.

Cancer Considerations
A retrospective study of cardiac tumors in dogs showed that there was a 5 times greater risk of hemangiosarcoma, one of the three most common cancers in dogs, in spayed bitches than intact bitches and a 2.4 times greater risk of hemangiosarcoma in neutered dogs as compared to intact males.(7) A study of 3218 dogs demonstrated that dogs that were neutered before a year of age had a significantly increased chance of developing bone cancer.(8) A separate study showed that neutered dogs had a two-fold higher risk of developing bone cancer.(9) Despite the common belief that neutering dogs helps prevent prostate cancer, at least one study suggests that neutering provides no benefit.(10) There certainly is evidence of a slightly increased risk of mammary cancer in female dogs after one heat cycle, and for increased risk with each subsequent heat. While about 30 % of mammary cancers are malignant, as in humans, when caught and surgically removed early the prognosis is very good.(12) Luckily, canine athletes are handled frequently and generally receive prompt veterinary care.

Behavioral Considerations
The study that identified a higher incidence of cranial cruciate ligament rupture in spayed or neutered dogs also identified an increased incidence of sexual behaviors in males and females that were neutered early.(5) Further, the study that identified a higher incidence of hip dysplasia in dogs neutered or spayed before 5 1/2 months also showed that early age gonadectomy was associated with an increased incidence of noise phobias and undesirable sexual behaviors.(6) A recent report of the American Kennel Club Canine Health Foundation reported significantly more behavioral problems in spayed and neutered bitches and dogs. The most commonly observed behavioral problem in spayed females was fearful behavior and the most common problem in males was aggression.(12)

Other Health Considerations
A number of studies have shown that there is an increase in the incidence of female urinary incontinence in dogs spayed early (13), although this finding has not been universal. Certainly there is evidence that ovarian hormones are critical for maintenance of genital tissue structure and contractility.(14, 15) Neutering also has been associated with an increased likelihood of urethral sphincter incontinence in males.(16) This problem is an inconvenience, and not usually life-threatening, but nonetheless one that requires the dog to be medicated for life. A health survey of several thousand Golden Retrievers showed that spayed or neutered dogs were more likely to develop hypothyroidism.(2) This study is consistent with the results of another study in which neutering and spaying was determined to be the most significant gender-associated risk factor for development of hypothyroidism.(17) Infectious diseases were more common in dogs that were spayed or neutered at 24 weeks or less as opposed to those undergoing gonadectomy at more than 24 weeks.(18) Finally, the AKC-CHF report demonstrated a higher incidence of adverse reactions to vaccines in neutered dogs as compared to intact.(12)

To spay or not to spay
I have gathered these studies to show that our practice of routinely spaying or neutering every dog at or before the age of 6 months is not a black-and-white issue. Clearly more studies need to be done to evaluate the effects of prepubertal spaying and neutering, particularly in canine athletes.

Currently, I have significant concerns with spaying or neutering canine athletes before puberty. But of course, there is the pet overpopulation problem. How can we prevent the production of unwanted dogs while still leaving the gonads to produce the hormones that are so important to canine growth and development? One answer would be to perform vasectomies in males and tubal ligation in females, to be followed after maturity by ovariohysterectomy in females to prevent mammary cancer and pyometra. One possible disadvantage is that vasectomy does not prevent some unwanted behaviors associated with males such as marking and humping. On the other hand, females and neutered males frequently participate in these behaviors too. Really, training is the best solution for these issues. Another possible disadvantage is finding a veterinarian who is experienced in performing these procedures. Nonetheless, some do, and if the procedures were in greater demand, more veterinarians would learn them.

I believe it is important that we assess each situation individually. For canine athletes, I currently recommend that dogs and bitches be spayed or neutered after 14 months of age.

References:

   1. Salmeri KR, Bloomberg MS, Scruggs SL, Shille V.. Gonadectomy in immature dogs: effects on skeletal, physical, and behavioral development. JAVMA 1991;198:1193-1203
   2. http://www.grca.org/healthsurvey.pdf
   3. Grumbach MM. Estrogen, bone, growth and sex: a sea change in conventional wisdom. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab. 2000;13 Suppl 6:1439-55.
   4. Gilsanz V, Roe TF, Gibbens DT, Schulz EE, Carlson ME, Gonzalez O, Boechat MI. Effect of sex steroids on peak bone density of growing rabbits. Am J Physiol. 1988 Oct;255(4 Pt 1):E416-21.
   5. Slauterbeck JR, Pankratz K, Xu KT, Bozeman SC, Hardy DM. Canine ovariohysterectomy and orchiectomy increases the prevalence of ACL injury. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Dec;(429):301-5.
   6. Spain CV, Scarlett JM, Houpt KA. Long-term risks and benefits of early-age gonadectomy in dogs. JAVMA 2004;224:380-387.
   7. Ware WA, Hopper DL. Cardiac tumors in dogs: 1982-1995. J Vet Intern Med 1999 Mar-Apr;13(2):95-103
   8. Cooley DM, Beranek BC, Schlittler DL, Glickman NW, Glickman LT, Waters D, Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2002 Nov;11(11):1434-40
   9. Ru G, Terracini B, Glickman LT. Host related risk factors for canine osteosarcoma. Vet J. 1998 Jul;156(1):31-9.
  10. Obradovich J, Walshaw R, Goullaud E. The influence of castration on the development of prostatic carcinoma in the dog. 43 cases (1978-1985). J Vet Intern Med 1987 Oct-Dec;1(4):183-7
  11. http://www.akcchf.org/pdfs/whitepapers/Biennial_National_Parent_Club_Canine_Health_Conference.pdf
  12. Meuten DJ. Tumors in Domestic Animals. 4th Edn. Iowa State Press, Blackwell Publishing Company, Ames, Iowa, p. 575
  13. Stocklin-Gautschi NM, Hassig M, Reichler IM, Hubler M, Arnold S. The relationship of urinary incontinence to early spaying in bitches. J. Reprod. Fertil. Suppl. 57:233-6, 2001
  14. Pessina MA, Hoyt RF Jr, Goldstein I, Traish AM. Differential effects of estradiol, progesterone, and testosterone on vaginal structural integrity. Endocrinology. 2006 Jan;147(1):61-9.
  15. Kim NN, Min K, Pessina MA, Munarriz R, Goldstein I, Traish AM. Effects of ovariectomy and steroid hormones on vaginal smooth muscle contractility. Int J Impot Res. 2004 Feb;16(1):43-50.
  16. Aaron A, Eggleton K, Power C, Holt PE. Urethral sphincter mechanism incompetence in male dogs: a retrospective analysis of 54 cases. Vet Rec. 139:542-6, 1996
  17. Panciera DL. Hypothyroidism in dogs: 66 cases (1987-1992). J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc., 204:761-7 1994
  18. Howe LM, Slater MR, Boothe HW, Hobson HP, Holcom JL, Spann AC. Long-term outcome of gonadectomy performed at an early age or traditional age in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2001 Jan 15;218(2):217-21.



 



Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3582


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: May 25, 2007, 11:47:22 AM »

http://www.littleriverlabs.com/neuter.htm

 The Question Of Neutering and at what age

(Put together by Gregg Tonkin, Little River Labradors from postings by Pam Davol PHD and Chris Zink DVM, PhD, DACVP)

Owners who are considering neutering need to take all factors into consideration, not simply the benefits of neutering when making a decision as to when to neuter.

If one looks close enough, one will find that neutering is one of those topics in veterinary medicine that is extremely biased: that is, most often one will find more emphasis placed on the pros of neutering with more often than not, very little or no discussion of the cons. Veterinarians, and responsible breeders as well, face a true dilemma when discussing neutering. The overpopulation crisis presents a very real concern with regard to the necessity of ownership responsibility. Prepubertal/early neutering or required neutering provides a means for vets/breeders to enforce owner responsibility by ensuring surgical sterilization of dogs not destined to be used in breeding programs. Again, this enforced neutering is typically presented along with a preamble of all the benefits that go along with neutering. However, I believe that breeders, if not veterinarians, need to begin questioning the ethics of this approach to prompt or require owners to neuter; especially in light of the facts that early neutering may not be as benign a process to the health of a dog as one would believe.

Yes, neutering prior to the beginning of estrus does reduce risk for mammary cancer in females, but it also significantly increases risk for urinary incontinence in bitches which predisposes these bitches to diethylstilbestrol (DES) dependency (Stocklin-Gautschi et al., J. Reprod. Fertile. Suppl. 57:233-6, 2001 and many other references)--in some instances, DES is not effective at controlling incontinence and will force some owners to elect euthanasia. Though with lesser risk compared to females, early neutering also increases risk of urethral sphincter incontinence in males (A. Aaron et al., Vet Rec. 139:542-6, 1996.)

With regard to cancer, spayed females have a 4 times greater risk for developing cardiac hemangiosarcomas (vascular tumors) compared to intact females (neutered males also show a significant increase in risk for these tumors compared to intact males) (Ware and Hysper, J. Vet. Intern. Med. 13:95-103, 1999.). Additionally, both neutered males and females have a 2-fold greater risk for developing bone tumors (osteosarcoma) compared to intact males and females (Ru et al., Vet J. 156:31-9, 1998.).

Some evidence suggests that early neutering may also predispose to endocrine disorders later in life (Panciera DL. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc., 204:761-7 1994.). Furthermore, there is also an indication that early neutering (because absence of sex hormones delays maturation of osteoclasts and thus results in delayed closing of the growth plates in the long-bones) may predispose to increased risk for various orthopedic disorders (such as cruciate ligament disease as I had mentioned in a previous post). Also, some evidence suggests that there is a correlation between increased time for growth plate closure and incidence of HD in Labs (Todhunter et al. J. Am. Vet Assoc., 1997).

If one conducted a research of the literature on the detrimental effects on physiological development associated with sex hormone deficiencies during adolescent development in any other species other than the dog and cat, one will find a wealth of literature stressing the importance of sex hormones for sound physiological, endocrine and metabolic development. Additionally, if one examines the scientific research that reports the benefits of early neutering in absence of any side-effects in dogs, one will discover that the methodology of these studies are designed in very specific ways to assure that outcome in neutering is presented in a favorable light (this does not mean that the data is biased, this simply means that the comparisons made do not provide for adequate interpretation of long-term effects of neutering).

In light of this, though it is understandable for vets/breeders to urge dog owners to neuter their pets early with regard to the greater good (i.e. reducing risk of accidental breeding), the physiological soundness of the individual dog should take precedence over any other issues. As such, it is my opinion, based upon the literature that I have reviewed that to reduce risks to physiological soundness, etc, that I am of the personal opinion that dogs should be a minimum of 1 year of age before neutering.
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3582


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: May 25, 2007, 11:55:46 AM »

1. Clinical and pathologic features of prostatic adenocarcinoma in
sexually intact and castrated dogs: 31 cases (1970-1987)
Ford W. Bell, DVM; Jeffery S. Klausner, DVM, MS; David W. Hayden,
DVM, PhD; Daniel A. Feeney, DVM, MS; Shirley D. Johnston, DVM, PhD; Dept. of Small Animal Clinical Sci; College of Veterinary Medicine; University of Minnesota; 1352 Boyd Ave.; St. Paul, MN 55108

- Retrospective study of 31 dogs with histologically confirmed prostatic
adenocarcinoma or undifferentiated carcinoma seen at the VTH between January 1970 through Oct. 1987.

PREDISPOSITIONS. Ages ranged from 6-18 years. No breed predispositions were seen. Most were medium sized dogs ie., 25-75 lbs (18/31), with 7/31 < 25 lbs and 6/31 > 75 lbs. There were 21/31 intact or recently (< 1yr) castrated dogs and 10/31 dogs castrated 2-8 years prior to admission. Castrated dogs had a 2.38 times greater risk of developing prostatic cancer than intact dogs when compared with the hospital population.

J Am Vet Med Assoc 199[11]: 1623-1630 Dec 1'91Retrospective Studies 45 Refs

2. Prostatic disorders in the dog.
Anim Reprod Sci 60-61[]:405-15 2000 Jul 2 36 Refs
Johnston SD, Kamolpatana K, Root-Kustritz MV, Johnston GR

"Two studies suggest that risk of prostatic adenocarcinoma is increased in neutered, compared to intact male dogs."


3. Reuters Health News Article: "Dog Study Suggests Hormones Linked to Bone Cancer"

"In a study of 745 purebred rottweilers, Dr. B. C. Beranek and colleagues from the departments of veterinary clinical science and veterinary pathology found that 15% of all the dogs developed bone cancer. However, the risk of bone cancer was 65% higher for castrated males and 34% higher for spayed females."


4. Canine prostate carcinoma: epidemiological evidence of an increased risk in castrated dogs.

Teske E, Naan EC, van Dijk EM, Van Garderen E, Schalken JA.
Department of Clinical Sciences of Companion Animals, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80.154, 3508 TD Utrecht, The Netherlands. e.teske@...

The present retrospective study investigated the frequency of prostate
carcinoma (PCA) among prostate abnormalities in dogs and determined whether castration influences the incidence of PCA in dogs. During the years 1993-1998, 15,363 male dogs were admitted to the Utrecht University Clinic of Companion Animals, and of these dogs 225 were diagnosed with prostatic disease. ... Dogs with PCA were significantly older (mean age=9.9 years) than dogs with other prostatic diseases (mean age=8.4 years). The Bouvier des Flandres breed had an increased risk (odds ratio (OR)=8.44; 95% CI 4.38-16.1) of having PCA (prostatic adenocarcinoma - GA). Castration
(26/56) increased the risk (OR=4.34; 95% CI 2.48-7.62) of PCA.

PMID: 12431819 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

5. Dr. Mary Wakeman, a specialist in canine reproduction:
"The situation in dogs (male dogs), is not equivalent. It is no longer
medically justifiable to castrate dogs for prevention of cancer. The
overwhelming mass of data to the contrary can no longer be ignored, and publications are out there so that no veterinarian can use the excuse of ignorance. Castration predisposes to highly malignant prostatic cancer. Nearly all dogs afflicted with this nasty tumor are neutered individuals. Testicular cancers are very rare and almost always benign. Perianal adenoma can be treated by castration if and when it arises. It too is benign although messy."
http://www.showdogsupersite.com/kenlclub/breedvet/neutr.html

Report to moderator   Logged
Nordic Beast
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 4685


Old World Values


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: May 26, 2007, 01:24:42 PM »

wow this is some Nazi--1984ish type shit

shit not only do they want to tell us how to live our lives now big brother has control of our pets Angry
Report to moderator   Logged
knny187
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21925



View Profile
« Reply #45 on: May 26, 2007, 01:36:36 PM »

wow this is some Nazi--1984ish type shit

shit not only do they want to tell us how to live our lives now big brother has control of our pets Angry

I can see some good to it, but for the most part, I disagree against it.

IMO, in the end, the responsible pet owner will be the one who gets the shaft.
Report to moderator   Logged
Hedgehog
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 19485


It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #46 on: May 26, 2007, 03:46:42 PM »

Seems like generally a good idea.

If there is more gain than loss: go ahead.

I think the issue of when the spay and neutering is going to take place needs to be looked into though, making sure the animals don't suffer diseases.

But that's a given.

-Hedge
Report to moderator   Logged

As empty as paradise
knny187
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21925



View Profile
« Reply #47 on: May 26, 2007, 04:08:55 PM »

Seems like generally a good idea.

If there is more gain than loss: go ahead.

I think the issue of when the spay and neutering is going to take place needs to be looked into though, making sure the animals don't suffer diseases.

But that's a given.

-Hedge

Well, as a responsible owner....I do not want to pay extra $$$ a year to keep my dogs nuts intact
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3582


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: May 26, 2007, 04:19:12 PM »

Seems like generally a good idea.

If there is more gain than loss: go ahead.

I think the issue of when the spay and neutering is going to take place needs to be looked into though, making sure the animals don't suffer diseases.

But that's a given.

-Hedge

 I merged the thread started by Max Rep into this one.  You can read his views on it, and my responses.

   Pet health with be greatly affected by early spaying and neutering, along with guide and helper dog and police dog programs suffering also.   Aggression has been proven to be greater in early altered dogs. Female incontinence is another, so will these dogs end up in a shelter and put down when they other wise would of had a normal healthy life because of this law?  Certain cancers increase from early altering.  People are going to have to spend tons of money for treatments of get rid of their companions, both which will cause suffering and heartbreak for all, that may not have had to suffer that fate. 

   This Bill is severely flawed and needs to address these and other concerns, because as it is written, it should be called the Healthy Pet Extinction Bill.
Report to moderator   Logged
Max_Rep
Max Rep
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3969

It’s about how hard you can GET hit...


View Profile WWW
« Reply #49 on: May 27, 2007, 01:13:09 AM »

I understand that this Bill is in an on-going re-writing process. Knny and Amy I understand your concerns but I'm also troubled by the fact that you don't even seem slightly concerned that 430,000 dogs were put to death in LA county last year. And I don't even have the number on cats. And I don't even want to get started on the callous treatment of these animals by the shelter employees.

Was it not your dog or cat so no concern?

You’re worried that people who can't afford altering will turn in their pets to the shelters yet many cities within LA county offer voucher programs to help those people as well their are plenty of groups who contribute pledges to owners and their are low cost and no cost spay/neuter days. If these owners can’t afford the $20 or $30 left over after the voucher then how can they afford food for their pet or veterinary care when needed. That argument is weak. 

I see a lot of opposition and the only solution I've seen is "what about a leash law for cats".

A great deal of the homeless pet population come from ethnic neighborhoods where keeping their dogs "in tact" is considered "macho" and from back-yard breeders who have their dogs turn out liters for profit until she no longer has any use then they just turn her out on the street looking for her puppies (they were sold) looking for food and looking for her home. 

So how about some solutions guys because so far, your arguments don’t outweigh my concerns about the lost 430,000 innocent lives.
Report to moderator   Logged

and keep moving!
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 6   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!