Honey's first social outing to a barbeque

[sarahp]

I think they where being Sacastic 

not likely

[Helen]

i'm losing count of the times where 'muzzle' has been *suggested* in threads by solidworker..........

i'd rather sort the problem than excacerbate it by muzzling...

kb i think you've received sound advice...up until the muzzling

dogs just don't like everyone as penel and sarahp have said ....and it's embarrassing (and sometimes they are remarkable judges of character )

[no time for this]

As a responsible dog owner then you have certain moral and legal duties to protect yourself, your dog and those you come into contact with, this was a thread about a dog that had had an unexpected reaction in a new social situation. I said:

"It might be an idea when taking a dog into a new social situation to muzzle it until you know that it is ok with the people and environment."

It "might be an idea", you know your dog more than anyone else, if you have a dog that you are not sure of how it will react in a certain situation such as a garden party then you have three responsible options. 1, Dont take the dog at all. 2, Take it and keep it on a lead until it has been introduced to everyone and you know that it is not going to be provoked by unruly children or drunk's etc. 3, muzzle it and allow it to run free.

Sadly dogs do bite, often out of self defence, if you are in one part of the garden and the dog is in another, would you be able to get to it and take in control before something bad happened?

"muzzle it until you know that it is ok"

Here I'm just saying take sensible precautions, and then it can be released / unmuzzled.

If people actually read things properly and took an objective and considered approach instead of having a knee jerk reaction then you might see the sense in my advice on dealing with a dog that you may be unsure of its reactions in a NEW situation.

[Helen]

here we go again 

it's your kneejerk reaction by proposing the most adverse methods (ie muzzling) which people react against.

Please don't insinuate we are all ignorant owners who don't know the consequences of dog's biting humans - we're actually a lot brighter than you give us credit for.

i don't agree with muzzling the dog.  full stop.  there are other more positive ways of dealing with this situation which have already been posted in this and other behavioural threads.

it is interesting that in your new post you mention 1 and 2 (the more positive approach) - shame you didn't put that in your original post, but then, that wouldn't provoke people as much would it?


kb - i'm sorry this thread is changing tack - i hope you have taken some good advice from it    and honey may be right about her character judgement too! our dog has only taken a dislike to one person and he has a violent reputation locally.  everytime he walks past us, jarv slinks to the ground and growls incessantly....

[Cob-Web]

It might be an idea when taking a dog into a new social situation to muzzle it until you know that it is ok with the people and environment.

It depends on the dog - muzzling some dogs can make them feel very vulnerable/anxious and consequently behave out of character; it may also prevent them ever relaxing and learning to accept the new situation 

As a training aid, as part of a devised training programme, muzzles have a valuable place in a pet home - but to be used routinely "just in case" can be counter-productive imo 

True, dont muzzle your dog! Let it bite children and be put down instead.

Is this the kind of knee-jerk reaction you are refering to?? 

[sarahp]

muzzling has its place - when you've exhausted all other options. 

It is not something to be done lightly or as a first approach.  A dog that is already uncomfortable in any situation, be it new or not, is going to feel a lot more uncomforatble without the ability to defend itself (as it see's it). 

Its like us going out with our arms tied behind our backs - it puts us at a psychological and physical disadvantage and therefore makes our reactions likley to be far extreme than they would be in normal circumstances.

Teaching a bomb proof 'watch me' is likely to be far easier for humans and dog and certainly less traumatic for the dog. 

Also what you seem to have forgotten is human's perceptions of muzzles - most people who see a muzzled dog assume that it is very aggressive and are therefore likely to be very nervous when near it which the dog will pick up on and again will exacerbate the situation.

The Rambo-esc approach is more than likely going to inflame the situation not ensure a calm and relaxed interaction between humans and canines

[Magic Star]

muzzling has its place - when you've exhausted all other options. 

It is not something to be done lightly or as a first approach.  A dog that is already uncomfortable in any situation, be it new or not, is going to feel a lot more uncomforatble without the ability to defend itself (as it see's it). 

Its like us going out with our arms tied behind our backs - it puts us at a psychological and physical disadvantage and therefore makes our reactions likley to be far extreme than they would be in normal circumstances.

Teaching a bomb proof 'watch me' is likely to be far easier for humans and dog and certainly less traumatic for the dog. 

Also what you seem to have forgotten is human's perceptions of muzzles - most people who see a muzzled dog assume that it is very aggressive and are therefore likely to be very nervous when near it which the dog will pick up on and again will exacerbate the situation.

The Rambo-esc approach is more than likely going to inflame the situation not ensure a calm and relaxed interaction between humans and canines

Totally agree Sarah,they have a place, but in this occasion I don't think it would be of much help

[kb]

I have just caught up with this - had been feeling a bit poorly for a few days and haven't been on as much!

Firstly if I had been at all concerned about taking Honey into this situation,  I wouldn't have taken her there.

Secondly if it was necessary to muzzle a dog before taking it into a social situation, then I would have serious doubts about the judgement of the owner in the first place. A social gathering such as the one I was talking about would not be the place to be socialising a fearful dog. I would imagine that would increase the dogs anxiety and lead to further problems.

In my post I was curious to why this had happened around this certain person, despite him having done all the right things to befriend her. I was not concerned about her reaction overly (more embarassed), nor was anyone there particularly. Everyone found this cheeky little cocker spaniel trying to throw her weight around quite amusing - as it was, taken in context. There was no threat to anyone. She was barking - no snapping, no snarling, no biting. I am not aware of the use of muzzling as an anti-bark technique.

We had 2 dogs at home that used to fight - and I mean fight! We were advised to muzzle and it made things much, much worse. I would be very concerned about the use of a muzzle in anything other than a last resort.

Interestingly, I was reading a book - "Animals in Translation"  - written by Dr.Temple Grandin (an animal behaviourist who is also on the autistic spectrum). I had mentioned her recently in another thread. She gives great insight into animal behaviour and the kind of things that spook them that most of us would not even think about. She tells a story of a dog who was upstairs with its owner. It heard the little boy of the house coming up the stairs and was really excited. As he approached the room the dog got more excited, assuming that the dog recognised the footsteps and smell of the boy. However when he entered the room the dog started barking ferociously at him, because he was dressed up as a skeleton to go "trick or treating" for hallowe'en. Now it probably seems that the dog did not like the costume - but how would a dog know to not like a costume. Her theory is that dogs are often confused by the different inputs their senses are giving them. The dog heard the footsteps of the boy, he smelt the boy - but the visual input told him it was not the boy - it didn't look like him. This led the dog to be confused and frightened hence the reaction.

According to her (and other specialists in dog behaviour would agree), we spend to much time "humanising" dog behaviour. A lot of us would assume that the dog was frightened of the skeleton costume - humans may be, but most dogs would have no experience to tell them to be frightened of a skeleton itself. It is the confused sensory information the dog receives that is telling it that.

The point that I am trying to make is that the reason Honey could have been so confused by this couple was that they sounded like people, they looked like people, but they smelt like dogs. Thus leading to a confused and frightend dog.

It all sounds so obvious that it seems silly when written down and you almost think to yourself that you knew that all along - whereas most of us if honest would have thought the costume spooked the dog. WHich in a way it did but probably for a different reason than we might have assumed.

Sorry I am rambling now - just thought it was interesting

[kb]

Solid Worker - I reread the whole thread and just wanted to point out that, apart from barking at this man, Honey behaved otherwise impeccably - well apart from being the opportunist she is and stealing an apple!

I consider myself to be as responsible a dog owner as I can be. The situation was fully weighed up before deciding to bring her there. Had there been any children there, apart from my own, for example, I would not have taken her. I can imagine the reactions of the other people if I had had a muzzle on her. I think they probably would have thought I had gone mad. I don't see that she reacted in any way that you wouldn't expect any dog would react.

There were no unruly children or "drunks" at the party. I don't know what kind of mansions your friends live in, but the garden was certainly not big enough to give any cause for her to be somewhere we were not.

I think it is very unfortunate that you feel that any dog taken into a new social situation should be muzzled, until you know it is not going to bite.

Yes dogs do bite - I am constantly amazed by people who see this as an abnormal behaviour in dogs. Generally though they do not bite for no reason - dogs who bite without provocation are rare. Also there is a difference in a dog who causes grievous harm in a bite and those who cause a minor graze.

You talk about responsible owners and their legal and moral duties to themselves, their dogs and those around them. Your duty therefore to your dog is not to muzzle it in social situations, but to provide a loving environment, where the dog is properly trained; where it is accepted for the animal it is - including the knowledge that on rare occasions even the most well trained dog is capable of biting; taking action to minimise the risk of this happening and reducing the risk of injury if it does bite; and to not put into situations it cannot handle.

I do not feel that Honey was in a situation where her attacking someone was even an issue - she barked for goodness sake!

This was not a thread about a dog that reacted unexpectedly in a new social situation. It was a "semi tongue-in-cheek" thread about how she had barked at this guy who wanted to befriend her and the reason why she may have done it.

Honey did not react any differently I am sure to many dogs in the situation.

[shonajoy]

I have to say that Hamish sometimes has a muzzle on. He will bite if I groom him otherwise, and if he barks non stop at 7am having it on for a minute or two stops him.

[Helen]

I have to say that Hamish sometimes has a muzzle on. He will bite if I groom him otherwise, and if he barks non stop at 7am having it on for a minute or two stops him.

i'm sure in these instances shona it's appropriate 
don't think in honey's case on this thread that it is...

[no time for this]

Sorry, I come from an environment of continuous risk assessment. Some dogs like our old St Bernard are very docile and can go anywhere and this whole topic would not be an issue.

Some people have dogs and are aware that they may not be so docile, or may not be sure how they will react in certain situations. I did point out that Honey was probably reacting to the scent of the mans others dogs, but people seem to have conveniently by passed this, no matter.

 If Honey had bitten this man, and caused a physical injury, and this man had then called the police then there could be a charge under the dangerous dogs act (failure to keep a dog under control) to answer to. With the court deciding on the particular circumstances of the case.

That’s where risk assessment comes in, I always ask “what’s the worst thing that can happen?” .Well in this circumstance of “Honeys first social outing” then it could be for Honey to bite someone (whether provoked or not), or perhaps become injured knocking over a hot bbq. Therefore what can I (as a responsible owner) do, to avoid harm to my dog, and other persons. 1, I can leave the dog at home. 2, I can take it and keep it on a lead, until I know how the situation is developing and the risks are clarified and perhaps negated, whereupon the dog may be allowed to run free. 3, I can muzzle the dog, which apart from leaving it at home would be the most certain way of ensuring that it did not bite anyone.

Some people don’t like muzzles, and I’m actually one of them, but in certain situations it may be necessary, as I said, you know your dog better than anyone else. All I was doing was pointing out an option which some people seem to liken to carrying out an act of torture on the dog?

[Cob-Web]

If Honey had bitten this man, and caused a physical injury, and this man had then called the police then there could be a charge under the dangerous dogs act (failure to keep a dog under control) to answer to. With the court deciding on the particular circumstances of the case.

Actually, if it was in a private garden to which the dog was given legitimate access, the the DDA does not apply - but you know that, don't you, Phil  Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 Section 3

Some people don’t like muzzles, and I’m actually one of them, but in certain situations it may be necessary, as I said, you know your dog better than anyone else. All I was doing was pointing out an option which some people seem to liken to carrying out an act of torture on the dog?

I made it very clear in my reply to your post about a muzzle that I believe they have a place, and having managed an aggressive dog in the past (who did bite, and was at risk of a death sentence ), I have used muzzles regularly  I was merely pointing out, just as you have in your most recent post, that there are negative effects to a muzzle as well.

Unsurprisingly, you chose to ignore my balanced response, in favour of a high impact rebuttal of little value that not only generated the outrage you no doubt anticipated, but could have undermined the confidence of people reading this forum for advice and support

[kb]

Do you take your dog out? Do you muzzle it every time you take it out?

You are not the only person who is familiar with the concept of risk assessment.

You are blowing the whole thing out of all proportion and quite frankly being utterly ridiculous!

This was not Honey's first social situation ever - but even if it had been, I am quite capable of a making judgements regarding the risk of my own dog. The dog BARKED!!!!!!! quite frankly had this man decided to get any closer to honey or done anything to result in her biting him, I think you would find that he would be be guilty of contributory negligence! But this is a totally stupid argument to be getting into.

I do not need you to educate me about the risks inherent in taking my dog to my aunt's house for a barbeque. I have considered these risks before I even bought the dog, when I planned how I would train the dog and so on.

Yes there are risks and duties of care  - in the civil law of negligence, however you are required to take reasonable steps to lessen risk (as would anyone approaching a barking dog). You are not required to eliminate risk altogether.

This was a simple case of a dog barking at someone and you are quoting the dangerous dogs act.

You are way out of line here. Risk can never be eliminated with a dog completely - so unless you want to keep a dog muzzled all its life or keep it in - you are talking complete and utter nonsense - with all due respect.

I think you are taking the whole concept of risk assessment beyond any reason whatsoever. I wonder do you exercise it so stringently in your own life?

[no time for this]

My dog is a little bit of an unusual case, a rescue who is blind and very wary of strangers,and has been aggressive, hence he doesn’t go to a lot of social functions. If I am holding one then he uses my study as a bolt hole, but might sometimes venture out. Everyone who comes into the House / Grounds is aware that he is a potentially aggressive dog and that they are too ignore him until he comes to them. If there are children then he stays on his lead. He very rarely wears a muzzle the last time been when he had his nails done. His problems are managed and most of the time he is a very nice dog, with thanks to COL for advice on managing him.

“Actually, if it was in a private garden to which the dog was given legitimate access, the the DDA does not apply - but you know that, don't you, Phil “


Here we see the dangers of looking something up on google. The Act would apply for the purpose of a prosecution, as I said (in a worst case situation) the Court would decided on the circumstances, which is why Barristers earn lots of money. You have assumed a public place is a park or such like, however there are definitions of what a public place is and is not, and there are also definitions of when a public place becomes a private place and vice a versa. The court would decided whether at the time of the hypothetical incident the location could be defined as a public place or not.

I have not at any time seeked to offend any other person yet have been castigated and insulted for proffering an opinion. Using this  does not mean that the user is correct!