i think the size and the assumed food bill will keep most of the regular must have it now crowd away. Im noticing a lot more breeders leaving the ears alone and making potential dog owners go out go their way to get them cropped.....you know people; if its inconvenient to do it doesnt get done haha

The Bichon Rescues are continually full as the Bichon seems to remain the cash cow of puppymillers. Bichon Frise Rescue has never fully recovered from JR's win at Westminster.

Any publicity given to a specific breed "ramps up" production at the puppymills. I pray that if sanity cannot keep the public from running out to buy a Great Dane pup, perhaps economic reality will!

I dislike Disney for the exact same reason as everything outlined in this post. In addition, I have been the owner/rescuer of several Dalmatians and Dalmatian mixes that emerged shortly after the furor and frenzy of the release of 101 Dalmatians.
There are only a few breeds that I can think of that could be worse choices for a household with children. Even my good, reliable Dalmatian mix was a weirdo when it came to kids. He was not vicious or dangerous around them, but they made him nervous and as far as I can tell, he'd never had one single negative experience with a child.
Disney movies spell disaster for certain breeds and I've never gone to see a Disney dog movie because of it.
I can only dream that they would stick to movies like the Nightmare Before Christmas -- at total creative classic that is thought provoking despite being on the weird and edgy side. Tim Burton is brilliant. I'd much rather a child see that or Coraline, but Disney will make money the way it sees fit, without regards to the welfare of dogs and the popularity that fame brings.
PS. Dr. Khuly , I am typically not the spelling police, but I was once corrected by a breeder that the spelling of our spotted canines originating in Dalmatia is correctly spelled using all 'A's. It been an easy way to remember how to spell the breed and I've never been incorrect since. :)

Anyone that crops a dog's ears should have to have their own cropped. It should be a law that the owner have theirs done first.

Yes, it pains me to wait for the hysteria to hit, the puppy buying to begin and then the inevitable dumping of the one year old Dane that is just too big and way too much to handle. They are a wonderful breed but as you said, just not for everyone.

Have always wanted a Dane, but in addition to all the "cons" you listed, their relatively short lifespan was always a big downside for me. I want my companions around for as long as possible, and even my Labs, with a 10-12 year expected lifespan seems too short. But if the shelters and rescues fill up, I may consider adopting one, knowing full well what to expect and plan for.

I've never been fond of these kind of movies, but I have to admit, I did like Beverly Hills Chihuahua and Underdog. However, I have enough brains to know that just because an animal acts one way on camera, that's not how they will act in real life.

I have 5 cats, and can safely say having pets is a huge commitment. Many people don't stop and think before they go out and buy that little dog, or big dog. They can't see past the image they see on screen and think their pet will be just like that.

If only impulse buying were limited to inanimate things, we would have no need for shelters or rescues.

Cropping ears, for me, falls into the same arena as spaying, neutering, removing dew claws, debarking, and, yes, even debudding goats. Something done for our own convenience but something I have NO problems with at all.

I personally find Boxers, Danes, and Dobes with floppy ears silly looking and ugly. A well done crop on one of those breeds adds a lot to their expressions, and the beauty of their heads.

jberry8- dont' know if you are male or female but I certainly hope you follow the logical expression of your statement and are spayed or neutered yourself, if you've done that to your dog.

Are you kidding - Cropping ears, removing dew claws & debarking are nowhere near the same as spaying, neutering! WOW

Declawing, debarking, ear cropping are in the same category as spaying and neutering? Seriously? How can someone even make this kind of statement and take themselves seriously. Declawing and debarking are done because people are too lazy to work on getting a cat to scratch something appropriate or a dog to stop barking, Ear cropping and tail docking are done for cosmetic purposes. Spaying and neutering prevent cancers, can help with behavioral issues, and prevent more puppies. They're not even CLOSE to being in the same category.

Regarding the original post from Dr. K...I'm not as worried about this movie's impact on dogs as I am some other ones (i.e. Beverly Hills Chihuahua). Chis are tiny little dogs often seen as purse dogs. People don't think there's much care involved when the dog is 5 or 6 pounds. People are willing to snap them up without a second thought. But few people are going to do that when you're talking about a 200 pound dog. The sheer cost of the dog alone is going to prevent people from rushing out to buy one. And puppy millers don't often want to deal with large breed dogs -- too expensive to maintain and they take up too much room. They seem to mostly focus on little dogs.

Heather, thanks for the catch. The quoted text was taken directly from PetDocsOnCall, so the misspelling was left as is. A "sic" has been added to indicate the original error. :)

Big dogs are very expensive to own. Plus if they are allowed on the furniture ( look for another place to sit).

I have big dogs and there are cost many factors.

I decided to feed my dogs the best kibble I could find. Add to that suppliments like, omega 3,flax lignans and phyto nutrients. Top it off with digestive enzymes and some doggy treats and I am over 250.00 a month.

Regular wellness visits to the vet for two dogs easily tops 1200 a year. Add to that flea and tick control ( I have to buy three sizes, 44 lb,88 lb, 132 lbs ) just to use the proper amount.
Heartgard is the same way, three sizes.

Plus if the dogs need any medication it is by the weigt of the dog. So there an extra charge for that too.

When we first got one of my dogs: there was an off leash golden retriever that got in his face. Even though both my wife and I had a leash plus a saftey leash our dog managed to pull us both off our feet and drag us behind him for about 10 feet before he even realized we were being dragged.

I myself weigh 200 lbs and I was like a piece of paper behind him.

So there is the handling part of a giant dog too.

They are wonderful, funny and great to own but not for everyone.

As a child I had a Cocker Spaniel, Mandy, that was from the tail end of the incredible damage done to that breed in reaction to the movie "Lady and the Tramp." She was a wreck: A shy-sharp, fear-biting, submissive-peeing, hyper-alert, constantly-terrified disaster of a dog with nerves of purest jello. I bear a facial scar from her - not her fault; She couldn't help being who and what she was. We gave her the best possible quality of life and she died of ripe old age, even though she was a constant management headache. Still, I've been sour on the breed ever since - even though I understand they've largely recovered. (finally!)

I suppose the story of Mandy and the Cocker Spaniel breed is actually one of hope for Dalmations and Huskies and Chihuahuas and Great Danes... The breeds *can* recover from the "Disney Effect." That doesn't mean that there won't be a whole lot of angst and pain in the short- and mid-term, though.

Truthfully, I can't actually blame Disney - *THEY* don't make people go out and buy unsuitable or ill-bred dogs. I blame the general public for its lack of consideration and thought. But people are people, and in large masses, they will do incredibly stupid things. May as well blame the sun for rising. All we can do is try to educate as best and as widely as we can, and then brace for impact.



BTW:
Using the AKC's support for puppy mills as support for attacking their stance on ear docking is an argumentative fallacy, and is unsupportable - One fact is not related to the other, and using them in that manner is sloppy and opens your thesis to attack. If, however, you wished to use both those facts as evidence that the AKC supports bad things, you'd have no kick from me.

I LIKE big dogs. I'm a big, physical guy - I like a dog I can be phyiscal with, with out fear of causing harm. Small dogs worry me, because I'm afraid that in a clumsy moment, I could do them real hurt.

That said, I'm in a place where I can afford and handle big dogs - I have the money, and I have the space, and I have the time, and I have the energy. I've seen, to my sorrow, what happens when one or more of those factors are missing - The rescue where I volunteer has more of those than I care to dwell upon.

I recently met a lovely Great Dane - She and her owner were coming out of a PetSmart store - And her head was even with the TOP of my sternum. Like I said - I'm a reasonably large guy - That dog's head was a solid five feet off the ground. That's a LOT of dog, even by my standards. She was a beauty - and a looming heartbreak for her owner. A dog that big will be lucky to see nine years. Big dogs die young. That's all there is too it. Even my preferred big dog breed only rarely lives past thirteen - Tweleve is more common. My other preferred breed, Border Collies, can see as many as seventeen years (rarely, but not unknown). If you own a pet, you own a heartbreak - But bigger dogs will break your heart sooner.

Opps forgot to add to a couple of things about big dogs.

Dog collars: largest a pet store carries is 27 inches. Forget that size, many dog dogs have necks larger than 27 inches. You may be looking at having a custom made collar.

Dog harness, forget standard sizes, must have custom made too.

I think in another post by Dr K she mentioned a thunder shirt for dogs scared of storms. The biggest they have is 50 inches for chest.If your dog is 50 inches or larger forget that too.

Protection shoes for the snow salt? The biggest
they have is 4 1/2 inches.

well I think the point is made, be prepared to shell out extra for things like that.

MaskMan, with all due respect, there is no way that dog's head was 5' off the ground. Not unless she was on her hind legs. I have a tall dane that is 38" at the shoulder, his head is about 4' off the ground. The world record dane came in at about 43" at the shoulder, so that would put his head at about 4.5'.

Also, my dane's dam is approaching 12 years old.

Lastly to donnadw who said that natrual ears are "goofy" and "ugly"... My boys exude REGAL with their natural ears. http://s54.photobucket.com/albums/g81/ec1659/Misc%20dogs/?action=view¤t=snowdogs2.jpg Though I can only assume that your dooshbag post means you're a troll.

Also, my dane's dam is approaching 12 years old.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

that is very rare exception to rule,,,anything over 5 i call dead dog walking hahaah

Crysania- If you keep your dog supervised properly, there is no danger of accidental breedings. Ergo, spaying and neutering is for the convenience of the dog.

Both cropping and docking were/are done for functional reasons. Hog dogs generally have their ears cropped to avoid them being damaged or injured when catching a feral hog. Bird hunting dogs had their tails docket to avoid injury in the field. Please google "council of docked breeds" to get a look at this.

Elcy- no, not a troll. Just someone whose opinion differs from yours. I hope that's OK with you. I can't see Photobucket at work, where I am posting, but I can assure you I would not find your uncropped Danes regal. Sorry.

I get the feeling you wrote this entry right after getting a bad cup of coffee and stubbing your toe. That's a compliment. Love it when you bypass pleasantries and go to the root of the matter.

The reason I got my dog "fixed" is to address temperament and housekeeping (female) issues as well as the obvious errant pregnancy issues and dogs hunting down my in heat dog. I don't see how that can reasonably be compared to cosmetic surgery to enhance a dog's appearance. Honestly, how many people utilize their dog for it's breed purpose anyway?

On tail docking, I think I heard on BBC or NPR that there is revisiting of the issue because of injuries to working, hunting dogs with natural tails.

@ Elcy,

I whiped out the measuring devices. You're right - I overestimated the hight of her head - About 4.5 is correct, depending on some imponderables, like length of neck, angle of neck, and carriage of head. Which still puts her at the very high end for height for the breed.

Whilst your dog's dam may be hitting 12, the average life expectancy for Great Danes is under 10 years, and the bigger ones still tend to die sooner. This girl, lovely and sweet though she was, was also HUGE. Well outside my usual experience with Danes. I do NOT expect her to make average life expectancy.

Yes, the life expectancy is short (less than 10 years). However, I know several people who either have or have recently lost Danes who lived well past ten years (12 to 14). As food quality and medical care has improved, it seems like Danes have a better chance of outliving that 9 year mark. Also, I think part of what goes into the life expectancy calculation is that you have cases where young dogs die suddenly of bloat.

And as for the ears... couldn't agree more. My Dane has natural ears, and I absolutely love how expressive she can be with them. Plus, some of the crop jobs are just plain ugly. Why would you mutilate your dog?

donnadw -- Spaying/neutering can also prevent cancers and behavioral issues. It can prevent every male dog from hanging out just waiting to jump on your female if you set foot out of the house. It can stop your male cat from spraying everything in the house and stop male cats and dogs from always trying to escape to get to a female in heat. You say that accidental breedings won't happen if you just keep the dog supervised. I think most people are aware that accidents happen. Dogs sometimes get out of the house, sometimes a leash gets dropped or breaks and the dog takes off. You can be the best owner on earth and things can STILL happen, especially with intact dogs. All of that combined makes me pro-spay/neuter. It's not all a convenience thing. If you're not breeding your dog, there's simply no good reason to keep it intact. My dog wasn't spayed until she was over 2. Now I may have to face mammary cancer, not something I'm too happy with but that's life (she was a rescue).

Docking and cropping ARE convenience things. The amount of actual tail injuries is so small as to be almost nonexistent. It's more about people not wanting to brush out a big tail, etc. Cropping ears is meaningless and always has been. People cropped guard dog's ears to make them look more dangerous and alert and to make it so criminals have less to grab onto. There's NO reason to crop and almost no reason to dock. Both are purely cosmetic.

If docking is so necessary for sporting gun-dogs, then why is it not standard for every single breed of hunting dog? Of the sporting group, 13/28 AKC breeds have undocked tails - that's almost half. In the hounds, there are no docked tails, and many of those breeds are also used in dense hunting conditions. 15/22 herding breeds are not docked. If long tails were truly such a problem that a dog needed to be docked in order to perform its job (even assuming that the dog is to be used for its original purpose, which is unusual in this day and age), why dock some breeds but not others? I've no doubt that there are some tail injuries in working/hunting dogs that are not docked, however these are hazardous occupations and I sincerely doubt the number of truly worrisome injuries (no, I don't think that a cut on the tip of the tail is worth cutting the tail off to prevent - I'm talking major wounds or bad breaks) is enough to warrant docking, especially compared with actual serious injuries.

Please read this before expressing the opinion that spaying and neutrering are automatically the most healthy option for dogs:

http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

As for tail injuries- I have had two dogs with tail injuries- every time I came home, they would wag their tails, hit something, and injure them again. Tail injuries are extremely difficult to care for.

If I were a dog, I think I would rather have one operation to have my ears appearance changed than have all my sex organs ripped out.

And even if is just for convenience, how many things do we do to dogs that are just for our convenience? If you are feeing kibble- that's YOUR choice, certainly not what your dog would choose. Do your dogs run loose? If not, I bet that's not what they would choose. Do you let your dogs breed with whoever they want? Again, not their choice.

Please don't tell me your choices are OK and mine aren't. It's a matter of opinion.

And those dogs are mostly retrievers, dogs who work in water, without much risk of tail injury.

Again, it's personal preference. I have seen many litters of puppies docked. They don't even seem to feel it.

If you knew how to train dogs as well as we constantly hear you bragging about, you would not need to resort to major invasive surgery to control your dog.

Anger aimed at Disney and Hollywood is completely misdirected and unfair. Be angry at irresponsible, unethical, high volume breeders and the idiots who must have the latest fad dog. Spend your effort educating the public. Write letters to the editor of your local paper telling people why they should resist the urge to buy a Great Dane just like Marmaduke.

donnadw finds certain dogs "silly looking and ugly" without cropped ears!? Sheesh. I suppose she finds many humans silly looking and ugly without nosejobs, facelifts, collagen ingections.

Ear cropping is nowhere near the same as spaying/neutering. Not spaying or neutering adds to the problem of more dogs than we know what to do with, not to mention giving our pets longer lives.

I am well within my rights to find any dog silly or ugly, no matter what the reason.

I find dogs with extremely long backs, pushed in faces, and dogs with long floppy ears MUCH more offensive and unattactive than those that have been through minor cosmetic surgery. Cropped dogs suffer no ill effects from the surgery- you can't say the same for long backed dogs that suffer from back issues, pushed face dogs who can't be shipped or exert themselves in hot weather, and dogs who have long ears and constantly suffer from stinky infected ears. What all those things have in common is that they are all ways humans have modified the appearance of dogs for their own ends.

Please read the link I provided above; more and more research is pointing towards spaying and neutering being a convenience for owners, and not something that will 'give our pets longer lives'

And to answer your question about humans? Yes. I wish plastic surgery was available to all, for free.

with respect to donnadw. neutering and spaying is for the future of the canine world. You do not have absolute control over your environment (you could die and your animals would be under someone else's control). Millions of animals are created by the "oops - I didn't mean for them to couple". And those animals are our responsibility.

What happens to the offspring of the puppies of the puppies you sold? You have no control over them? They can go on to irresponsible people or run away or just one "oops". The responsible thing to do is spay and neuter.

Spending hundreds of dollars on ear cropping? Adopt a mutt from the pound with the money and save a life. If the looks on the dog were that important and it translates to humans then we will have another Nazi Germany to contend with.

While I agree that *responsible* owners can keep intact dogs without problems, IME >95% of owners are not that responsible, and of the few that are, most have their dogs spayed or neutered for their convenience (no heats with bothersome stray males from less responsible owners nosing about, blood dripping, less of a desire to roam, etc) and to prevent mammary, oviarian, uterine and testicular tumors as well as prostatic hyperplasia and infection in males. I'm happy to be counted among this group. For the welfare of the population of pet animals in the US (not necessarily INDIVIDUAL animals, but the group overall) spaying and neutering is an absolute must IMO. I'd much rather subject a bitch to a spay surgery than euthanize her litter of unwanted puppies.

Except in the case of injury, I find cropping and docking distasteful. I am always saddened when I see an animal that's had either ear parts or a tail removed for cosmetic reasons. Done by a professional, I don't think it's cruel, but I do think it is unnecessary to put an animal through a painful medical procedure for looks alone. And yes, I will argue to my last breath that it IS painful, even in young puppies, though they do heal and get past it so quickly. There is no benefit to society with cropping/docking like there is with fixing animals. I wish they had chosen a Dane with nice soft snuggly natural ears. And the uncropped=ear infection? I will have to disagree completely. Ear infections in dogs are almost invariably related to some underlying cause like allergies, immunosuppression, or a foreign object in the ear canal, not how their ears stand or don't. GSDs are prick eared and just as notorious as cockers for having ear infections.

Along the same lines as disliking the cosmetic surgery, I find animals that are congenitally unsound (most bulldogs, pugs, bassets, shar-peis, etc) and unable to live fairly comfortable lives without significant medical intervention distasteful as well. I strongly believe that breeders should be breeding for health and functionality first, looks second.

NAIA is a very biased organization. "Our members are pet owners, dog and cat clubs, obedience clubs and rescue groups as well as breeders, trainers, veterinarians, research scientists, farmers, fishermen, hunters and wildlife biologists." I'd like to know what rescues are on board with them.

http://naiaonline.org/about/index.htm

I am glad to see they added a measly 2 animal welfare advocates to their list of volunteers, but not a single one on their paid staff, board, or advisory panel. Their shelter pet program is also a joke. Statistics have been collected to show what programs have been helpful in reducing euthanasia: public education, low cost/free spay/neuter, feral cat trap-neuter-release, proactive adoption programs, etc. I don't know what they expect to accomplish with this.

http://naiaonline.org/about/board.htm
http://www.naiashelterproject.org/about.cfm

Ok, if you really find great danes and other dogs without cropped ears and docked tails ugly, don't breed them.

My great dane resulted from an "accidental" breeding from a person who did her absolute best to keep the dogs apart. The fact of the matter is that dogs will go through CONCRETE to get to a female in heat, it doesn't really matter about training or whatnot. There are proven benefits to early spay and neuter, the late spay and neuter hasn't been shown to have health benefits--yet. I'm sure if studies prove that that is the case, there will be more veterinarians recommending that.

However, spay and neuter is primarily done to control the pet population, not for the convenience of the "dog". I mean really, does the dog actually care if it gets knocked up and breeds twice a year? Probably not. But what we know now is that that is not the best situation for family pet dogs. So it is done because there are too many irresponsible owners out there (not pointing fingers here, either)that do not get these animals spayed and neutered when they should.

Declawing, tail docking, and ear cropping, however, are COMPLETELY cosmetic procedures and most often do not do ANYTHING to help with the health of the animal. These are truly for the convenience of the owner. (There are occasions where there is a health issue that does require these surgeries, but these are few and far between.)

Comparing spaying and neutering to ear cropping and tail docking is like trying to compare a hysterectomy on a woman with a legitimate medical issue to botox or a boob job.

It just doesn't jive.

(My great dane happily has both of his ears and has for the past 8.5 years. And he's cute as the dickens.)

Stthrift-congratulations on making an absolutely amazing leap from docking the tails of dogs to another Nazi Germans. You just won the Godwin's Law prize.

LindaBCS- GSDs are one of my breeds and I have never, ever known them to be, or heard them to be prone to ear infections. Source?

I found this:

Ear infection is very common to dogs with flopped ears. Cocker that their pets are properly groomed. Fungal infections are spaniels are type of dogs most prone to this disease. Air circulation is very crucial in maintaining the health of the ears of dogs. In the cases of flop-eared dogs, small follicles of hair grow in their ears.

And another:

Ear Environment: Bacteria and yeast could not ask for a better environment to live in than a warm, dark, moist ear canal. Dogs with heavy, floppy ears such as Cocker Spaniels may have ear problems due to the excess moisture that builds up in their ears.

And yet another:

3. The third type is one we vets frequently have to deal with and are very frustrating to the pet and the owner too. This is the chronic ear infection that makes the dog miserable and smelly and even though it gets improved with treatment...keeps coming back. And the ear tissue changes to become thicker, spongier, and more productive...secreting large amounts of inflammatory glaze and goo.

This is not a common problem of cats, but a very common problem in dogs, especially dogs with floppy ears and/or underlying allergie

Huh?? What does NAIA's purpose as an organization have to do with their ability to read and interpret scientific literature?

And texvet- Please don't assume that not everyone is able to manage their animals.

Also, I NEVER argued that it was for the convenience of the dog. Pretty much every single way we breed and manage dogs is for OUR convenience, not theirs.

I just wish people would be honest about this, or at least admit that they're not capable of controlling or managing an animal who is still lucky enough to possess all the hormones and sex organs that whatever deity or deities you believe in gave them.

Texvet, if you really ARE a veterinarian, what percentage of your income is derived by performing spays and castrations? Do you think that a certain conflict of interest may be coloring your recommendations?

In my area, there is a holistic vet who does not perform surgeries as part of her practice. She discusses spays (or neuters) according to what is best for the individual animal rather than giving one-size-fits-all, across-the-board recommendations to whack off testicles or rip out ovaries and uteri, and by golly we'd better do it ASAP since we're helpless to prevent them from procreating otherwise. She follows a similar approach to that recommended in the JAVMA review article [December 1, 2007, Vol. 231, No. 11, Pages 1665-1675 doi: 10.2460/javma.231.11.1665], _Determining the optimal age for gonadectomy of dogs and cats_ by Margaret V. Root Kustritz. Being a veterinarian, I trust that you have seen this article and read it with great interest, as I did.

For my particular female, a spay will increase the likelihood that she will get a hemangiosaroma and/or rupture a cranial cruciate ligament. As you know, CCL repairs are quite expensive, particularly the surgeries that are recommended for large breed dogs, and, as for hemangiosarcoma, well, there IS no good outcome for that, no matter how much money one might spend. Yes, we've also discussed the chance of my girl ending up with pyometra. I appreciate this veterinarian's reasoned and caring approach a whole lot.

donna? It seems that your quest for to breed all dogs to look the same IS the canine equivalent for Nazi Germany. It is a sick perversion that leads to the unsound dogs with genetic mutations taking years to recover from.

Meanwhile all the litters resulting from the unspayed and unneutered animals that you so proudly sell are going on to produce hundreds of animals. Are you there to manage the process? NO! Can you say for certainty those people are responsible? NO! Otherwise over 5 million shelter dogs would not have to be destroyed in the US every year.

I am sure your puppies are beautiful. How about spending an equal amount of monies on shelter puppies and make sure all your dogs are not bred to add to the problem.

Donnadw, if the GSDs in your area really do have healthy ears, can I come live there? After nearly a decade of working vetmed with rescue GSDs, I can say in all honesty that ear infections in GSDs are a bane of my existence. Many of them have immune/allergic disease and horribly infected and inflamed ears if that's why they're in, and sometimes even if that's not the reason they're showing up in rescue or on the vet clinic doorstep to start off with. Since one of my two rescue GSDs has the same issue, I completely sympathize with owners who have to deal with it. It's a huge PITA to try to resolve. For me, until a GSD or cocker is proven NOT to have an ear infection, I will continue to assume they do have one. Maybe it's a regional variation in allergens and breeding? Otoh, I haven't seen one with clinical hip dysplasia for quite a while.

I'll provide my sources (other than personal experience), could you do the same for the quotes you posted earlier?

"Dog breeds with pendulous ears were shown to be at higher risk for developing otitis externa. Originally, the difference was thought to be due to variations in temperature or humidity; however, none were found. Although breeds with pendulous pinna may be over-represented in the breeds presented with otitis externa, not all breeds with pendulous pinna are affected and some breeds with erect ears (German Shepherd dog) appear to be prone to otitis externa." -AVAProceedings, Cole 2008

Similar to above "...A breed that is prone to otitis externa but does not have obvious compounding factors is the German Shepherd." -ACVConf, Merchant 2009

"Breeds documented to be at higher risk for ear disease (Basset Artésien, Bichon frise, poodles, cocker and other spaniels, Labrador retrievers, Labrit, Lhasa Apso, setters and German shepherd dogs) did not exhibit significantly higher Malassezia counts as compared to other breeds represented. Dogs with pendulous ears were not more prone to yield higher yeast counts as compared to dogs that carry their ears erect." Vet Derm, Reme 2004

I completely agree with this entire letter, every single detail. Now, I have always been a fan of the Marmaduke comic, even the movie (I am a Dane FREAK!!!), but I have noticed the large amounts of shelter animals that people have gotten to imitate these 'movie stars'. The terrible thing about Disney is that they paint this beautiful image of the animal that people think is accurate about the breed. Celebrities don't really help out either. I remember the whole 'Paris Hilton has a teacup chihuahua so we need one too' craze. I turn and see people walking around with these tiny things in a designer purse...and then a week later they're in the shelter. What people don't really see is that these famous people also have their own groomer, vet, caretaker...all they have to do is carry it around and show it off. IMHO, I HAAAAAAATE teacup ANYTHING with a passion. It's like saying 'please give me a dog with more health problems than their poor bodies can handle!'

I believe this Dane craze will cause an overbreeding, which will result in more health problems and possibly an even shorter lifespan.

These celebrity wanna-bes don't want a dog, they want an item to boast about. They can purchase and spoil these dogs then throw them away once they find out how hard you have to work...and I can't even have a Great Dane yet.

And I always end with this...GO TO SHELTERS TO FIND A FRIEND, NOT A BREED!!!

It is almost impossible to read the article you cited and come to any firm conclusion without reading the individual studies or seeing any overall statistics.

For example, in the study they cited about the increased risk of osteosarcoma, although the Rottweilers altered early were more likely to develop this disease, the spayed/neutered dogs were still statistically likely to live longer. In no way does that study show that Rottweilers are better off unaltered, even though it is one of the studies most often cited by those who avoid these surgeries. In fact, it seems to show that despite the increased risk of osteosarcoma, the dogs are still better off altered.

We also must be careful not to confuse correlation with causation. To use the same old example, global warming was less severe when pirates ruled the high seas. There are now fewer pirates, so the decrease in pirates must have caused global warming.

We should be looking at other factors involved here, or doing double-blind studies. No real conclusions can be drawn from a handful of studies each looking at a handful of dogs of a single breed.

The JAVMA article is a better source, but we also must take into account the health of dogs as a whole, and not just our individual pets. I see this as the difference between someone who really loves dogs, or someone who just loves their dog. One love is selfless, the other is, well, not. And behavioral issues are another topic entirely...

Valliesong, I love dogs generally, but when I'm making medical decisions for MY dog, sorry, HER medical condition and best interests take precedence. It's meaningless to say that you love "dogs" generally, if that doesn't translate into doing what's best for the individual examples of "dog" who happen to actually be totally dependent on YOU for their well-being.

A more recent study, which I'm too lazy to dig out the specific cite for right this moment, showed that both Rottweiler females and human females lived longer if they kept their ovaries, not forever, but until well into middle age--into their fifties for humans, and at least until age five for Rottweiler bitches. It's not a big enough, extensive enough study to be conclusive, and more studies are necessary, but it is a result that dovetails nicely with other accumulating information about ovaries and the medical effects of menopause, radical hysterectomy, and hormone replacement in human females.

Now, that's purely medical consideration. It's not the only issue with dogs, and social and practical considerations come into play as well. If you're not confident that your abilities and your circumstances will let you handle an intact female in heat safely and successfully, it's still better to spay. OTOH, if your dog is at high risk of dying under anesthesia, you might choose to, heck, learn how to handle an intact female in heat safely and successfully, and make some modifications to your home to do so.

But regardless, whether or not OTHER intact females may produce unwanted litters is not a consideration. The only consideration of that kind that matters is whether THIS female will produce unwanted litters if she remains intact.

Valliesong says, "We also must be careful not to confuse correlation with causation," but then fails to follow his or her own directive. The thing about spayed and neutered dogs "living longer"? That's correlation. It's pretty easy to think up other factors that are correlated with spay/neuter that might account for the longevity. For example, there has, at least historically, been a direct correlation between INCOME (and education level) and likelihood that a pet would be altered.*

People with more money are more likely to have a fenced in yard, which makes the dog less likely to get hit by a car. People with more money and education are able to afford and more likely to seek out regular, preventive veterinary care, which makes it likely that disease conditions will be caught early and treated (thus extending expected lifespan). People with more money can afford to TREAT expensive-to-treat emergency or long-term conditions rather than euthanizing the animal, again extending the animal's lifespan. People with more money can feed a higher quality of food. And so on.

*Now that low-cost spay/neuter is becoming more widely available, I'd predict that the "living longer" gap is likely to start closing.

All I did was Google "ear infections in dogs' and those were the first 3 sites that came up. You may see ear infections in GSDs, but i have never seen one and from reading what you read, I will count myself lucky. Most of my experience with ear infections has been in grooming people's pets-so, like you, I just assumed all Cockers would have nasty ears but my experience with GDSs has been with working line dogs. Like you say, that could make a difference.

Nowhere in this discussion have I stated I breed dogs. This is because I don't. Nowhere in this discussion have I stated that I want all dogs to look the same. This is because I don't. Are you even reading anything anybody writes, or are you just getting hysterical and putting words in people's mouths?

Getting into the shelter dogs issue is way off topic, but something to think about- most animals in shelters had homes, but lost them. The animals up for adoption in most parts of the country are NOT puppies. This does not make their particular situations any less sad, but does indicate that breeders are not the problem. People who do not make an effort to retain their pets are the problem.

I am an active volunteer at my local shelter, so I see firsthand the results of irresponsible dog owners.

But, after reading all these comments, I truly don't think donnadw is one of those people.

Everyone on this board is probably 100 times more responsible with their pets than the general public and everyone seems to be doing what they believe is best for them and their dog.

And I think that if all dog owners put as much thought into their decisions as you guys, we'd be better off. Even if not eveyone's pets are spayed/neutered.

So, should donnadw spay/neuter her pets? Certainly not if she doesn't think it is better for the dog and for the dog population in general. And this won't impact anyone if donnadw is able to prevent her dogs from producing unwanted litters. But should my neighbors in rural Texas spay/neuter the dogs that they let run loose every day - I certainly think they should!

The issue is not donnadw or her opinion on spay/neuter - the issue is people not taking responsiblity for their pets or for their own decisions.

-Allison

Blaming Disney is a little too convenient. I've seen most of these movies, yet I didn't feel the need to rush out an buy a puppy.

Donna, ear cropping is not a minor procedure. I have known show breeders that had to tape their dogs ears for years, I have known of Danes that lost most of their ear to infection and had to have the leather cut off. It's completely unnecessary cosmetic surgery done only for the selfish pleasure of the owner.

And after reading all of your posts, you are without a doubt selfish, I will also add short sighted.

I do take pleasure in the fact that your ridiculous opinions have managed to alienate all of the commentors on this board. You don't have very many friends either, do you...

I still doubt that the female dane's head was 4.5 feet, one, because it was a female, and two, because that would have made her the biggest in the world.

Perceptions can certainly be skewed after some time, especially when someone is taken by surprise.

The average life expectancy for Danes is 8-10 years. And being involved in the Dane world, it is becoming more and more common to see Danes over 10. The critical move is to find an ethical breeder that does extensive health research on not only their current breeding dogs, but generations back.

Unfortunately, most of the Danes I see around here are from BYBs, and most live about 6-8 years. Which brings us to educating the public about what makes a good breeder. Most of the dog owners I know either rescue or get their danes from BYBs, which explains the shorter life span.

Interesting fact, Boxers have a shorter average life span than Danes, which shows that life expectancy is not necessarily tied to size.

Yes, ear cropping on Danes was originally done for hunting, BUT those ear crops were short. Today's ridiculously long "show crops" bear NO resemblance to the functional crop and IMO look silly. Those long strips of ear sticking straight up in the air look anything but natural or "regal", they look man-made and out of place.

Until more US breeders take a stand and refuse to do the crops, this will sadly be the preferred look in the ring.

I do not post on message boards to make friends, so your ad hominem attacks do not bother me.

Ear cropping is a much more minor procedure than spaying yet most dog owners do that without a second thought.

Please don't assume I don't know anything about Great Danes, the showing of Great Danes, or even of cropping. I have seen ear cropping done first hand.

If I give you anecdotal accounts of bitches who were spayed and developed urinary incontinence will that make you characterize those who spay as 'selfish'? Because that is your evidence for cropping being a major procedure- a few anecdotal stories of people you know, or have heard about.

And again, spaying, is done for the same reason cropping is- human convenience and preference.

Your final argument, the opinion that show crops look silly? Is just that- an opinion.

Wow. I love how an article can claim that spaying your dog young can lead to hemangiosarcoma AND CCL rupture! Seriously? There is NO PROVEN scientific evidence for that. None whatsoever. Those are coincidences, and nothing more. That's the great thing about statistics--you can make it say ANYTHING you want. I could also find a study that would tell you that if you DIDN'T spay or neuter your animal it would end up with lymphosarcoma of the intestine. There's no cause and effect here, there's coincidence.

We DO know that not spaying and neutering leads to 1) pet overpopulation 2) mammary cancer 3) pyometra and 4) prostate cancer. We KNOW these things. ALL of those things are related to the reproductive tract. The reproductive tract does not have any direct effect on the spleen (unless you slice it during surgery, which would hardly cause HSA) or a cranial cruciate ligament tear (unless the dog gets fat, and that's usually from overfeeding--not the spay).

And I love the fact that you demean me by assuming that I do a large volume of spays and neuters. I don't. We have a low cost spay neuter clinic in our town, which I am happy to have, because frankly, it's a very routine thing. I do have occasional people who prefer to have me spay or neuter their animals because they know the standard of care I provide, but trust me, I do NOT make any money on those once you calculate drugs, staff time, equipment, and overhead.

And thanks for implying that I am an uncaring, unthorough vet because I believe spaying and neutering is in their best interest. I respect your vet's opinion, but do not agree with it. I wish you could be as respectful to a professional you have never met.

You REALLY think that your perception, and your perception only, is reality, don't you?

Spaying is not a cosmetic or convenience procedure, no one can ensure 100% of the time that their intact bitch will not get pregnant. Pregnancy endangers the life of the bitch, it brings more puppies into a world that is already overcrowded with pets, it's expensive to care for a pregnant dog and puppies for 8-10 weeks.... I could go on and on. Ear cropping? Done purely for the visual pleasure of the owner. I find it sick that anyone would put their dog through that painful surgery, along with the risks associated with anestesia. That makes me very sad.

I'll stop here, I don't normally waste my time arguing with selfish narcissists, but you really struck a nerve.