# Large Goldens



## Moosey (Jun 27, 2010)

Just wondering what size of others goldens are.
My puppy is 7.5 months now. Not sure what he weighs right now but he is over 70 pounds for sure. He is as big as his Dad now. His head is about the only thing smaller then his Dad. I know the growth slows down the last 6 months, just wondering how much bigger he will get.


----------



## 2Retrievers222 (Sep 5, 2007)

mine were 80lbs at 7 months now down to 130lbs from 140, other 130lbs to 120lbs.

Is yours fixed 

http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/showthread.php?t=21847


----------



## Willow52 (Aug 14, 2009)

Between 7.5 months and 1 year, Hank added about 8 lbs.


----------



## 58loosy (Apr 18, 2010)

Lucy just turned 1 today and weighs around 45 lb, she is very petite, your guy looks good but that is quite a bit of weight for that age. I would just be careful he doesn't pack on the weight, just lately I have run into some males that our over 100 lbs. very wide.


----------



## paula bedard (Feb 5, 2008)

My first Golden Sam was a huge guy. He didn't stop growing until he was 3 and then topped out at 103 pounds, 27" at the shoulder. My current boy Ike, is 3.5 years old and grew nearly another inch in the last 6 or 8 months. Ike's now 80 lbs and just under 25" at the shoulder. I know that it's not the norm to grow so late, but it does happen. Usually they are done growing sometime in their first year and continue to grow muscle into their second year. Both of my boys were neutered at 6 months.


----------



## ssbon18 (Dec 21, 2009)

My guy is 9 months old and weighs 50 pounds. He weighed 45 pounds at 7 - 8 months old. He is not neutered yet.


----------



## Enzos_Mom (Apr 8, 2010)

Enzo just turned 7 months old yesterday and he was 60 lbs at the vet about a week ago.


----------



## missmarstar (Jul 22, 2007)

Sammy is almost 3.5 and he weighed in at a whopping 55.6 lbs at the vet when he went in for his neuter 2 weeks ago.

Dillon, (about 4.5 years old) weighed 73 lb at his last vet visit earlier this year. I am fairly certain Dillon was neutered at a young age.


----------



## Sweet Girl (Jun 10, 2010)

I have a petite female - she was only about 40 pounds at 6 months. She was about 52 pounds fully grown for many years - now about 57.


----------



## cisobe (Feb 22, 2010)

Tobey also just made 7 months this weekend. He weight in at 56.3 lbs, but he is one skinny lanky side (we're trying to keep him on the lean side). His parents were 60-70lbs, adn his grandfather was 75-80lbs...


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

My Jack is 2, big boned, and 24" at the shoulders... and he was 79lbs at his last weigh in. He was 70 lbs when he reached his full height at 1 year, and I'm looking to get him back down to 76lbs at least. It's easier on his joints. 

Previous goldens -

Danny was 25" at the shoulders and usually was between 74 and 80 lbs. Towards the end when he couldn't go for walks (he could still walk!) anymore, his weight went up to 90 lbs. 

Sammy was 23" at the shoulders and usually between 65 and 75 lbs (he yoyo'd). Towards the end he was up to 85lbs. <- We actually kept him on adult food even towards the end, because he lost too much weight on the senior diet. 

Our Charmy was 25" at the shoulders and a healthy 70lbs most of his life. He went down to 60lbs and under towards the end. 

To keep them at a healthy weight, we always fed them food amounts recommended by our vet. We _never_ went by the measurements on the bags.

ETA - this doesn't count, but thought I'd add -

Arthie (collie) is 26" at the shoulders and he's 55 lbs. He truly is all fur.


----------



## Mssjnnfer (Aug 9, 2009)

Mojo is almost 17 months old is around 70lbs.

Missy, who is around three years old, is 60lbs.


----------



## Jim Cahill (Mar 5, 2009)

mine boy Luke is out of field trial stock , he weights in around 70 lbs. He will be 4 yrs old in Sept.


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

Scout is 16 months and 53 lbs. I am eagerly awaiting for her chest to drop and pop and gain a few more pounds


----------



## Lennap (Jul 9, 2010)

Wow Remy is roughly 2 years old, 29 inches at the shoulder (and about 29 inches long!) and weighs 78 lbs. He is very tall, long and lean. I'm wondering if he'll fill out anymore - guess we'll just ait and see.

Last night we were at the vet to pick up food for the cat (due to the recall) - and some woman started screaming at me that I was a neglectful, abusive doggy mommy because he was too thin. Thankfully my Vet came out and told her that if anyone was going to declare this dog unhealthy it would be HIM - and btw I was probably the best dog, cat and horse mommy he'd ever worked with.

UGH love my pets - but I could seriously live without people!


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Lennap said:


> Wow Remy is roughly 2 years old, 29 inches at the shoulder (and about 29 inches long!) and weighs 78 lbs. He is very tall, long and lean. I'm wondering if he'll fill out anymore - guess we'll just ait and see.
> 
> Last night we were at the vet to pick up food for the cat (due to the recall) - and some woman started screaming at me that I was a neglectful, abusive doggy mommy because he was too thin. Thankfully my Vet came out and told her that if anyone was going to declare this dog unhealthy it would be HIM - and btw I was probably the best dog, cat and horse mommy he'd ever worked with.
> 
> UGH love my pets - but I could seriously live without people!


 
How old was he when he was neutered?


----------



## LifeOfRiley (Nov 2, 2007)

I'd have to look at his records to be positive, but I'm pretty sure that Riley was right around 70 pounds at that age, as well. We thought he was going to be much bigger than he is, but fortunately his growth slowed WAY down at about 8 to 9 months. He grew a bit, and filled out a lot, but he didn't get to be nearly as large as we thought he would.

He's 3 years old now. Stands just a little over 25" and at his last weight check, they told me he's 74.9 pounds. The scale at our previous vet showed 85, but I always wondered how accurate that was. I think the 74.9 is a lot closer.


----------



## HudsensMama9 (Dec 17, 2009)

Hudsen gained about 10lbs a month during the first 6 months.. He was 62lbs at 7 months. He just turned 11 months and he was 66lbs when we weighed him last night. He has been between 63 and 66lbs the past four months. I wonder if he will get any bigger?


----------



## Lennap (Jul 9, 2010)

Pointgold said:


> How old was he when he was neutered?


I believe he was neutered around 9 months, when he entered the rescue.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Lennap said:


> I believe he was neutered around 9 months, when he entered the rescue.


Which explains his long, tall, lean appearance. Very typical of early neuter, due to early removal of testosterone.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Males, if their height is within standard, are supposed to max out at 75 pounds. Females at 65.

Now, many dogs are taller than standard, so they might be a little more, but many owners can fall into denial when their dogs are moderately or even severely overweight. Also, so many Goldens are overweight that our "eye" for it can get skewed.

A moderately overweight dog lives, on average, almost two years fewer than a dog kept at an ideal weight. The moderately overweight dog also experiences common geriatric issues almost two years earlier. A dog on the light side of ideal lives as long as an ideal dog and is at the lowest risk for joint issues. You can get TWO MORE HEALTHY YEARS with your dog if you're careful about weight. It's the cheapest, simplest thing you can do for your dog, and it has the biggest impact. It's actually cheaper to feed your dog properly than to overfeed him.

You should be able to feel your dog's ribs with gentle pressure. You should be able to see a defined waist when you look down from the top. If the dog is fluffy, you should be able to push the fur in and see/feel that waist. Hip bones should be easily felt with only a thin layer of fat over them.

If your dog is overweight and the food is a good food, feed less. You're the adult, and you're the one responsible for his health. You're also the one with full control over what he gets to eat. The buck stops with you.

My dogs are lean, and anybody who wants to stop me on the street and lecture me on putting weight on them had better be prepared for a sh*tstorm of education coming their way.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> Which explains his long, tall, lean appearance. Very typical of early neuter, due to early removal of testosterone.


This is a common misconception. Long bone growth in a dog neutered at six months only increased by a centimeter or two over a dog neutered at two years. It would be extremely hard to distinguish with the naked eye, and would not cause a dramatically different look to the dog.

Just look at all the litters where one dog was neutered at six months and others are intact. Sometimes you can't even tell at all. The neutered dog's head may be just as blocky, and he may not be taller at all.

Many breeders say that it changes the look of the dog, creates a snipier head, or makes the dog significantly taller. There's no actual scientific evidence that this is the case. The changes caused by the differences in hormones are extremely small in terms of actual measurement.

Nine months isn't really an "early" neuter either. Six months is the general standard in the US, so when vets say "early," they're often referring to the newer practice among rescues to neuter dogs at 14 weeks before adoption. Nine would be a pretty normal age for a pet dog.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

tippykayak said:


> This is a common misconception. Long bone growth in a dog neutered at six months only increased by a centimeter or two over a dog neutered at two years. It would be extremely hard to distinguish with the naked eye, and would not cause a dramatically different look to the dog.
> 
> Just look at all the litters where one dog was neutered at six months and others are intact. Sometimes you can't even tell at all. The neutered dog's head may be just as blocky, and he may not be taller at all.
> 
> ...


I disagree with this entirely. Every bit of it.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

I'd chalk up a lanky, disproportionate, or oversized dog to breeding and genes, rather than neutering. The pet dogs from show litters that I've seen have not developed that look, no matter what their neutering age.

I should say that even the two breeders I love and admire, who have given me dogs, say this about neutering. I'm still highly skeptical, based on the actual science of long bone growth and on my personal experience seeing litters with neutered and intact males. I think genes have much more to do with lankiness and head shape than age of neutering.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

tippykayak said:


> Males, if their height is within standard, are supposed to max out at 75 pounds. Females at 65.


But this depends on the dog's structure/shape too... 

My golden is 79lbs, but you can feel all of his bones without pressing. And his backbone sticks out. And my mom was frequently stressed out last year because his middle was so narrow. I'm going to be getting him down a few more pounds because of his hips and my vet advised keeping him very thin. 

I've talked to my vet and have just gotten the idea that muscles and bones do tip the scale a little heavier. And you are more likely to run into goldens who are shorter and stockier. 

79lbs on our Charmie would have been overweight because he was a field line golden. He had long legs and a narrow frame. 

Same thing with our Sammy who probably was the only male dog around who managed to look spongey and soft when he was in the 70-75 range. :

So I think there should be variances depeneding on the dog. It's why we are supposed to go by rib touch test and then the side and top view of a dog. 

That said - I DO think that most goldens should be kept under 85 lbs. :uhoh:

@neutering age - I do think that your dog is _more likely*_ to be narrow built and not filled in properly if neutered or spayed early. I mean - it makes sense. 

I don't know about the height though, as that seems to be more tied in to nutrition and heredity.

*Although I do feel heredity does play a role here as well, considering _none_ of my dogs were neutered, and the field one was definitely not as big-boned as the three that came from show lines.


----------



## Gwen (Aug 9, 2007)

Some awfully BIG dogs here....... Razz is 21 mos, intact & weighs in @ 73 lbs. Nygel is 3 years old & weighs in @ 78 lbs of solid muscle. 

I think that there are a pile of breeders (no comment as to type of breeders:doh::doh out there who think that bigger is better and my advice to them would be to read the standards!!!!!


----------



## Lennap (Jul 9, 2010)

Pointgold said:


> Which explains his long, tall, lean appearance. Very typical of early neuter, due to early removal of testosterone.


OK that makes total sense! So that means he'll never bulk up right? Unless I overfeed him of course - which I do not plan on doing!


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Megora said:


> But this depends on the dog's structure/shape too...
> 
> My golden is 79lbs, but you can feel all of his bones without pressing. And his backbone sticks out. And my mom was frequently stressed out last year because his middle was so narrow. I'm going to be getting him down a few more pounds because of his hips and my vet advised keeping him very thin.
> 
> ...


You're absolutely right. Frame has a huge influence on healthy weight, just like height does. That's why I think the ribs, waist, and hip hands-on exam is the best way to ensure the dog's weight is healthy, more than pounds.

I think the 75 number is helpful because it gives you some clue what an oversized dog might weigh. If 75 is the appropriate weight for a 24 inch male, then a 25 or even a 27 inch male shouldn't be more than 85 or so. But nothing can substitute for actually checking that there's an appropriately small amount of fat on the dog.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

tippykayak said:


> I'd chalk up a lanky, disproportionate, or oversized dog to breeding and genes, rather than neutering. The pet dogs from show litters that I've seen have not developed that look, no matter what their neutering age.
> 
> I should say that even the two breeders I love and admire, who have given me dogs, say this about neutering. I'm still highly skeptical, based on the actual science of long bone growth and on my personal experience seeing litters with neutered and intact males. I think genes have much more to do with lankiness and head shape than age of neutering.


Explain to me then, why littermates look entirely different when left intact than when neutered, and even when neutered at 6-9 months vs between 18-24? I have seen it over and over again, in my own and the breedings of hundreds of others. I venture to guess that I have over the years seen as many or more "show" breedings, and this has held true every single time.


----------



## Lennap (Jul 9, 2010)

Megora said:


> @neutering age - I do think that your dog is more likely to be narrow built and not filled in properly if neutered or spayed early. I mean - it makes sense.
> 
> I don't know about the height though. Height seems to be more tied in to nutrition and heredity.


This all makes sense to me as well. My apologies I've withheld information that probably has bearing on this. Remy is a special needs boy - when he was about a year old they actually thought he was suffering from chronic wasting/failure to thrive - his muscle tone was so non existent. Ends up he has a very uncommon swallowing disorder called Cricopharyngeal dissynchrony - which caused him to get very little nutrition during his critical first year. 

Thankfully the rescue group that had him went above and beyond in their care and attention and the brilliant vets at the University of Missippi diagnosed him. Unfortunately there is not much that can be done about the disorder, he is not a candidate for corrective surgery. But his condition can and is being managed - and he should live a long and healthy life (THANK G-D!).

Anyway I've digressed - I guess that contributed to his "unique" physique as well - I hadn't even thought of that!

Regardless I've always said he may not be a perfect Golden but he is most definitely THE perfect Remy!

The other day my friend commented that he is probably the most elegant Golden she has ever seen - hey we'll take it!

Once again I thank the forum for educating me.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> Explain to me then, why littermates look entirely different when left intact than when neutered, and even when neutered at 6-9 months vs between 18-24? I have seen it over and over again, in my own and the breedings of hundreds of others. I venture to guess that I have over the years seen as many or more "show" breedings, and this has held true every single time.


I can't explain your personal experience. Mine differs. I _can_ explain why littermates look different from each other. They often do even when they're all intact. Some litters are very consistent, and some have a great deal of variation.

I can say, more generally, that confirmation bias suggests that once one believes something, one's mind latches on to the examples that prove the principle while explaining away the ones that don't. It tells a lot about politics and may explain our difference here. I've read about hormones and long bone growth in dogs neutered at different ages, and what I've read inclines me to see lankiness as genetic rather than hormonal. I have a hard time imagining how one or two centimeters in the femur and other long bones would make such a big visual difference, so maybe I'm less inclined to see the pattern you see.

I'm thinking of a particular couple of litters in which the dogs neutered earlier are absolutely indistinguishable from the dogs left intact. How does that fit your theory? If what you say is true, those dogs would not look like they do.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Megora said:


> @neutering age - I do think that your dog is _more likely*_ to be narrow built and not filled in properly if neutered or spayed early. I mean - it makes sense.


Why does it make sense?


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

tippykayak said:


> I didn't realize you had so much contact with dogs neutered at 6 months, since you wouldn't be evaluating them as a judge nor allowing it with your puppies. I can't imagine that you've evaluated hundreds of litters in which you've brought all the intact and neutered dogs back together at two years of age for comparison.
> 
> I can't explain your personal experience. Mine differs.
> 
> ...


 
I used to require males sold as pets be altered at 6 mos. I came to agree with waiting to alter quite late, actually. I also have been teaching for 25 years, (nearly as long as you are old...) so _have_ seen hundreds of young dogs, altered and not. And many of them ARE litter mates. I evaluate a large number of litters, of all breeds, for people in our area. What I, the many breeders and exhibitors I know (INCLUDING obedience and agility competitors whose dogs are altered, not just intact "show" dogs), and not just Golden Retrievers, have seen is certainly not just a bias that our seemingly uneducated or politcally (?????where that comes from is beyond me) diverse viewpoints have latched on to. There are a myriad of breeder vets I know who would agree. 

Were the "couple of litters" that you are thinking of outcrossed or linebred?


----------



## Lennap (Jul 9, 2010)

tippykayak said:


> Why does it make sense?


If you look at other species - specifically horses, this is very true, so why not dogs? If a horse is gelded later, it is very obvious the moment you see him - it is called "proud cut" - his neck is far more developed/bigger than a horse who was gelded earlier.

So I can understand why it might make sense.


----------



## Golden_Lover (May 10, 2009)

Charlie is 1 1/2 years old and weighs 83 pounds but the vet told him he needs to lose about 5-7 pounds! :doh: He's the golden (obviously) in this picture:


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Lennap said:


> If you look at other species - specifically horses, this is very true, so why not dogs? If a horse is gelded later, it is very obvious the moment you see him - it is called "proud cut" - his neck is far more developed/bigger than a horse who was gelded earlier.
> 
> So I can understand why it might make sense.


Cool, that makes sense. With an animal that grows even faster and larger than a dog, the long bone effect would be even greater.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

tippykayak said:


> Why does it make sense?


In theory, it makes sense since I'm going off the effect that estrogen/testosterone have on human growth. And at least with humans they are supposed to develop at a certain time, but sometimes they do not stop growing and filling out until slightly later. 

By waiting until your dog is at least 2 or at least the usual 18 months, you can at least ensure your dog is done growing. 

*laughs* At least in my unscientific opinion. Keep in mind I stopped growing taller when I was eleven (I was always tall for my age before then, so it was some relief that I stopped when I did). And at least one of my brothers stopped growing and filling out when he was pushing 20. 

With dogs - I'm not sure if mine would have stopped filling out if neutered early. But at least my current golden was not completely filled out until this summer, well past his second birthday.


----------



## Roxy_the_Retriever (Jul 28, 2010)

Golden_Lover said:


> Charlie is 1 1/2 years old and weighs 83 pounds but the vet told him he needs to lose about 5-7 pounds! :doh: He's the golden (obviously) in this picture:


He looks perfect in the picture... considering they say a camera adds 10 pounds? IMO... I love his color. We are hoping Roxy (our GR) will have similar coloring :crossfing


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> I used to require males sold as pets be altered at 6 mos. I came to agree with waiting to alter quite late, actually. I also have been teaching for 25 years, (nearly as long as you are old...) so _have_ seen hundreds of young dogs, altered and not. And many of them ARE litter mates. I evaluate a large number of litters, of all breeds, for people in our area. What I, the many breeders and exhibitors I know (INCLUDING obedience and agility competitors whose dogs are altered, not just intact "show" dogs), and not just Golden Retrievers, have seen is certainly not just a bias that our seemingling uneducated or politcally (?????where that comes from is beyond me) diverse viewpoints have latched on to. There are a myriad of breeder vets I know who would agree.
> 
> Were the "couple of litters" that you are thinking of outcrossed or linebred?


I don't think the dogs you see in puppy kindergarten are not going to be examples of this principle. You're not going to see that many dogs from the same litter (I assume), and you're not working with them at two, when you'd actually see this effect. Maybe I don't understand what class you've taught during that time period.

And when you evaluate litters, you're clearly not doing it at 2 years old. You're doing it when you're picking show prospects, all of whom would be intact until after you evaluated. Why evaluate a two year old dog who was neutered at six months?

I know you've seen a ton of dogs, both neutered pets and show dogs, but I wonder how much controlled study can really be done by an individual (myself included) when we simply don't get a whole lot of opportunities to compare dogs scientifically.

The litters in question were all linebred. Most were very consistent, and the dogs are hard to distinguish (visually) in height and frame, regardless of age of neuter. One litter wasn't terribly consistent, despite the linebreeding, and one of the stockiest (not fat, but short legs and heavy bones) dogs was neutered at 6 months, as was one of the leanest, lankiest, though that dog was not particularly tall either.

There were issues with incorrect coat that seemed confined only to the neutered dogs (regardless of age), but structurally it was very hard to see the leaner/lankier/taller thing among the neutered dogs.

I thought this might be a nice opportunity for you and I to play nice. I'm making a big effort not to be a condescending jerk here, though I recognize I'm not succeeding fully. Based on what I've seen, this neutered thing is exaggerated and hard to really see when you have an opportunity to compare intact and 6-month neutered dogs from the same litter and actually look for these differences. And based on what I've read, the changes in bone wouldn't be significant enough to cause a huge change in look.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Megora said:


> In theory, it makes sense since I'm going off the effect that estrogen/testosterone have on human growth. And at least with humans they are supposed to develop at a certain time, but sometimes they do not stop growing and filling out until slightly later.
> 
> By waiting until your dog is at least 2, you can at least ensure your dog is done growing.
> 
> ...


Testosterone has an effect on muscle and on bone density. 95% of it is produced in the testicles.

There is evidence that neutering before maturity does cause the long bones to add a little length, since the plates don't close as quickly, and I can imagine that dogs neutered at that age look a little lankier since they don't fill out with dense muscle as quickly or completely.

But I don't think the suggestion that neutered dogs are dramatically taller or longer makes much sense.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

tippykayak said:


> I don't think the dogs you see in puppy kindergarten are not going to be examples of this principle. You're not going to see that many dogs from the same litter (I assume), and you're not working with them at two, when you'd actually see this effect. Maybe I don't understand what class you've taught during that time period.
> 
> And when you evaluate litters, you're clearly not doing it at 2 years old. You're doing it when you're picking show prospects, all of whom would be intact until after you evaluated. Why evaluate a two year old dog who was neutered at six months?
> 
> ...


You do assume much as far as what I have or have not done, as far as teaching classes, breeding, evaluating litters/dogs, etc, and incorrectly. If it were just me with such anecdotal observations, vs hundreds of breeders, exhibitors, and even vets, then you might have reason to pick me apart. I have, in some capacity or other, been working with dogs and other animals (working with, as in as an actual job) for over 38 years. I may be wrong, but I don't think that you are even 38 years old. I've considered myself a student of dogs for at least that long. I've come to change my viewpoint on altering males based on what I have seen and experienced with both my own, and other dogs (all breeds) over many long years. 
And yep, you are failing at the condescending thing. 
I strongly disagree with you on this subject.


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

I do believe that early neutering can lead to physical changes, although I'm thinking that 29 inches would be pretty extreme and there is likely genetic reasons also that the dog ended up this tall.

But that's just the thoughts that ran through my head, I have nothing to back that thinking up.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Loisiana said:


> I do believe that early neutering can lead to physical changes, although I'm thinking that 29 inches would be pretty extreme and there is likely genetic reasons also that the dog ended up this tall.
> 
> But that's just the thoughts that ran through my head, I have nothing to back that thinking up.


I've never intimated that a dog from a breeding taking the standard into consideration, would ever end up 29" tall if neutered early. However, he will have a longer, taller body, lack the rib spring and broad, masculine head that his intact brother will have. I've seen it time and time again. A breeding that has been made without consideration of the standard, where the parents are oversized, might produce dogs that are 26 or 27 inches tall if left intact. A male from that breeding neutered early may be somewhat taller, but more obviously would be the length of the legs and body, the lack of breadth and depth, and a longer, "snipier" head.


----------



## Lennap (Jul 9, 2010)

Pointgold said:


> I've never intimated that a dog from a breeding taking the standard into consideration, would ever end up 29" tall if neutered early. However, he will have a longer, taller body, lack the rib spring and broad, masculine head that his intact brother will have. I've seen it time and time again. A breeding that has been made without consideration of the standard, where the parents are oversized, might produce dogs that are 26 or 27 inches tall if left intact. A male from that breeding neutered early may be somewhat taller, but more obviously would be the length of the legs and body, the lace of breadth and depth, and a longer, "snipier" head.


Yup that's my boy! He's got very long legs, his body is also around 29 inches long (if I recall correctly - that # is less stuck in my head than shoulder height), his chest is quite narrow and I'm not sure what snipier means, but he's got a very tapered head with a very long snout. 

There's no doubt that he is 100% golden, but I agree he's from a messed up back yard breeding. I know that his original owners bought him from the people who bred him - so perhaps they were trying to be in the business, who knows?!

I always say that G-d made him extra tall so that no one would have to bend down to pet him - and trust me Remy likes it that way!

I'll post more pictures when I get home so you guys can see.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> You do assume much as far as what I have or have not done, as far as teaching classes, breeding, evaluating litters/dogs, etc, and incorrectly. If it were just me with such anecdotal observations, vs hundreds of breeders, exhibitors, and even vets, then you might have reason to pick me apart. I have, in some capacity or other, been working with dogs and other animals (working with, as in as an actual job) for over 38 years. I may be wrong, but I don't think that you are even 38 years old. I've considered myself a student of dogs for at least that long. I've come to change my viewpoint on altering males based on what I have seen and experienced with both my own, and other dogs (all breeds) over many long years.
> And yep, you are failing at the condescending thing.
> I strongly disagree with you on this subject.


You're failing at the condescension thing too, with your constant comments about my age. 

I don't think any of us re really able to state anything with absolute certainty about this idea, since none of us have embarked on a large, scientific survey. Just trying to pick up a sense of it over time doesn't really tell you enough, even if you have a lot of time.

I thought I remember that you said you had taught puppy classes for 25 years and had also taught some handling classes, which would only have intact dogs. I'm really not picking you apart, just pointing out that despite your advanced age curtain, your experience could not have confirmed the principle either way with total certainty. Sorry if I assumed anything incorrect.

There are LOTS of things that become common knowledge among breeders and exhibitors that turn out to be false when studied scientifically. I know, for example, that you don't buy into the current fads about food, but a huge number of breeders have jumped on that bandwagon.

I disagree with you. I don't think the science backs up what you and many others say about the effect of neutering, and I don't think anecdotal evidence, no matter how many years of it there are, is convincing here. All the actual science done on neutering, and there's a lot, doesn't confirm such a huge effect on body size and shape

I can't state with absolute certainty that neutering has no effect because I think it has some effect, particularly on the amount of muscle that develops on a male. I just think that chalking up any old lanky dog as being oversized because he was neutered at nine months isn't correct. Most dogs have the majority of their long bone growing done by six months and the growth plates have begun to close. So in the initial case that started this conversation, the dog was well past that phase before neutering. Hence, I disagreed with your comment that his size and shape were due to his neutering age, rather than to his genes.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

I should add that I think that the difference in muscle mass from testosterone can create a pretty different look to a dog that wouldn't require a huge change in bone structure.

As far as the "masculine" head, my anecdotal evidence suggests that genes have way, way more to do with it than age of neutering. All three boys I have right now are intact, and one has a sort of blocky head, one has a lot of stop put is a lighter boned dog, and one has a long muzzle, not much stop, and is light boned. 

My boy that was neutered at 6 months was more muscular and had a more "masculine" head than the intact, 20 month old nephew who's staying with me right now.


----------



## eeneymeanymineymo (Oct 5, 2009)

tippykayak ~ maybe you should read this article:

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

It has nothing to do with conformation bias.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

eeneymeanymineymo said:


> tippykayak ~ maybe you should read this article:
> 
> http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html
> 
> It has nothing to do with conformation bias.


I have, and I wasn't talking about anything to do with conformation, but rather the psychological principle of confirmation bias.

Here's an oft-posted rebuttal to Dr. Zink's article that points out some of his weaknesses in methodology:

http://www.sheltermedicine.com/documents/Zink%20rebuttal.doc


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

I'd also encourage anyone who has read Dr. Zink's article to also read the GR health survey he cites, since it doesn't appear to support some of the conclusions he draws, particularly about height and age of neutering.


----------



## eeneymeanymineymo (Oct 5, 2009)

1998 GRCA/GRF Health Survey:
http://www.grca.org/pdf/health/PreventiveCare.pdf

Read the paragraph titled 1998 GRCA/GRF Health Survey.

I agree with everything Pointgold has posted on this thread. And I guess all the GRCA members/BREEDERS who contributed to the Health surveys over the years don't have any experience with what they have actually seen over the years in the offspring that they have produced who have been spayed/neutered or never done. 

LOL - I just assumed you misspelled conformation.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

eeneymeanymineymo said:


> 1998 GRCA/GRF Health Survey:
> http://www.grca.org/pdf/health/PreventiveCare.pdf
> 
> Read the paragraph titled 1998 GRCA/GRF Health Survey.
> ...


But can anybody tell us what "significantly" means in that context? How much taller? Five millimeters might be significant in joint formation and completely impossible to see with the naked eye.


----------



## eeneymeanymineymo (Oct 5, 2009)

tippykayak said:


> But can anybody tell us what "significantly" means in that context? How much taller? Five millimeters might be significant in joint formation and completely impossible to see with the naked eye.


Taken from the 1998 Health Survey:

<<The above information will be kept at Purdue University and will remain confidential.
Thank you for your participation in this health survey of Golden Retrievers. Please return your
questionnaires to Purdue University in the envelope provided by November 1, 1998. Be assured that all
information will be kept strictly confidential and names of participants will not be released. After Dr.
Glickman analyzes the data at Purdue University, a detailed report will be sent to the Golden Retriever Club
of America for publication.>>

Perhaps Rhonda Hovan can help you understand what "significantly" means in that context since she wrote the article.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Anyone can find something on the internet, or in a book, to prove what they believe, and someone else can find something to disprove it. 

For me, the proof is in what I can see, and touch, and that I have been able to do so with for years. Tangibility means something. So does experience.
Most breeders (again, not just Goldens) can tell by looking at any given dog whether he has been neutered "early" (prior to 18-24 months.) 

Not that it will or should matter, but I have over the years taught not only Puppy Classes and handling classes, but Basic Obedience. My focus is on Puppy K because I love it so much and believe it is the most effective thing that I can do. I have also regularly attended several levels of obedience classes with my own dogs, during which I have closely observed many ages and breeds of dogs. Attending, over 25 years plus, many National Specialties (several breeds) and watching the venues that do not require an animal to be intact has provided the opportunity to see the effects of neutering on the appearance of males.


None of this has just been pulled out of someone's butt.


----------



## RSHANNING (Nov 14, 2008)

My Sierra is a year old and she weighs 65 lbs


----------



## Enzos_Mom (Apr 8, 2010)

I don't know about all of the scientifics behind it, but I do know that my vet said that while she would neuter Enzo at any time that I wanted, she recommended that I wait until he is a year old at the minimum, but preferrably two years old.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

tippykayak said:


> (snipped)
> I The litters in question were all linebred. Most were very consistent, and the dogs are hard to distinguish (visually) in height and frame, regardless of age of neuter. One litter wasn't terribly consistent, despite the linebreeding, and one of the stockiest (not fat, but short legs and heavy bones) dogs was neutered at 6 months, as was one of the leanest, lankiest, though that dog was not particularly tall either.


Are the pedigrees of these litters in K9 Data? I'd love to see them.


----------



## Lennap (Jul 9, 2010)

I just remembered I posted pictures of Remy when I first joined - almost a month ago, they are fairly current.

http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/showthread.php?t=80902


To give perspective the horse is 17.1hh, the bed is a full king, the last - can't help you there - I just loved his reaction to seeing snow for the first time (that picture was taken back in February).

PointGold is that what you meant in your description? Because everything you were writing seemed to have described him. Tonight I'll go back to the medical records the rescue sent me on him, to make sure I've got the neuter date correct. It may very well have been earlier, I'm not sure.


----------



## goldensrbest (Dec 20, 2007)

Well, i picked up my puppy, this past sunday, the breeder said, i could wait if i wanted to, to neuter him, at 12 months, or a little later, because of the issues stated here.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

goldensrbest said:


> Well, i picked up my puppy, this past sunday, the breeder said, i could wait if i wanted to, to neuter him, at 12 months, or a little later, because of the issues stated here.


Yeah, but, whaddo us breeders and reglar ol' vets know? :curtain:


----------



## Bell (Jan 23, 2010)

I think my guy is in the middle-23.2 inches high,24.4. in lenght,72 pounds.I think he's still got a little more growing to do.And filling out at year and 9 months.


----------



## jimla (Oct 9, 2008)

*Big boy*

Elliot is tall and lanky. He is 27" tall, 27" long and weighs 85 lbs. He reached full growth about 2 years old. He is 5 years old and neutered at 9 months.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> Are the pedigrees of these litters in K9 Data? I'd love to see them.


Yes, but I don't feel it's appropriate to discuss other people's dogs like this. You can look up mine if you like. Gus was neutered at 6 months. His brother Rip is shorter legged. His other brother (Finn) was neutered around 6 months but is much more similar to Rip in build than to Gus.

Can you post some k9data info for some of these hundreds of dogs that prove what you're saying?


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

tippykayak said:


> Yes, but I don't feel it's appropriate to discuss other people's dogs like this. You can look up mine if you like. Gus was neutered at 6 months. His brother Rip is shorter legged. His other brother (Finn) was neutered around 6 months but is much more similar to Rip in build than to Gus.
> 
> Can you post some k9data info for some of these hundreds of dogs that prove what you're saying?


 
Is Gus from the litter referred to? Why isn't it inappropriate to discuss his littermates? I was simply interested in the pedigree of a linebreeding that would produce so inconsistently. I would have absolutely no qualms about posting the pedigrees of any of the dogs that referred to, if I knew all of them. I don't think it inappropriate at all. Again, as many were not Goldens, K9 data will not have them. I really wish that I had photos of all of them, as it would prove much more.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> Is Gus from the litter referred to? Why isn't it inappropriate to discuss his littermates? I was simply interested in the pedigree of a linebreeding that would produce so inconsistently. I would have absolutely no qualms about posting the pedigrees of any of the dogs that referred to, if I knew all of them. I don't think it inappropriate at all. Again, as many were not Goldens, K9 data will not have them. I really wish that I had photos of all of them, as it would prove much more.


Gus's litter is one of the litters I was talking about, and I feel more comfortable posting about it because he was my dog and I had him neutered at 6 months. Finding out the rest of his litter is public info. With other litters, it's not my dog and I don't necessarily want to drag those other owners or breeders into the conversation.

It's not that the litter was particularly inconsistent, but the dogs do have fairly distinct differences in build that seem independent of age of neutering, so I thought it might be an illustrative example.

I'm definitely happy to discuss this particular litter and its degree of consistency and linebreeding. Your insight would be illuminating, I'm sure.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> Is Gus from the litter referred to? Why isn't it inappropriate to discuss his littermates? I was simply interested in the pedigree of a linebreeding that would produce so inconsistently. I would have absolutely no qualms about posting the pedigrees of any of the dogs that referred to, if I knew all of them. I don't think it inappropriate at all. Again, as many were not Goldens, K9 data will not have them. I really wish that I had photos of all of them, as it would prove much more.


Surely you must know at least some of them, particularly if you had a role in evaluating them.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

tippykayak said:


> Surely you must know at least some of them, particularly if you had a role in evaluating them.


 
Surely, had I ever imagined that it would ever be necessary to prove to one person what breeders, exhibitors, and vets have been seeing for so long, I would have gathered the information. You can look at my pedigrees that are in K9 Data, but what will it tell you? Again, many of these dogs were not Goldens. As I said, photographs would prove far more. ie photographs of littermates standing next to each other, perhaps with circles and arrows and measurement comparisons scribbled in the margins to show the differences between the intact vs the altered. I asked about the pedigree in the case of the litters you referenced because A. I love to study them and B. I am interested in what is produced by linebreedings vs outcrosses, and have rarely seen inconsistentcies in a linebreeding.
It is hardly some mass hysteria afflicting so many people who see the difference in neutered dogs as opposed to those left intact..


----------



## Ranger (Nov 11, 2009)

I'm not going to get into the neutering early vs. neutering later debate...or the proud cut comment, I'll just answer the OP's question.

Take this with a grain of salt as Ranger is a flat coat X (possible golden cross) - He's 25'' at the shoulder, more than 31'' in length and is almost 2 years old (approx). When i adopted him at 9 months, he weighed 66 lbs and was a skinny minny - visible ribs. He's ranged everywhere from 66 to 75 lbs and is currently at 70 lbs which I think is perfect since he's fairly lean. I've heard the "Oh my god he's sooooo skinny!" a few times but if it gives me a few more years to spend with him then he's staying this thin!


----------



## Abbydabbydo (Jan 31, 2007)

Abby (byb) is 23" and weighs 60 pounds
Finny (well-bred lab is 24" and weighs 72 pounds (down from 80)
Both neutered at six months
I do not post in the when to neuter your dog threads, it is a personal decision. But it certainly did not cause long bone growth in either of mine.
















Abby is quite petite and Finn has a head like an ox.
I think it is more diet, exercise level and genetics.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

I don't find the "everybody thinks so" or "I have a lot of experience and I think so" arguments compelling. Lots of things become common wisdom but don't turn out to be true. It's not mass hysteria, just human nature.

I do think that neutering age has an effect on growth, but I believe that many people comment on it as if it's going to cause an enormous difference when I've seen over and over again that it doesn't really seem to cause a dramatic difference within litters.

Listening to some folks, you'd be amazed to find out that dogs neutered before a year ever have blocky heads, when they clearly do sometimes. You'd think all dogs neutered at six months are an inch taller than they should be, which seems exaggerated to me. Do heads get a bit blockier when the dog is left intact longer? Possibly, but it's hard to say for sure. Are dogs neutered at six months slightly taller overall? Possibly, and that appears to be confirmed in some of the surveys that have been done.

But I don't think it's accurate to blame neutering if a Golden comes out oversized and improperly proportioned. It's almost certainly breeding more than neutering.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

And that, folks, supercedes anything that actual hands on experience could ever possibly show otherwise. We are all hysterics.
I do believe that I have stated that a dog bred to the standard will not be as tall as a Great Dane or anything, but that when altered early will NOT mature to be as "masculine" as one left intact. It is true. While there are certainly exceptions, it is more often true than not. And I WILL stand by not only my years, but those of others far more experienced even than I, who have seen exactly the same thing. 
And now, some people can continue to post evidence of how wrong am I without me playing back. Have fun!


----------



## GoldenSail (Dec 30, 2008)

tippykayak said:


> Listening to some folks, you'd be amazed to find out that dogs neutered before a year ever have blocky heads, when they clearly do sometimes.


I wonder if this is in part due to how the different lines mature. Some dogs look very mature at 6 months, and others lack maturity sometimes until they are 3.


----------



## Tracy S. (Jul 2, 2009)

I got my husband neutered about 12 years ago - he didn't seem to grow any taller.....  But he doesn't hump my leg as often - so that's a plus !


----------



## iansgran (May 29, 2010)

Oh, Tracy, I am still laughing. Thanks.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Tracy S. said:


> I got my husband neutered about 12 years ago - he didn't seem to grow any taller.....  But he doesn't hump my leg as often - so that's a plus !


 
I must assume that he'd already reached puberty when you had him altered... :bowl:


----------



## Moosey (Jun 27, 2010)

He is neutered. We will watch his weight to make sure he doesn't get fat. Most of what you see in the picture is hair. When he gets a bath he is much thinner looking.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> And that, folks, supercedes anything that actual hands on experience could ever possibly show otherwise. We are all hysterics.
> I do believe that I have stated that a dog bred to the standard will not be as tall as a Great Dane or anything, but that when altered early will NOT mature to be as "masculine" as one left intact. It is true. While there are certainly exceptions, it is more often true than not. And I WILL stand by not only my years, but those of others far more experienced even than I, who have seen exactly the same thing.
> And now, some people can continue to post evidence of how wrong am I without me playing back. Have fun!


I like the "g'night folks, tip your waitress" tone there. Funny stuff.

You have hands on experience. That's valuable. So do I. You have educated yourself a great deal on the breed. So have I. There's not going to be a referee and a clear answer in this disagreement, since we're arguing about the degree to which neutering influences look, and that's not a cut and dried issue. I think it gets exaggerated. You don't. I don't think the fact that you're older automatically means you're right.

I don't have any evidence that you're wrong besides several litters that contradict what you're saying and a number of papers that measure dogs' bones that don't show a huge degree of difference. You have lots of theoretical dogs and litters you've seen in your decades in the business, but not a single litter or picture that proves your point.

It's interesting stuff and well worth exploring. You're certainly in the majority among breeders I've spoken to. Most seem to be asking owners to wait until 18-24 months to neuter for health reasons and also for look. I just wonder how much it really matters in terms of look and build.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

LOL. You completely ignore what I have said SEVERAL times - dogs from a litter bred to the standard, when neutered early, will very likely NOT be "significantly" taller, but they absolutely will be longer, "weedier", lack rib spring, breadth and depth of chest, and overall have a less "masculine" appearance. Dogs that are from poorly bred litters, or othewise bred without consideration to the standard, and would likely be well oversized height wise anyway, will appear to be even more so when altered because of the same concerns.

It's not about being older, dear, it's about experience, and having seen more, which just cannot be denied. As for my "theoretical" litters, that's interesting, perhaps the dementia I suffer due to my advanced age is causing me to be delusional! I suppose that I could say the same about the ones that you reference (being "theoretical", that is, not the dementia part...)but cannot share because they are not your dogs. Instead, I'll believe that it's very likely that a "couple of litters" may be just as you've described. I'll give more weight, though, to the collective hundreds that I and that majority of breeders that you yourself mentioned have observed this in. 

And if I can figure out this new fangled invention called a camera (I'm so used to chiseling images on rock, and during the time it takes to complete one the dog is a veteran...) I'll start photographing such dogs. I'll see if I can get owners of dogs that I've bred to send me photos of dogs that I might compare to littermates that I've kept. Not sure why, but maybe there are members who would like to see them just for the sake of seeing them; I'll probably have to assure others that I'm so technologically challenged that I haven't photoshopped them to make it look like I'm "right". :wavey: :smooch:


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Just as I clarification, I meant "theoretical" because you didn't give any specifics, not because I'm calling you a liar. I do not doubt that you've seen a bazillion dogs.

I was really only objecting to your initial comment that the dog's appearance, even though it wasn't clear how he was bred, was due to neutering. It's probably much more due to his breeding. I don't think neutering has a dramatic impact on the look of most boys, but I do agree it has some. We're only really disagreeing about the degree of impact, I think.


----------



## Lilliam (Apr 28, 2010)

I think you're both right, which is bizarre since there is a bit of a disagreement between you. 
I do believe that poorly bred goldens/labs will be out of balance, their proportions won't be correct. However, I have seen foals who were gelded early develop a thinner face, no cheeks, and will lack an arched neck that their sires clearly possess. Also, later gelded foals will achieve some of their sire's characteristic cheeks, neck and general carriage. Perhaps this is also what happens with goldens who are neutered early.
Some contracts do require for later neutering....perhaps as a way to achieve full maturity and have an adult male show its full potential?

I think you're both such incredibly knowledgeable people - I've learned a great deal from you both in so very many of your posts. My impression as a newcomer to the breed is that you're both right, with the only difference being a matter of degree to which early neutering affects the final look.

Let's all go to the nearest cantina and get schnockered....


----------



## CarolinaCasey (Jun 1, 2007)

Rhonda Hovan, on neutering early vs. late

There are numerous references listed in this article, citing scientific data.

http://www.weebly.com/uploads/2/0/2...her_and_when_to_neuter_a_golden_retreiver.pdf



> Dogs neutered prior to sexual maturity grow taller than their natural genetic
> potential, and their bone structure is altered toward a more narrow, lanky
> appearance. Taller Goldens have shorter life spans than shorter Goldens. Among
> male Goldens, the shortest males live 2.2 years longer than the tallest males; and
> ...





> If a male is going to be neutered, there is good evidence to support
> that it is in the overall best health interests of the dog to neuter male Goldens after sexual
> maturity, at approximately one year of age. Neutering a male after two years of age has less
> impact on behavior, so if behavioral considerations are important to the owner, neutering should
> be done prior to the age of two.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

I'm normally not too discriminating about who I will drink with, but I'm going to make an exception this time.


----------



## Barkley2010 (Jan 18, 2010)

Barkley is 46lbs at almost 7 months....he has not been altered and we are expecting him to be around 70lbs when he is fully grown, but after reading this I'm wondering if he'll really get that big?


----------



## Lilliam (Apr 28, 2010)

Pointgold said:


> I'm normally not too discriminating about who I will drink with, but I'm going to make an exception this time.


Aaawww, c'mon....I'd love to see you "in your cups" - I have a feeling it'd be a hoot!!!!!


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Lilliam said:


> Aaawww, c'mon....I'd love to see you "in your cups" - I have a feeling it'd be a hoot!!!!!


 
Yes, but I do have to be _so _careful - alcohol interacts badly with all my geriatric meds, dontcha know... And then there's the Depends, and the walker, and trying to get a pass to get out of the home...


----------



## Lilliam (Apr 28, 2010)

OK, you're incorrigible!!!! :roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Lilliam said:


> OK, you're incorrigible!!!! :roflmao::roflmao::roflmao:


Nah... just lost all my filters when I had my bazillionth birthday.


----------



## njames (Jul 13, 2010)

Ah the joys of internet forums!  Although i tend to stick with pointgolds view i do think it has to do a lot with the pedigree which will lead to the degree of effect it has on the dogs overall full mature appearance. But honestly i think you two have really turned this into a how many licks does it take to get the center of a toostie roll pop.  Lets agree to disagree.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

njames said:


> Ah the joys of internet forums!  Although i tend to stick with pointgolds view i do think it has to do a lot with the pedigree which will lead to the degree of effect it has on the dogs overall full mature appearance. But honestly i think you two have really turned this into a how many licks does it take to get the center of a toostie roll pop.  Lets agree to disagree.


 
Whut...??? I've already forgotten what we were tawkin' 'bout.


----------



## iansgran (May 29, 2010)

I understand the age to neuter is a hot issue, but if I have a Golden only for a pet, not show, which is the case, why would I care what size he gets to? How tall he is, or the other issues about head and chest and such? Is his an issue of health or looks? I know i decided not to get a puppy from a breeder whose contract specified not neutering until 18 months because she got so nasty with me when I asked about it (I really had no idea why it was there at the time). Her attitude was if you don't do as I say don't even talk to me--not let me help you understand why I say this. I do have a little male, 16 weeks tomorrow, so it is an issue. I asked the vet and she said between 6 months and a year was her advice.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Ian'sgran said:


> I understand the age to neuter is a hot issue, but if I have a Golden only for a pet, not show, which is the case, why would I care what size he gets to? How tall he is, or the other issues about head and chest and such? Is his an issue of health or looks?


I kinda think health is an issue if your dog grows too fine and doesn't develop enough re/muscles/bones.

- The side note here is my golden is foremost a pet and it doesn't matter if he is conformation or not. But I do care what he looks like. I like the fact that he LOOKS like a male dog. There are times when he's stalking rabbits or airplanes (he probably thinks they are enormous birds) when he looks absolutely gorgeous. People do take pride in having beautiful dogs. There's nothing wrong with that.


----------



## Tahnee GR (Aug 26, 2006)

Ian'sgran said:


> I understand the age to neuter is a hot issue, but if I have a Golden only for a pet, not show, which is the case, why would I care what size he gets to? How tall he is, or the other issues about head and chest and such? Is his an issue of health or looks? I know i decided not to get a puppy from a breeder whose contract specified not neutering until 18 months because she got so nasty with me when I asked about it (I really had no idea why it was there at the time). Her attitude was if you don't do as I say don't even talk to me--not let me help you understand why I say this. I do have a little male, 16 weeks tomorrow, so it is an issue. I asked the vet and she said between 6 months and a year was her advice.


For me, it is more an issue of health. The link posted to Rhonda Hovan's article mentions higher incidences of ACL injuries and hip dysplasia, and there are concerns with cancer as well. My contract requires neutering no earlier than 15 months, and I'm thinking of bumping it to 18 months.

A search of this forum on the topic should bring up tons of links to some very good articles that go way beyond the issue of long bone growth and maturity.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

I think we should start a thread a post pictures of dogs neutered at different ages and then guess the age at neutering. It should be relatively simple to give a rough estimate if the physical changes are so profound.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

These photos would have to include those of unaltered litter brothers in order to accurately assess how profound the difference is.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Tahnee GR said:


> For me, it is more an issue of health. The link posted to Rhonda Hovan's article mentions higher incidences of ACL injuries and hip dysplasia, and there are concerns with cancer as well. My contract requires neutering no earlier than 15 months, and I'm thinking of bumping it to 18 months.
> 
> A search of this forum on the topic should bring up tons of links to some very good articles that go way beyond the issue of long bone growth and maturity.


I agree totally, Linda. Ultimately it is entirely about health.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> These photos would have to include those of unaltered litter brothers in order to accurately assess how profound the difference is.


If it has a substantial effect in making heads snipey and trunks weedy, we should be able to get it right more often than not, right?


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

tippykayak said:


> If it has a substantial effect in making heads snipey and trunks weedy, we should be able to get it right more often than not, right?


 
You have been insisting that it's more breeding than anything, so we should be able to see that intact male littermates look exactly the same, right?


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> You have been insisting that it's more breeding than anything, so we should be able to see that intact male littermates look exactly the same, right?


What I would say is that we _may_ be able to see _some_ differences by comparing male littermates, but it would be very difficult to predict the age of neutering just by looking at photos. I've never denied that it had an effect; I just don't think it has as big an effect as many seem to think.

I think it would be incredibly difficult to predict age of neutering just by looking at a dog, which is what you seemed to think you could do when you told that poster that her dog had a certain look because he was neutered at nine months.

If neutering was the cause, then neutering should be causing that obvious, major effect in most, if not all dogs. It should be pretty obvious.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

tippykayak said:


> What I would say is that we _may_ be able to see _some_ differences by comparing male littermates, but it would be very difficult to predict the age of neutering just by looking at photos. I've never denied that it had an effect; I just don't think it has as big an effect as many seem to think.
> 
> I think it would be incredibly difficult to predict age of neutering just by looking at a dog, which is what you seemed to think you could do when you told that poster that her dog had a certain look because he was neutered at nine months.
> 
> If neutering was the cause, then neutering should be causing that obvious, major effect in most, if not all dogs. It should be pretty obvious.


I don't recall anyone having stated that they could identify the exact age, tippykayak, but rather that the dog was altered before having reached maturity. Which most breeders would agree is somewhere between 18 and 20 months. 

Correction - that should be "between 18-24 months", as I've stated previously.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Pointgold said:


> I don't recall anyone having stated that they could identify the exact age, tippykayak, but rather that the dog was altered before having reached maturity. Which most breeders would agree is somewhere between 18 and 20 months.


I said a rough estimate, not an exact age. Do you think you could tell if they were neutered before a year vs. after 18 months?


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

tippykayak said:


> I said a rough estimate, not an exact age. Do you think you could tell if they were neutered before a year vs. after 18 months?


More often than not, yes, if in person and hands on. Probably yes from photos.


----------



## CarolinaCasey (Jun 1, 2007)

I think if one were to do this 'experiment' that you would have to compare litter-mates, as they have the same sire/dam and genes behind them. Preferably the show prospect that is unaltered vs a male neutered before maturity vs another male neutered after maturity. Since that will be hard to do, I'll take PG and other breeder's word for it- as they have seen far more dogs than I have in my lifetime. 

When it comes down to it, what is most important is that the owners are informed and make the best decisions for their family and their pet. Having a healthy dog is what trumps all for me and for all of you. If delaying neutering has as many benefits as there appear to be, not just an impact on rib spring/height/head, so be it! IMO, of course.


----------



## oliver1024 (Mar 13, 2010)

My Oliver seems like a lightweight compared to alot of other Goldens his age.....he stands just over 24" at the withers and weights only 56 pounds at 9 months old. He's tall and very lean but I'm not worried about weight as long as he's healthy which of course he is and I'm guessing he'll probably be about 63-65 once he fills out.


----------



## iansgran (May 29, 2010)

I am very much a novice, although I have had a Golden for 12 years, and I have no idea what some of the terms being used about dogs heads and chests, etc mean. Does anyone have a link, or photos or something to clue me in?


----------

