Blanket recommendations for sterilization may not have your sporting dog’s best interest at heart

For decades, a blanket recommendation for sterilizing dogs at a young age has been presented as a universal good. Yet for those of us who live and work alongside canine athletes, the cracks in that narrative have become harder to ignore.

There are few topics in modern veterinary medicine that generate as much quiet (or outspoken) controversy as early spay and neuter, especially when the conversation turns toward sporting dogs.

For decades, a blanket recommendation for sterilizing dogs at a very young age has been presented as a universal good: responsible, ethical, and unquestionably in the animal’s and the planet’s best interests.

Yet for those of us who live and work alongside canine athletes, the cracks in that narrative have become harder to ignore.

In this first part of a two-part series, I want to step back and explore where the early spay and neuter mindset came from, why it persists, and why growing evidence suggests it may deserve a more nuanced approach—particularly for working and sporting breeds.

Enter my colleague, mentor, and all around animal reproduction badass Dr. Michelle Kutzler.

In my lengthy and spirited podcast conversation with her, Dr. Kutzler gave us a foundation for the pervasive Bob Barker mindset and set the stage for the numerous unintended consequences. We discussed how a well meaning recommendation-turned-infatuation with sterilizing animals may be harming our sporting dogs, merely for the sake of convenience..

How We Got Here: A Well-Intentioned Beginning

To understand why early sterilization became so entrenched, you have to look back to the 1960s and 1970s. At that time, animal shelters across the United States were overwhelmed. Estimates vary, but millions of dogs and cats were euthanized each year simply because there were far more animals than available homes. It was an undeniable tragedy, and veterinarians, shelters, and municipalities were desperate for solutions.

Sterilization emerged as the most practical tool for population control. The logic was straightforward: fewer litters meant fewer animals entering shelters, and fewer animals euthanized. Early on, many shelters adopted a voucher system—animals could leave intact, but adopters were required to sterilize them later at no cost. In 1974, the Medford Humane Society in Oregon became the first to mandate that dogs and cats be spayed or neutered before adoption. Shelters across the country quickly followed suit and almost all continue this practice today.

That policy shift worked—perhaps better than anyone anticipated. Shelter intake numbers dropped dramatically over the following decades. Today, far fewer dogs are euthanized than in the past, a genuine success story born of good intentions.

From Overpopulation to Dog Shortage in the US

Here’s where the conversation gets uncomfortable. The problem we were trying to solve in the 70s here at home no longer exists in the same way. In fact, data now suggest we’ve swung the pendulum too far.

The United States is currently experiencing what can only be described as an adoptable (an important distinction!) dog shortage. Fewer than a million dogs enter shelters annually, and in many regions, that number is far lower. At the same time, the U.S. imports well over a million dogs each year from other countries—numbers we know about, based on CDC data. The true total is likely higher. Much of this importation exists to meet rescue groups’ demand for adoptable dogs, Kutzler suggests.

Why does this matter? Because dog importation brings real public health risks, including diseases like brucellosis, leishmaniasis, and other foreign animal diseases that we rarely saw domestically in the past. Ironically, policies designed decades ago to protect animal welfare and public health may now be contributing to new risks—while still being justified by outdated assumptions of rampant overpopulation.

Hormones Matter—Especially for Athletes

For sporting dog owners, the most pressing issue isn’t population statistics. It’s performance, longevity, and soundness. This is where early spay and neuter deserves a hard look.

Reproductive hormones play a critical role in normal development, particularly skeletal maturation. Puberty isn’t just about reproduction, rather it signals the closure of growth plates in long bones. When those hormones are removed before puberty, skeletal maturation is delayed. The dog still grows, but it grows differently, Kutzler said, and it’s easy to spot in working dogs who underwent this procedure early in life.

The result is often a taller, more angular dog with disproportionately long limbs. While that appearance might seem cosmetic, the consequences are anything but. Altered limb length changes joint angles, increasing stress on elbows, stifles, hips, and hocks. Over time, this predisposes dogs to injuries and conditions that plague canine athletes, namely cruciate ligament ruptures, elbow dysplasia, and early-onset osteoarthritis. Any of these issues can be career ending (or at least truncating) for a canine athlete.

Genetics already load the dice for many of these conditions. Early sterilization can stack the deck even further against the dog.

The Less Discussed Physical Consequences

Skeletal effects aren’t the only concern. Reproductive hormones also drive normal maturation of external genitalia. In female dogs spayed before puberty, the vulva may remain small and recessed—often called an “infantile vulva.” This anatomical change significantly increases the risk of recurrent urinary tract infections and urinary incontinence later in life.

In males, inadequate development of the prepuce can leave portions of the penis exposed, leading to trauma, infection, or even urinary obstruction—problems that can escalate into true medical emergencies.

These are not rare, theoretical complications. They’re conditions many veterinarians see regularly, yet they’re seldom part of the standard pre-surgical conversation.

We’ve Known for a Long Time

What’s perhaps most frustrating is that none of this is new information. As far back as 1972, veterinarians were publishing observations about health changes in sterilized dogs—obesity, endocrine disorders, and metabolic shifts.

More recent research has expanded on these findings, particularly in large and athletic breeds, which we’ll discuss in part II.

Yet the profession has largely continued down the same path, often framing early spay and neuter as the default (or in many cases, the only) responsible choice.

Why? In part, because it’s easier, Kutzler suggests. Surgery on younger animals is faster and technically simpler. High-volume sterilization fits neatly into busy clinic schedules. Over time, convenience for the veterinarian has quietly replaced individualized decision-making, Kutzler says, unapologetically.

A Call for Better Conversations

This isn’t an argument against spaying or neutering outright. It’s an argument for informed consent and individualized care. Every choice in medicine carries trade-offs. The ethical obligation is to explain those trade-offs honestly, particularly when they may impact a dog’s athletic potential and long-term soundness.

Sporting dog owners deserve more than a one-size-fits-all recommendation. They deserve a conversation that weighs population control against performance, longevity, and quality of life, especially for a dog whose life will be managed with far greater scrutiny and a sense of responsibility than those animals creating unwanted backyard litters.

In part two of this series, we’ll dive deeper into what current research tells us about long-term hormonal manipulation and explore alternative approaches that may better serve our canine athletes.

Until then, the most important takeaway is simple: ask questions, demand nuance, and remember that hormones exist for a reason, especially in dogs bred to run, hunt, and work at the highest level.

The Origins—and Consequences—of Early Spay and Neuter in Our Canine Athletes