Re: [pyrnet] Re: Family Jewels

["Jessica @ DaVor" <woods@davor.com>]

Lene:

I have no intention of attacking you; I was aware that my comment is very
forceful.

It's something I feel very strongly about, for several reasons.

Unneutered animals who do not breed regularly are subject to a frequency and
variety of health maladies not usually seen in neutered animals.  I speak
from experience, having worked in a veterinary clinic.

Additionally, animals who exhibit behavioral problems (and marking falls
into this category, to my mind) all too often end up homeless.  The behavior
gets to the point where the owners can no longer tolerate or ignore it, and
usually by that time there's no correcting the behavior.

It is true that just because an animal is intact, does not mean they will
ever father or bear children.  However I can't agree that "it's simply a
matter of good fences and closed doors."  Accidents happen, fences get
damaged, houses get broken into.  There's no foolproof way to guarantee that
a pet can never breed an unwanted litter without neutering--and with a male,
the danger increases because if he does get out and father a litter, his
owners (if they recover him) will never know it's happened.

I have never met Newman's owners so I can't say for certain one way or the
other how they treat their pet, and I did not mean to imply that they were
abusive, neglectful, or in any other way poor caretakers to the dog, other
than to say that I believe in the long run Newman will be the worse off for
not being neutered.

My suggestion to Newman's owner was forceful, true, but it's not as though I
was advising her to do something she was against.  The "you" in my statement
was meant as a more general, for all pet owners.. not targeted specifically
at her (although I do stand by my statement and I do feel her husband is
being VERY irresponsible.)

I don't know if Europe has the same problem with stray animals that occurs
in America, but there are entirely too many unwanted animals here in the
states for me to ever counsel anyone to allow a family pet to remain
unneutered.

Jess
Levittown PA
woods@davor.com


on 2/20/02 15:27, Lene Nielsen at sandybear@orangenet.dk wrote:

> Jess writes:
> 
> "My advice to you at this point: take the dog and get it done.  Fight with
> your husband about it later, but do not allow your dog to be harmed by his
> stubborn and selfish behavior.
> 
> Otherwise find someone to adopt the dog.  You really shouldn't have a pet if
> you're not prepared to take care of it."
> 
> Really this is too much. What gives you the right to accuse someone of not
> taking good care of their dog, just because they (in this case the husband)
> choose not to have the dog neutered.
> I am not against neutering, I respect all the good reasons for doing it, but
> there is no reason why people should not be both caring and responsible
> dogowners, even if they do own an intact male. Just because Newman is intact
> does not mean he will ever father a litter, time enough to point fingers if
> and when he does.
> It is perfectly possible to have an intact male and keep him from mating, it
> is simply a matter of good fences and closed doors. It may be more difficult
> than to own a neuter, but that is a personal choice.
> Most males in Europe are unneutered, and most of them never father a litter,
> just as most of them don't mark inside their homes. I really don't think the
> American males are so very different.
> To talk of harming the dog by not neutering seems rather out of proportions to
> me, after all being intact is a perfectly natural thing.
> 
> To avoid misunderstandings I will repeat, I have nothing against neutering,
> but I sometimes get fed up with the intolerance show to people who choose not
> to neuter.  Keeping the pet from reproducing is what makes an owner
> responsible, not whether the pet is neutered or not.
> 
> Okay, ready for the attack.
> 
> Lene Nielsen
> sandybear@orangenet.dk
> http://hjem.orangenet.dk/~wai38745/