Neutering does NOT make one more responsible. Go to a pet store, expo, or better yet walk around in your own neighoborhood. Chances are those "reponsible" people are the same ones that incorporate no training and let their dogs dog as they please. Spay and Neuter is for human benefit period. In fact recent studies proved that the procedure does even more harm than good. Don't use a dog sack as for owner ignorance.
If your so against full dogs why not suggest to the OP to have their dog snipped ASAP instead of the suggested 2 years?
I'm not sure what I intended to communicate was what was read ... I'll take the brunt of the responsibility for the misunderstanding. So, here, I'll try again.
First thing, to the extent I have any expertise or experience, it is limited to Mastiffs. If the facts are different for Danes, Saints, Dogues, Filas, etc., I couldn't tell you. So, everything that was written above (and written below) is
solely with the Mastiff in mind.
Responsible breeders do NOT want to see their breed become over-bred. They do NOT want to see their dogs or their "grand-dogs" in rescue. They do not want irresponsible (i.e., "back yard" breeders) breeding any of the MANY lack-luster dogs that are out there being bred.
One way to prevent seeing so many pups for sale on eBay, CraigsList, etc. is for responsible breeders to require most/all pups that they're not going to keep for their own program to be sold on a contract which requires a spay/neuter after some minimum age.
Why a minimum age? Because, at least in larger breeds, the benefits of the hormones are most dramatic while their skeletal system is still growing...hence waiting until their bones are pretty well set and established at 2yrs or so of age.
Spaying and neutering is NOT only for the benefit of humans. It's also for the benefit of the breed. If someone has a awesome family pet, who also so happens to not fit the breed standard ... reasonable people will disagree as to whether or not the dog and the breed would be better off if this family pet were to be neutered before given a chance for a "whoops" breeding, resulting in pups who have the same genetic malady as the parent.
Related to this, there are also studies that show the best treatment for Benign Prostate Hyperplasia is neutering. BPH is not a genetic ailment. A friend of mine lost her awesome boy, a Mastiff named Finny, to BPH just a few months ago. I know if she'd have known the risk, she would have collected more semen on him, and would have had him neutered and kept as a great pet for the remainder of his days. His health would have been greatly improved with a neutering...instead, he's dead.
Also, it's been medically and scientifically shown that the best treatment for Mastiffs who are genetically predisposed to developing cystinuria (i.e., the creation of cystine crystals in their bladder, which create life-threatening blockages) is neutering.
I also know that there are medical references that state that animals benefit for having their sexual organs (and therefore the sexual hormones) for as long as possible ... and, so, as a result of there being a conundrum about what to do (or not do), someone having to decide whether or not an animal should be neutered, while each pet owner needs to have a preference about whether or not to desex an animal, it is my quite-firm belief that the best thing for each breed is when thoughtful and responsible breeders (i.e., those who are looking out for the well-being of their respective breeds) tell their pet buyers whether or not they want their pet spayed or neutered.
While your experience may differ, it is my experience that just as there are responsible owners who neuter (or spay) and responsible owners who do not neuter (or spay) ... there are also irresponsible owners who do one or the other. Lumping people into groups as it appears you have is sometimes not as constructive as one would prefer.
Thank you for your perspective.
