Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Giant breed neutering

  • 16-10-2019 12:37am
    #1
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭


    Hi guys. I have a Newfoundland puppy, he is 12 weeks and an amazing little (big!) pup. His vet said to neuter at 6 months, but another vet I know, not his vet, recommends waiting till 12 months to allow him to grow. I know as a giant breed he won't be fully grown for maybe 18 months, but I would like him to have the op earlier than that anyway.

    Anyone have experience with giant breeds and neutering? Any advice appreciated!


Comments

  • #2
    Spencerfreeman
    Registered Users Posts: 692 ✭✭✭Spencerfreeman


    budgese wrote: »
    Hi guys. I have a Newfoundland puppy, he is 12 weeks and an amazing little (big!) pup. His vet said to neuter at 6 months, but another vet I know, not his vet, recommends waiting till 12 months to allow him to grow. I know as a giant breed he won't be fully grown for maybe 18 months, but I would like him to have the op earlier than that anyway.

    Anyone have experience with giant breeds and neutering? Any advice appreciated!

    Don't do it at all. It has no benefits to the dog.


  • #3
    FanadMan
    Registered Users Posts: 3,820 ✭✭✭FanadMan


    Spencerfreeman wrote: »
    Don't do it at all. It has no benefits to the dog.

    :D

    Unless the owners want to breed, ^ is a silly suggestion.


  • #4
    Spencerfreeman
    Registered Users Posts: 692 ✭✭✭Spencerfreeman


    I've got a 50Kg dog, it's easy to keep him away from bitches. If you have more than one it's better to spay the bitch.


  • #5
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    I want to neuter him as many doggie daycares, kennels, etc won't take him otherwise and I want to use these services. I have zero intent to breed him even if as a completely biased opinion he is the most incredible puppy ever.

    Also I work as a dog walker and saw one of my clients turn from a lovely sweet pupper of 18 months (not a giant breed) become so dominent that he can't be let off lead anymore. Even after the op. My dog is going to be so big and have such massive strong jaws that I want to avoid this at all costs.


  • #6
    Quadrivium
    Registered Users Posts: 213 ✭✭Quadrivium


    budgese wrote: »
    Hi guys. I have a Newfoundland puppy, he is 12 weeks and an amazing little (big!) pup. His vet said to neuter at 6 months, but another vet I know, not his vet, recommends waiting till 12 months to allow him to grow. I know as a giant breed he won't be fully grown for maybe 18 months, but I would like him to have the op earlier than that anyway.

    Anyone have experience with giant breeds and neutering? Any advice appreciated!

    If you're gonna do it then wait until the dog is fully grown and formed. 6 months is far too early. 18 months would be a better bet.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    Quadrivium wrote: »
    If you're gonna do it then wait until the dog is fully grown and formed. 6 months is far too early. 18 months would be a better bet.

    That could be 18 months or even 24.

    He's only 12 weeks but already humping his cushion, a posh lady I walk dogs with calked him the "tiny masterbater"! I am worried he will develop dominent aggression.


  • #8
    NSAman
    Registered Users Posts: 3,386 ✭✭✭NSAman


    had a Saint who was massive. Never gave him the snip. He never had dominant tendencies as training worked. Never had any issues with walking him or having him in kennels.

    Some say that health issues are a reason for the snip (cancer) but there are various reports both ways for this.

    I would let the guy grow first before getting the snip. 18 months would be the best time.. 6 is WAY too young.

    Whatever you decide, enjoy him. He is going to be a big handful of fun no matter what.


  • #9
    Spencerfreeman
    Registered Users Posts: 692 ✭✭✭Spencerfreeman


    budgese wrote: »
    I want to neuter him as many doggie daycares, kennels, etc won't take him otherwise and I want to use these services. I have zero intent to breed him even if as a completely biased opinion he is the most incredible puppy ever.

    Also I work as a dog walker and saw one of my clients turn from a lovely sweet pupper of 18 months (not a giant breed) become so dominent that he can't be let off lead anymore. Even after the op. My dog is going to be so big and have such massive strong jaws that I want to avoid this at all costs.
    All valid concerns but I think lots of positive interaction will probably solve them. As for the humping thing, who knows. As suggested a wait and see approach is best.


  • #10
    Knine
    Registered Users Posts: 3,761 ✭✭✭Knine


    If a vet suggested I neuter a giant breed at 6 months, I would be changing Vets, I would be wondering what else they were not up to date on.

    Many kennels do take intact dogs! Usually the more professional kennels.


  • #11
    em_cat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,292 ✭✭✭em_cat


    Start training him now, redirect his unwanted behaviour with positive association and build focus. Dominance theory is extremely outdated.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    em_cat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,292 ✭✭✭em_cat


    Spencerfreeman wrote: »
    All valid concerns but I think lots of positive interaction will probably solve them. As for the humping thing, who knows. As suggested a wait and see approach is best.

    Sorry but humping is most certainly not a wait & see approach! Especially with a full grown Newfie!


  • #13
    Quadrivium
    Registered Users Posts: 213 ✭✭Quadrivium


    budgese wrote: »
    That could be 18 months or even 24.

    He's only 12 weeks but already humping his cushion, a posh lady I walk dogs with calked him the "tiny masterbater"! I am worried he will develop dominent aggression.

    Don't be afraid to give him corrections if he is showing undesirable behaviours. The whole purely positive stuff is all grand in theory but the reality is it doesn't always work and it certainly doesn't work on working line dogs who are in mid drive.


  • #14
    DBB
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 9,726 Mod ✭✭✭✭DBB


    Quadrivium wrote: »
    Don't be afraid to give him corrections if he is showing undesirable behaviours. The whole purely positive stuff is all grand in theory but the reality is it doesn't always work and it certainly doesn't work on working line dogs who are in mid drive.

    There is no such thing as "purely positive" training. Learning theory dictates that in order to extinguish certain behaviours, the reinforcement the animal is deriving from those behaviours must be reduced or, if possible, removed. That often means removing nice things/actions/consequences, which is not "positive" for the dog.
    Removal of good things is a form of punishment. The definition of punishment is to manage consequences in order to make the preceding behaviour less likely to occur in future.
    In other words, "positive" trainers use punishment. They have to. The difference is the consideration and knowledge they put in to what level the punishment takes, and it should never be harmful aversive or fear-inducing.
    This is absolutely vital because it's misunderstood by those who don't really get what they wrongly call "purely positive" training (or derivations thereof)... removing the reinforcement DOES NOT mean that you HAVE TO use "corrections", or any harsh consequences in response to unwanted behaviours.
    As I mentioned above, this is where "positive" trainers diverge from more traditional trainers who like to use corrections... the consequences for the dog for exhibiting unwanted behaviours are non-physical, non-aversive, and not potentially harmful to welfare or future behaviour.
    With respect, I train working dogs, and they are never "corrected"... they just don't get their expected reinforcement if they go wrong, or at worst, they are removed for short periods from a scenario in which they are gaining reinforcement from misbehaving. In my experience, which is supported both by research and evidence, approaching training with the intention of not using corrections, or fear, or startle, or anticipation of any of these, most certainly does work. Always.

    OP, "dominance aggression" isn't really a thing. It is a handy myth perpetuated by those who still cling to the outdated and disproven notion of "dominance" in dogs.
    What you do get, is undersocialised dogs that act in a pushy, boorish manner due to not having learned social skills during puppy puppyhood and beyond.
    Puppy humping is absolutely normal. I'd worry about a young male pup who doesn't hump things! As has been suggested, you gently distract (with a toy, or play) and remove him from the immediate vicinity for a couple of minutes. No big deal. Nice and calm and controlled.
    Again, going back to solid scientific research to inform how we manage our dogs, neutering giant breed males before at least 1 year of age, preferably full maturity, is not advisable due to the significant risk of bone cancers, or joint disorders. There's no reason why entire male dogs can't be raised to be perfectly civil, polite and pleasant adult dogs. Their manners are not stored in their testicles!


  • #15
    tk123
    Registered Users Posts: 14,016 ✭✭✭✭tk123


    Knine wrote: »
    If a vet suggested I neuter a giant breed at 6 months, I would be changing Vets, I would be wondering what else they were not up to date on.

    Many kennels do take intact dogs! Usually the more professional kennels.

    ^^ THIS. Any business be it a vet, kennels or daycare that is telling people to neuter at 6 months is one to be avoided. Daycare IMO is also not really conducive to having a relaxed chilled out dog - which is what you want especially with a large or giant breed?

    This is a puppy training issue like everything else. We don't cut our dogs legs off if they counter surf .. we do some training with them instead.

    The pros of waiting far outweigh the cons. Trust me joint issues and their associated behavioural issues are a lot more inconvenient than waiting for a pup to mature. Lucy (retriever) was spayed at 17-18 months - as discussed with her breeder and the vet so planned well in advance. I already have a dog with bionic legs and that’s enough for me!


  • #16
    Quadrivium
    Registered Users Posts: 213 ✭✭Quadrivium


    DBB wrote: »
    There is no such thing as "purely positive" training. Learning theory dictates that in order to extinguish certain behaviours, the reinforcement the animal is deriving from those behaviours must be reduced or, if possible, removed. That often means removing nice things/actions/consequences, which is not "positive" for the dog.
    Removal of good things is a form of punishment. The definition of punishment is to manage consequences in order to make the preceding behaviour less likely to occur in future.
    In other words, "positive" trainers use punishment. They have to. The difference is the consideration and knowledge they put in to what level the punishment takes, and it should never be harmful aversive or fear-inducing.
    This is absolutely vital because it's misunderstood by those who don't really get what they wrongly call "purely positive" training (or derivations thereof)... removing the reinforcement DOES NOT mean that you HAVE TO use "corrections", or any harsh consequences in response to unwanted behaviours.
    As I mentioned above, this is where "positive" trainers diverge from more traditional trainers who like to use corrections... the consequences for the dog for exhibiting unwanted behaviours are non-physical, non-aversive, and not potentially harmful to welfare or future behaviour.
    With respect, I train working dogs, and they are never "corrected"... they just don't get their expected reinforcement if they go wrong, or at worst, they are removed for short periods from a scenario in which they are gaining reinforcement from misbehaving. In my experience, which is supported both by research and evidence, approaching training with the intention of not using corrections, or fear, or startle, or anticipation of any of these, most certainly does work. Always.

    OP, "dominance aggression" isn't really a thing. It is a handy myth perpetuated by those who still cling to the outdated and disproven notion of "dominance" in dogs.
    What you do get, is undersocialised dogs that act in a pushy, boorish manner due to not having learned social skills during puppy puppyhood and beyond.
    Puppy humping is absolutely normal. I'd worry about a young male pup who doesn't hump things! As has been suggested, you gently distract (with a toy, or play) and remove him from the immediate vicinity for a couple of minutes. No big deal. Nice and calm and controlled.
    Again, going back to solid scientific research to inform how we manage our dogs, neutering giant breed males before at least 1 year of age, preferably full maturity, is not advisable due to the significant risk of bone cancers, or joint disorders. There's no reason why entire male dogs can't be raised to be perfectly civil, polite and pleasant adult dogs. Their manners are not stored in their testicles!

    There's so much misinformation in what you've written that I do not know where to start.

    There certainly is dominance and submissiveness in dogs, one or the other can lead to an aggressive reaction, this is undeniable.

    Corrections work and once they are proportionate and don't include hitting or harming physically or mentally they will get results 10 times quicker than any purely positive training.

    I've seen positive trainers try for months to get certain dogs to walk at a heel without pulling without success, the same dogs would then be trained to heel and stop pulling within a week using simple corrections.

    I have a working line shepherd and without doubt treats in your hand may as well be balls of crap if he is in a drive state of mind.

    I see the advocates of purely positive training as being like cult members, they're like the Scientologists of the dog world. Promising to train all of the problems away for a charge but never seeming to finish the job, the dog always needing more work for more money contrasted to trainers like the Leerburgs and others like them who get results fast and permanent reducing the ongoing stress inflicted on the dog which is caused by human centric methods based on human emotionalism also known as positive methods.

    As for your research, if all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail, the research you refer to set out with an agenda regardless of consequences. Results and the long term happiness of the dog and its ability to live a stable life with its human owners is more important than any method based on doggy virtue signalling.

    Only using avoidance techniques of training is just as bad as only using motivation techniques, for different reasons.
    Balanced training is the best method using both corrections and motivation in a balanced and measured way.


  • #17
    Quadrivium
    Registered Users Posts: 213 ✭✭Quadrivium


    This short video is a good explanation of the pro's and con's of all types of dog training. https://leerburg.com/flix/player.php/1236/Ed_Frawley's_Philosophy_on_Dog_Training


  • #18
    DBB
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 9,726 Mod ✭✭✭✭DBB


    Jayney :o I've been called a lot of things, but misinformed is a new one when it comes to dogs :D
    It is something I've all-too-often found with "balanced" trainers... they seem to struggle to present their arguments with research to back up their opinions, indeed even discrediting the need for research and empirical evidence in training... I wonder why that is?! I know the answer, having come from the world of "balanced" training myself, albeit a long time ago. For people with an agenda to accuse researchers of having an agenda is... odd. The whole point of research in the world of behaviour is to eliminate bias and the influence of agendas. The fact that the findings of the research doesn't suit the agenda of the "balanced" trainer is where the answer lies.
    All the stuff said above about "purely positive" trainers is the same predictable stuff that "balanced" trainers seem to fall back on to defend their stance... Attack the qualified guys to distract from their own lack of independently recognised qualifications in the field of behaviour. It's really quite predictable at this stage.
    The difference between ethical ("positive") trainers and "balanced" trainers is the mountains and mountains of evidence and research that ethical trainers base their approach upon. Research and empirical (not anecdotal) evidence which demonstrates how utilising positive reinforcement, alongside negative punishment (removal of reinforcement), is measurably the most effective and ethical way to train all animals, regardless of species. Yep, using corrections and aversives does work, but has been shown time and time again, when empirically measured, to (a) not be as effective at achieving learning goals as positive reinforcement, and (b) has a significantly increased chance of causing unwanted, enduring behavioural side-effects.
    Ethical trainers are also informed about how dominance theory/pack leadership in dogs has long since been disproven, even renounced by the guy who first theorised about it in wolves and dogs in the first place (David Mech) many moons ago. He even renounced it many moons ago, but it is recognised as being an enduring myth, much to Mech's horror. Again, mountains of research, evidence, and expert opinion to support that neither wolves nor dogs live within, nor recognise what a social dominance hierarchy is... those who still believe that social dominance hierarchies exist in dogs are not looking at what they think they're looking at. And that's a major problem.
    Similarly, when trying to discredit "positive" trainers, "balanced" trainers regularly throw out the old chestnut that "positive" trainers only use food treats. Not correct. Again, to illustrate, I train working dogs, and I have many, many contacts who train drivey, working dogs positively, and without food. Indeed, drivey dogs usually work better for non-food reinforcement. The weight of science that links learning theory to dog cognition and behaviour cannot and should not be ignored... but it often is, because it doesn't suit.
    I can think of no "balanced" trainer that has a recognised qualification in animal behaviour, yet all qualified, professionally certified trainers and behaviourists do. What's that all about? The self-professed expertise of the "balanced" trainer oftwn seems based only on "years of experience", yet they've never opened themselves to being independently assessed nor scrutinised by professional peers, as certified, qualified trainers and behaviourists do.
    Seems to me that we wouldn't send our children to school to be taught by self-proclaimed teachers who base their skills purely upon experience, we wouldn't attend university or courses if the lecturers/instructors had no qualifications, we wouldn't bring our animals to an unqualified vet, and we wouldn't ourselves attend an "experienced" snake-oil salesman in preference to a qualified medical doctor who renounces research as nails being recognised by hammers, so it does seem odd that there are still some people who insist on deviating away from this when it comes to dogs.


  • #19
    tk123
    Registered Users Posts: 14,016 ✭✭✭✭tk123


    Quadrivium wrote: »
    This short video is a good explanation of the pro's and con's of all types of dog training. https://leerburg.com/flix/player.php/1236/Ed_Frawley's_Philosophy_on_Dog_Training

    But video is exactly what DBB said - apart from his weird methods of correction lol? You’re preaching to the converted there by the way with your GSD example....

    And again as a reminder this is a 12 week old giant breed pup - he doesn’t know why he’s humping or what it’s for so his correction is distracting him away from what he’s doing. He doesn’t need time out or a leash correction or you don’t need to eat his dinner. He’s 12 weeks old not a teenager.


  • #20
    Quadrivium
    Registered Users Posts: 213 ✭✭Quadrivium


    tk123 wrote: »
    But video is exactly what DBB said - apart from his weird methods of correction lol? You’re preaching to the converted there by the way with your GSD example....

    And again as a reminder this is a 12 week old giant breed pup - he doesn’t know why he’s humping or what it’s for so his correction is distracting him away from what he’s doing. He doesn’t need time out or a leash correction or you don’t need to eat his dinner. He’s 12 weeks old not a teenager.

    Humanising an animal is a recipe for disaster.
    You people are too busy virtue signalling to learn about dog behaviour.

    Most of you never trained a dog, some of you have trained dogs but badly and yet others wouldn't know where to begin training a working line dog with high prey drive, if you had you'd know your silly treats or toys mean diddly squat to a working line dog mid drive. It's actually hilarious reading the nonsense you guys peddle :D


  • #21
    Knine
    Registered Users Posts: 3,761 ✭✭✭Knine


    Quadrivium wrote: »
    Humanising an animal is a recipe for disaster.
    You people are too busy virtue signalling to learn about dog behaviour.

    Most of you never trained a dog, some of you have trained dogs but badly and yet others wouldn't know where to begin training a working line dog with high prey drive, if you had you'd know your silly treats or toys mean diddly squat to a working line dog mid drive. It's actually hilarious reading the nonsense you guys peddle :D

    Hmmm high prey drive dogs. Nope. We don't have a clue.

    How the hell do you know what dogs people have trained here? I lol at some of your replies. Oh I have seen some of the 'methods' the hard men use to train their unfortunate dogs.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    DBB
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 9,726 Mod ✭✭✭✭DBB


    Quadrivium wrote: »
    Humanising an animal is a recipe for disaster.
    You people are too busy virtue signalling to learn about dog behaviour.

    Most of you never trained a dog, some of you have trained dogs but badly and yet others wouldn't know where to begin training a working line dog with high prey drive, if you had you'd know your silly treats or toys mean diddly squat to a working line dog mid drive. It's actually hilarious reading the nonsense you guys peddle :D

    I only hope you're kinder to dogs and their owners, than you are to the human beings you're addressing here :(


  • #23
    peasant
    Registered Users Posts: 17,819 ✭✭✭✭peasant


    To come back to neutering a giant breed dog ...

    First of all, the idea that neutering is good for the dog is debatable anyway..see here:
    https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=94858909

    Secondly, in large breeds, neutering is to be seen even more critical than in other dogs. The sexual hormones, in particular testosterone, are linked to controlling growth. Large breeds that are neutered too early have a potential to grow too big too fast, especially in their legs, which can lead to hip and joint problems later on.

    You should really read up about this and think long and hard about it...not just neuter because it's the "done thing"

    And from personal experience...our lump Benno, a Saint Bernard mix of 70 cm shoulder height, weight of 68 kg and a pair of testicles the size of chicken eggs is the sweetest, friendliest, most relaxed and most un-aggressive dog I've ever met.
    His predecessor (a Bobtail mix) was neutered (not by us) and a right macho in comparison.


  • #24
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    Thanks to all that replied. Sometimes this forum reminds me of the Monty Python sketch, "Sorry, this is Insults, Arguments is down the corridor". Said in jest please understand! I did take it all on board though!

    I am considering not neutering him at all now but for definite not at six months!

    My darling little black cat was killed on the road tonight so we're processing that right now, but still looking forwards to puppy school tomorrow.


  • #25
    Mr Crispy
    Registered Users Posts: 7,639 ✭✭✭Mr Crispy


    Sorry to hear that :(


  • #26
    Spencerfreeman
    Registered Users Posts: 692 ✭✭✭Spencerfreeman


    I'm sorry for your loss. I hope your new pup will mitigate some of the pain.


  • #27
    DBB
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 9,726 Mod ✭✭✭✭DBB


    Oh no :( That's awful news.
    Sorry to hear that Budgese:(


  • #28
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭[Deleted User]


    We might get a kitten now.

    I actually wanted to get one to grow up with the puppy anyway!

    But our Amelia will be so missed.


Advertisement