Hello all,

I could really do with some advice please!

I have a dog with only one plum, he's 13 months old now and there's no sign of it.  We've tried all the homeopathic remedies going and they haven't worked (not particularly surprised by that though!)  It's looking less and less likely that it will make an appearance. 

Anyway, he is the most wonderful dog.  He loves all other dogs (even if they're not too keen on him), doesn't do any of the adult male posturing, staring, raised hackles, etc.  He doesn't hump other dogs (just his bed!), and doesn't do any territorial woofing.  He does cock his leg - that's about as manly as he gets.  Apart from being a little boisterous, and soooo eager to meet people/dogs, he is the perfect pet dog :-D  We have had a few nasty experiences recently with other dogs - he's been attacked by other males who don't like young, confident, entire (or half entire :-D) males.  I'm worried that this kind of thing may hurt his wonderful temperament - no sign of that as yet though. 

I know that the undescended testicle will have to be removed at some point, does anyone know how long it is safe to leave there?  I also think that if he's going to have surgery to remove one, it's sensible to have the other one removed too.  I just am really anxious about doing it at the right time!

I've had a bit of a bad experience with my other male, he started to show some aggression towards male dogs at the age of 12 months, so (on the advice of the vet and trainer) I had him neutered.  I now know that this was the worst thing I could have done, and his problem with other male dogs has become much worse.  I don't know if I'd had it done earlier, before he showed any 'iffy' behaviour if all would have been ok (although I don't really like the idea of early neutering), and I don't know if we'd just let him mature properly if it would have resolved itself.

So, I reeeeally don't want to change this boy's temperament.  If I do it sooner rather than later, do you think that could preserve this wonderful friendly temperament?  And maybe stop the occasional grumpy male going for him?  If I let him mature for a while with his one plum, is he likely to become more 'iffy' with other males, more territorial, etc? 

I know there will be lots of different opinions on this, and there's no right or wrong answer.  What I'm really asking is 'what would you do?'

Thanks,

Clare

What I'm really asking is 'what would you do?'

I would speak to his breeder and see what advice she can give you :-)

My OP took the decision to castrate his BC (Jake) he was done at about ten months (for an undesended testicle). I hung on for Whistler but when he satred humping avarything in sight and the dog minder said she could not have him again he was done!!! about a year ago (he's 3 now). All fine with our two now.

Thanks, I did ask his breeder first :-D  However, she has never experienced this problem before and has never had a dog castrated, so it was her suggestion that I ask on here. 

Hi, Zuma, my GSD, only had one down, I talked it over with vet and she agreed that it would be fine to leave it till he was 2ish to remove. As it worked out he had to have surgery for possible gastric obstruction when he was 17 months, part way thru his op I had phone call saying the vet had found 'the missing bit' in abdominal cavity and did I want it removed. They did ask about the other one which was down and were happy to leave it where it was/is.

> if he's going to have surgery to remove one, it's sensible to have the other one removed too.

Can I ask why, after Zumas was removed he was very slightly less 'in your face' with other dogs, Vet said it could have been a bit less testosterone or just coming out of the Kevin stage, but whichever he has had time to mature physically and mentally and also kept his good temperament with dogs and people and is now just over 2 1/2.

don't know if this is any help but its just my experience.
Chris

Thanks, it's reassuring to know that your vet said it's fine to leave until 2.  That gives me more options.

I think that if my boy isn't going to be shown/bred, I would rather have both his bits off eventually.  It is likely that I will add to my gang of dogs one day (probably a long way off), and would probably go for a bitch next time with the hopes of keeping her entire and showing, etc.  I think it would cause unnecessary stress for me and him in this situation.  I don't want him having two surgeries, and knowing that this is a real possibility I think it's best to do it all in one go. 

a dog pup i bred,who lives with my sister had only one decended and at 2 yrs old was still not down,so they took the decision to have him neutered.incidentally he still mounts both cats and their other dog who all seem to allow it,although he's a tib spaniel,he's quite a hefty one! it hasnt changed his personality at all since,but both his parents are exceptionally laid back and i own his sister and mum who have never shown any agression,although can put other dogs in their place!

My oldest boy turned out to have a retained (inguinal) testicle and I booked him in for surgery when he was 18 months old--only to remove the retained testicle, which caused lots of pointless discussion with the veterinary surgery I was using then. They were insistent that castrating him was "best" but had no answer to the suggestion that a change in coat and temperament could be the outcome. After all, it's not as though I let him wander the streets in search of a bitch in season.

I think what tipped them over the edge was asking them to hip score our boy while he was under the anaesthetic--ours is a numerically small breed and all information is good information in my opinion. They obviously interpreted my intention as that of a prospective BYB.

By the time he had his surgery it was clear that the retained testicle would not have descended. Diesel was back to his old self the next day and I am proud to say he is the same gorgeous lovely boy he has always been--he has authority over my other (entire dogs), never gets humped by strange dogs down the park :-).

One line of rough collies had that problem and they used to wait until 2yrs before doing anything. I had one some years ago who by a year still only had one the vet checked and couldn't find the other so was castrated.

friend of mine as a 10 year goldie he only got one and never been done

My experience with undescended testicles is two of my Dachsunds had this.  The first died of cancer at 9 years and the vet said it was probably related to the U.D.T.  Many years later I rescued a long haired dog and took him for a checkup to my then different vet, who advised me to have it removed A.S.A.P.  When I collected him the vet showed me the offending item and said it was attached to his bowel and would almost certainly have caused problems if left.  Both dogs were very male and the little hairy one, who was relieved of the descended organ at the same time, would "see off" any much larger dogs who were too cheeky towards my bitches!! Good luck!!

Hi CVL,

were this my dog I would have the undescended testes removed at 2 years - or earlier if you prefer :)  I would however leave the descended one in place, if you're happy with his character as it is why take the chance on changing things?

Neutered males can give off the scent of in season bitches to their entire counterparts which, as you can imagine, could have consequences leading to fights.  Removing the undescended testes should not have any effect on how he's 'assessed' by other dogs, male or female, that he meets nor on how he reacts towards them.

It's personal choice although clearly at some point the one within the body cavity has to be removed as it is a serious risk in later life.

best wishes, Teri

Thanks for the advice :-D

What you are saying makes sense.  I really don't want to change a single thing about him.  I know neutering changed my other boy for the worse, but I have no way of knowing if that was timing or neutering in general.

So, if male-male aggression isn't an inevitable part of maturing (again I have no experience of this - most adult male dogs we seem to meet, even at training classes have 'issues' of one kind or another), I'll leave everything alone for now.  2 seems to be the consensus age for removing the 'hidden' one, so I'll reassess everything then.  Who knows, the elusive plum may put in an appearance before then! Let's just hope he stays as he is - a fun, happy, loving, (slightly dim) little/big fella :-D
Clare

When you say there is no sign of it - I'm presuming the vet can't feel it in the groin area either? Just checking.

The advice I am aware of is to have it removed before the age of four, as retained testicles are much more likely to develop tumours (20x).

You can just have the retained one removed, though generally both are removed, mainly to make sure they don't breed - but a responsible owner can manage that (OK, not with a complete guarantee!!) and can say they only want the retained one removed. :-) .

Dogs I have met that have been castrated - and I have met a number - the ones that are laid back and friendly and castrated after maturity haven't really been any different (except a tendency to weight gain - and sometimes becoming more attractive to other males, though that does seem to be just certain individuals!!) - the ones that have changed or had problems are ones that have been done younger or have had behaviour issues - particularly if they've been anxious dogs to start with.

My tuppence. :-)

PS Haven't read other replies, sorry if repeating!

PPS Sorry, too late to edit. The health benefits of full castration are, specifically, prevention of testicular tumours (not statistically very common in descended testicles), benign prostatic hyperplasia, and perineal hernia (well technically not prevention of the latter two, but they are problems of entire males). And statistically castrated males are meant to live slightly longer than entire males - don't know why, and not enough to get my dogs plums. :-D (And it would spoil his photos. :-P )

hehehe thanks for all that :-) I'll take all this info to the vet when he goes for his 14 month check up... I bet he'll still try and convince me to chop it off now, he's a strange vet - he barely charges for neutering dogs, he really really believes it's what is best for them (unless he has a sinister secret purpose for all those spare plums!!?).  So I think I'm going to struggle to bring him round to my way of thinking... but I'll try :-D

hi CVL, after the carry on I had with the veterinary practice over my oldest dog and insisting that they leave him with the descended testicle, I finally moved to another practice, and I only wish I'd gone sooner. I am either very lucky or there is absolutely no reason why entire dogs should be aggressive--my three often collapse into a dog pile, they very rarely grumble at each other and even then it's usually down to who gets to sit on my chair :-)

Hello all,

I was 80% decided on this - he was going to have the missing one removed soon-ish, and the other one was going to stay put.  So we went to the vet last night (we've recently started going to a holistic vet, who has been excellent with my other dog), he was due his boosters so I thought it would be a good time to discuss his plums.  Anyway, they wouldn't booster him because he has a little bit of hayfever... again, all signs of a good vet if you ask me...

They said there's no rush to do anything about his plums, just probably best to do it in the next year.  But they said if they were removing the undescended one, they were ethically obliged to take the other one away too!  I understand their reasoning, they don't want to perpetuate a genetic problem and as much as I promise to be a good dog owner, mistakes can happen I guess. 

My boy is very much a baby in character, I don't think I realised this until the vet pointed it out, and that's probably what I love about him... she thinks this could be down to his retained testicle, so she thought neutering wouldn't change him. 

So I'm happy to take their advice, but I'm just wondering how you lot have managed to convince your vets to just take the one!!?  When I told the vet that I'd heard of vets doing this, she was really surprised that a vet would agree to it.

Thanks again for all the good advice, it's just unfortunate that I can't really take it - it seems wrong to seek out a different vet to perform an 'ethically questionable' operation, when I'm a big fan of the way this vet does things.

Clare

Not ethically questionable at all, why remove something that is causing no problem. The vet is there to do as you ask they can not and should not perform an operation you have not requested and signed giving permission. Just what reason to they give for calling a relatively common procedure 'ethically questionable' it would seem your vet has an agenda of their own.

She gave several reasons, and I thought she made a good case.
1.  What if he got out/escaped?  I do everything in my power to ensure this doesn't happen... but what if there was a fire or a burglary?  He could run off and impregnate a bitch, only for puppies to come along with a good chance of having undescended testicles themselves.
2.  He could be rehomed one day (again, I have no intentions whatsoever of this happening, and I'm sure his breeder would never allow it.... but awful things can happen... what if I died and no one contacted his breeder!?), and his new owners may be irresponsible and allow him to breed, or they may get their vet to look for and remove the undescended testicle which has already been removed, putting him through a completely unnecessary major operation.
3.  She said that often the descended testicle is abnormal as well, so he has a higher chance of having to have that one removed at a later date.

It is perfectly possible in some cases to perform an operation to bring down the undescended testicle (in a young dog), as it is in humans, but no vets will do this..  again for 'ethical reasons', so surely keeping the descended one in place will fall into this same argument.  Similarly, in some countries you can have prosthetic testicles put in after neutering, or just to replace the undescended one... don't think many vets over here would do that though!  I don't think a vet is there simply to 'do as you ask', they have their own code of ethics which they have to work (and live) by. 

They would obviously not do it without my signed permission, but if I didn't give my permission for both then they wouldn't want to do just the one.  I dare say if I pressured them... a lot, they may give in... I could say 'well, he'll just have to stay as he is', in which case it would be in the best interest of the animal to do as I ask and nothing more.  However, when I agree with their general way of doing things, and am happy to go along with their advice and trust their judgment for all other veterinary problems, it seems ridiculous not to trust them on this!

I don't know how you can say it's a common procedure?  Every vet I've spoken to (6 in total) has never heard of anyone doing it.  This vet won't neuter a young animal, advises against routine neutering, is not against responsible breeding or showing, doesn't recommend annual vaccination or frequent worming or flea treatments, recommends a raw diet and seems all together very progressive... I'm not entirely sure what their 'agenda' could be... it won't even cost more to remove the descended one at the same time.

I obviously have no experience of this, and am very grateful for all of the advice I've received, but I think I'll trust the vet on this one and have both removed in the next year.

Clare

Nova, I too would trust the vet on this one.. and back Clare's judgement on this vet 100%. This decision has certainly not been taken lightly by Clare, hence her reason for asking for 'experienced views' on the subject.. All the reasons for removing the descended testicle are valid... I bred the dog in question, and so far.. the pro's for removing both far outway the con's. 

CVL the reasons given by your vet are interesting but to me strange, the first two would be the same if he was intact - it assumes he may escape or you may die, if this was an overwhelming reason then all dogs would be castrated and there would be the end of the species.  The last would be a good reason but the reason retained testis are prone to cancer is because they are retained not because they in some way retained because they are particularly prone. The phrase I find particularly strange is that not to remove both is somehow unethical but perhaps that was your term and not that of the vet.

If you have a 100% trust in your vet then you will do as they say I was only questioning what seemed to me a very strange reasoning that only removing the retained testis was in some strange way 'unethical'.

The vet did use the term 'unethical', and said many times that it would be unethical to her.  It's not that he could escape and produce any old puppies, it's (assuming that most cases of a retained testicle are genetic) that he would pass on the problem and exacerbate a problem.  I'm sure everyone agrees that cryptorchids should be removed from the gene pool (in normal circumstances anyway, certainly in Labs).  I suppose it stands reason that this vet would want to remove any dogs displaying hereditary conditions from the gene pool (and again, I think in many situations CD people would do the same, certainly for complex genetic conditions), but they don't really get the opportunity to insist on neutering dogs with, eg HD or another likely genetic condition.... I guess this would count as eugenics, just in the same way some people say breeding for show types is eugenic.  I think she may advise neutering in these other hereditary cases, but when she has to operate on the testicles in our case, it is easier to insist upon full neutering.  I do see what you mean, it's a horrible grey area, I don't know what the right answer is... Just because it's 'ethical' to have him neutered for future generations of dogs, doesn't mean it's what is best for him.  I just know that this vet has been spot on with other things, and as much as I value the advice on this forum it's all essentially anecdotal, as I don't actually know anyone with a 1 testicled dog!  Nor can I find a vet who has ever heard of such a procedure.  He'll be keeping hold of his 1 testicle a while longer anyway :-)

"Ethically questionable" is putting it a bit strong, CVL...my monorchid dog will never be bred from (and it's entirely possible that none of his normally endowed packmates will be either), but I wasn't about to risk changing his character, coat or his place in the pack by letting him be fully castrated. Maybe others here will disagree, but I would be very offended by a vet's suggestion that my morals or capacity to keep a dog were in question.

The idea that a retained testicle is responsible for babyish behaviour sounds like nonsense to me I'm afraid--it's more likely to be that he is just still a baby and his social skills are still developing!

The veterinary practice I took him to was one I'd been to for 15 years with various animals and they were admittedly very keen to have him fully castrated. However the senior partner who carried out the surgery listened to my reasons and accepted the choice was mine, not his. Ultimately the retained testicle is likely to cause disease, but the descended testicle is not a problem as long as he is never bred from.

I think you'll find that even very experienced owners can have 'accidents', but what sets them apart is what they do about it.

I agree you have a tough decision, especially since you like this vet's way of working, but don't take everything you are told as gospel--we all have our preferred ways of doing things and can be less than objective at times, and we learn to do better/different through constructive challenge. That's the value of this forum.

CVL, certainly I make no criticism of you or your decision but I do find the term unethical a bit emotive and unnecessary, your vet feels it is best to remove both and so be it that is their professional advice I am just a bit surprised at the reasons given and the language used.

Best of luck to you and your boy I am sure everything will turn out for the best.

<<what if there was a fire>>

ROFLMAO! Sorry CVL, I just saw your latest post and the explanations offered by this vet--I'm afraid she would never get my business with this quality of logic! I know it isn't a joke, so please pardon my laughter, but all I can see now is a dog escaping the flames thinking "which way to the nearest bitch in season???" How realistic is that??!!!

As for the cosmetic surgery--putting the undescended testicle in the right place, so to speak--it was a good friend who happens to be a local vet (from a large highly regarded practice) who told me about this procedure when my dog first presented with a retained testicle, and she was quite clear that this can and does happen. That's where I would absolutely agree with the "unethical" label.

I'm sorry if I've offended... I'm using the words this vet used.  I think it's really dodgy for me to look for a vet who will do an operation that my vet thinks is unethical, when I have no other problems with this vet.  I don't even know how I'd go about finding such a vet as I've seen all the vets in this area that I think are ok, I don't know if it's wise going through the phone book until I find one that says 'yes' :-)

I've probably not explained things very well, she's not saying it is unethical for you to want one testicle kept or to keep your dog that way, she is saying as a vet she feels it is unethical for her to offer that procedure.  Which is fair enough, I sort of understand her reasoning, she wants to do what is best for pet dogs as a whole as well as my boy.  If he were to get out (which again, I will do everything in my power to avoid, but like you say accidents do happen), and impregnate some random bitch, I would never even know about it... and the kind of people that would keep a litter from such a situation would not necessarily be the kind of people who would ensure these accidental puppies were never bred from themselves...  It's all very unlikely and hypothetical, but those are her reasons.  I respect that she feels so strongly about it, I certainly wasn't considering the bigger picture before speaking to her. 

It's annoying because I can really see all sides to this, which is why I've struggled so much over it. 

Hi CVL, just to assure you that I am not getting at you for your decision at all. I understand and agree with the imperative to eliminate cryptorchid and monorchid dogs from the gene pool, but want balance the good of the breed with the health of my dog. I don't want you to feel though that the responses are just anecdotal, though--I am happy to pm you with the full details of the practice and vet I took my dog to.

Thank you, without actual information like that, it is all anecdotal!  I've learned (the hard way) that you can't believe every last word that people say on these forums, and while it is nice to get information/experience to help make a decision I can't ever rely totally on information I get from here (for health things anyway).  I would really appreciate your practice details, it would be good to hear what a vet that's done it before says, then I'll truly have heard all sides to the argument.   

My mother's golden had an undescended testicle, and at 12 months or so he had it removed, with the normal one left in situ. He lived to be 14 with no problems; no change of his sweet personality and no coat changes either.

Think when you are involved it is hard to see the wider picture but I know a number of dogs that have had the retained testis removed and the other left in place to continue to produce and supply the dog with the hormones needed for normal growth and well being. I do not understand why it is thought necessary to remove the healthy descended gland, if the dog has a problem with a kidney or the adjacent adrenal gland the vet would not suggest removing both so what is the difference, who would remove health tissue just in case there was a fire. :-O

> Every vet I've spoken to (6 in total) has never heard of anyone doing it.

A lady I knew about 12 years ago had this discussion with her vet about her Rott, she solved it quite quickly, she told him........
We have a farm,............ we put a lot of money in your pocket.............I want you to remove the missing one and leave the other..........no prizes for guessing what the vet decided to do.

hi CVL I have sent you a pm with the details as requested.

Interestingly my old vet had this problem with her own dog, she removed his undescended testicle but left the descended one in place.

Personally I wouldn't worry about the 1st two reasons the vet gave, I've never had a dog that ran away or 'got out' and I would be very careful where I rehomed a dog. For me the issue would be what health problems (if any) where likely to arise from keeping the other testicle. Perhaps you could ask your vet to elaborate on this?

Vets are ethically supposed to do a full neuter, because of the condition being known to have a hereditary component, so it's not unusual for a vet to say that - but at the end of the day, he is your dog, and it is YOUR decision. You can insist they only remove the undescended one - if they refuse, they know that there are the much increased risks of cancer in the undescended one, and you would be within your rights to complain I think. At the end of the day (though it sounds very 'cold') - he is your 'property', and they cannot remove his descended testicle against your wishes (and as I said if they refused to remove the undescended one alone they would be putting his health at risk which WOULD be unacceptable). If I have made sense? My brain is mush tonight. :-P

Her reasons are logical except:

> 3.  She said that often the descended testicle is abnormal as well, so he has a higher chance of having to have that one removed at a later date.

That is certainly not something I have ever heard.... Fully descended testicles, whether in a normal dog or cryptorchid are as normal as each other, as far as I'm aware anyway! And she can feel the descended one to check if it feels normal. :-)

PS  Hadn't read the other replies. To do or not to do is your decision, and I think you're right, it won't change him, as long as he's fully mature first (no rush....  I'd be waiting till he was at least 18 months if he was mine, and probably 24 mths, if I was having both off him). Sounds like you've got a good vet.

I am still intrigued about number 3 though.... if you remember next time you're in, can you ask if it's some sort of scientific study and if so from where, or anecdotal? Just completely curious. :-D

ETA - not really relevant - but you brought it up - in the event of you dying unexpectedly, which I certainly hope you don't,  if you have a will that says he is to be returned to his breeder, and it is kept in a known place, that takes care of that angle - just thought I'd mention, cos it is worth thinking about.

As is the fact that if you have an entire dog you should check their plums regularly for lumps, and a bitch, whether entire or spayed, for mammary lumps regularly, same as you should check..... yourself...... (*slapped wrist* - dog gets checked OK :-P ). *Ceases sermon that everyone on here probably knows anyway but thought would add on just in case.*

I have long been of the opinion that in general vets think the owners of the animals they treat as stupid and totally irresponsible, why else would they feel that it would be ethical for them to force the issue. It is about time that vets gave a true and honest estimate to their clients of the situation presented, IMO it is totally unethical to assume that each and every owner is unable to care for their charges in a proper and responsible matter.

>I have long been of the opinion that in general vets think the owners of the animals they treat as stupid and totally irresponsible

Sadly a lot of them are exactly that. :-(

But the OP obviously is not, surely there is room to deal with people according to how they present themselves to the vet.

> I have long been of the opinion that in general vets think the owners of the animals they treat as stupid and totally irresponsible

But many people are. :-( From what the OP has posted, her vet has not treated her that way, and has explained her reasoning, and the OP has arrived at her own informed decision. :-) I haven't found that I have been treated that way by vets I have dealt with (odd exception, always is!).

> why else would they feel that it would be ethical for them to force the issue

I don't think it's a question of it being "ethical to force the issue", I think it's a question of veterinary professional ethics on the issue generally - probably the RCVS would be the ones to question on it! Don't know if link below will work, and it's from New Zealand - but it implies that it is considered unethical to remove just the retained testicle (it isn't absolutely clear, as it also refers to using the dog for breeding) by the veterinary professional body there.

http://www.vetspace.org.nz/files/u5/JanFeb_MoralDilemma.pdf.

> to assume that each and every owner is unable to care for their charges in a proper and responsible matter.

I would be surprised if vets assumed every owner incapable! But the ethical code will have to be on the basis of those that do not behave responsibly - and sadly many do not - and with the best will in the world, even with a responsible owner, accidents can happen. I would love to see more responsible owners, less BYBs, less reports of dogs being out of control, animals being neglected.... Brain is still mush tonight but do you see what I'm saying? It's a general ethical code, but clearly vets can and do make exceptions for responsible owners that wish for whatever reason just to have the retained testicle removed, and take extreme care that the dog is not allowed to reproduce. There are plenty people on here that have had or know of someone who has had  just their dog's retained testicle removed.

The vet put forward 3 reasons, the first two by general consensus are nonsenses if the owner is of average ability as a guardian of the dog, talk of fire and sudden re-homing is not really relevant and you yourself questioned the third but saying more or less what I had already said it is the retention that causes the risk of cancer not cancer causing the retention.

a friend of mine had a dog like yours.  Vet advised her to have the testicle removed and be castrated at the same time. Her vet wanted £520 for the operation, so she phoned me and asked me how much our vet would charge and it was £220. So they travelled 100 miles to bring him to our vet for his operation.  They could not believe the differnce in vet fees!!! Also I read up in my Doggy Book last night that undesended testicles are hereditary and dogs with ONE testicle should never be bred from :-( BTW Sam was fine after his op :-)

I think that is one of the reasons why vets tend to fully castrate dogs with only one desended testicle, so that the can't still be bred from and pass the trait on. 

I am sorry to be the devils advocate but if the reason they insist on removing both when there is no health reason for doing so but say it is so the careless owner does not breed then why do they not insist on neutering every dog or bitch they see with a possible heritable condition including the tendency to have a hernia or HD. As far as I am aware they do not even mention it so just what is the difference, no responsible owner of a bitch would choose a dog with only one testis or with any other inherited condition but as has been mentioned elsewhere they do sometimes have to or loose the breed altogether.

As you said - no responsible owner would do it. Sadly, there are many irresponsible owners out there. It can be hard for the vets to single out which ones they are. I thought some of our clients were responsible owners, until one day the came in and announced they were mating their two dogs just because they had a boy and a girl. No health tests given, they didn't even know they existed ( a breed that requires eye testing at the very least. ) Others that you think are responsible and then they let their bitch get mated by accident when they weren't paying attention. unfortunately its more common than you will think and so it is far safer for the vet to reccommend castrating the dogs with heritable defects, exactly the same way as we will reccomend not breeding from dogs with umbilical hernias or HD, and invariably people do so the only way to prevent this is to neuter.

Both my cocker spaniel's testicles were undescened.  I went to my normal vet and he wanted £850 to remove them.  Hence I found a vet close-by highly recommended by my sister who charged £250 for the operation.  I waited until he 18 months old and then he had the operation.  He has been fine since and would highly recommend that one waits until your dog is at least over 14 months old.  I would also like to add that another dog of the same litter also had one undescended testicle.  Hence his breeder decided to not breed anymore from the mother and apparently the sire ( a very well known name in the cocker breed) retired her dog from mating because of this.

Don't get me wrong I think the reason to health test is so you do not breed from dogs that are carrying hereditary problems.

That said why are the vets only interested in a un-descended testicle and in most cases do not mention neutering when there are other worse conditions present. In other words do they suggest that a dog is neutered when it is taken in for a hernia repair, liver shunt, sever HD  or soft pallet fault and so on. In most cases they do not, over and above their normal tendency to neuter everything that passes through their door - there have been times to get out with my husband intact.

Let's face it we should not be breeding from any animal that is not the very best example of the breed but that is up to us to know through our own study and experience nothing to do with the vet, responsible people do not but of course there are those that will but why and by what right do the vets think they should decide who is and who is not responsible, to my mind they should advise but never take matters into their own hands by embroidering the truth and in some cases telling their clients downright lies.

I've found that vets often have a weird outlook and are perhaps over the top in trying to neuter.  I sold a lovely collie boy to a smashing and very responsible family, only to have them constantly badgered and bullied into getting him neutered as early as possible.  Fortunately they've so far held out.  Neutering early can cause all sorts of problems - joint problems caused by neutering before growth plates close means the dogs grow bigger, and also other cancers are more likely, as well as social problems with them not really growing up properly.  I would leave any neutering until the dog has physically and mentally matured.  If you wish to retain the dogs character and social standing then have the retained testicle removed, leaving the normal one where it is.  The majority of dogs with two testicles don't ever 'use' them and most people are responsible enough not to let them.  Vets should do what's best for the dog, which is to leave the normal one, not how they think the dog or owners might behave. I would change your vets.  There's been a recent thread on a GSD website about this and all the response was very much leave the one in place or you'll change the character - fair enough they were also talking shutzhund which may need some testosterone but the basics are the same.

Does neutering really affect a dogs character? I've never found that myself, i thought all it did was stop the behaviour that is linked to testosterone. I wouldn't class that as affecting the character of the dog?