Opinion: Muzzles

[TrishB]

Hi all,

I'd like to get the boards opinion on muzzles.

Yes - there are cases where you dog may have to be muzzled in his life (i.e. treatment for a painful injury, examination of something painful).

However, the question is this: If a dangerous dog bylaw is put into place and an otherwise even tempered dog is ordered to be muzzled (due to breed specific legislation) - what do you feel is the potential impact?

I see several possible concern points:

1. Sudden constraint on the dog, something completely alien - could increase aggression / fear / sensitize reactions.

2. Increase of fear of people viewing the dogs with muzzles - without justification.

3. Decreased ability for the dog to communicate with other dogs / people - increased frustration.

4. Lack of ability for the dog to defend itself if attacked.

If you have any links to articles addressing the impact of imposed muzzles - I'd appreciate a copy of it.

What do you all think? These are just ideas / thoughts off of the top of my head. I worry that people feel that this is a viable option without considering the possible implications of such an action.

Thanks!
Trish

[Wookie'sMom]

Originally Posted by TrishB

2. Increase of fear of people viewing the dogs with muzzles - without justification.

I'm not an expert or anything and I don't have much useful to say, but this one scares me. I already get reactions (especially when she has her GL on, people think that the GL is a muzzle ) I can't imagine the negative reactions if I had to walk my dog down the street with a muzzle on.

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by Wookie'sMom

I'm not an expert or anything and I don't have much useful to say, but this one scares me. I already get reactions (especially when she has her GL on, people think that the GL is a muzzle ) I can't imagine the negative reactions if I had to walk my dog down the street with a muzzle on.

Don't be silly! Your opinion is very useful! :)

This particular point is concerning. I mean - there are people that are tentative about our dogs. But they're still open to discussion. However, I think the first time they see them all being paraded around with muzzles - there won't be any recovering them to the side of reason. :(

[Patty1231]

I, too, don't have a lot of experience and I would guess a dog would get used to it after awhile but #2 really concerns me the most. That's just not something this or any breed needs.

[spidey]

1. Is taken care of by appropriate desensitization techniques, same as you'd use with any other new thing.

2. Is potentially a big problem, and certainly the biggest concern on this list.

3. I don't agree is a problem - a basket muzzle shouldn't affect communication, and is the only appropriate muzzle for long-term use anyway.

4. I don't think random dog attacks really happen all that frequently, there's usually lots of posturing and vocalizing with a strange, aggressive dog (which a muzzle doesn't interfere with), but not actual attacking. I don't think self defense is necessarily a good argument against muzzles.

[LORHEL]

All of the OP comments are correct, as far as muzzles and their effects. I had a fear-biter, who in the end had to be constantly muzzled around strangers. I cannot tell you how many potential bites in his last month that might have saved someone from, 2 to three at least. If you have a dog that can function in a capacity and have a quality life, at home then using a muzzle on him would be okay I feel. If he is at a point where no improvement is going to occur, and you need it to contain him, then do it.

If this is a young dog who is impressionable, and can be worked with, then I can see where it would hinder their abilities, also. No right or wrong here, I believe it depends on each individual dog. ;)

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by spidey

1. Is taken care of by appropriate desensitization techniques, same as you'd use with any other new thing.

Agreed - however it would be an issue for i) those who have no idea of how to desensitze appropriately ii) the legislation is instantly passed, therefore not giving appropriate time for training

Originally Posted by spidey

2. Is potentially a big problem, and certainly the biggest concern on this list.

3. I don't agree is a problem - a basket muzzle shouldn't affect communication, and is the only appropriate muzzle for long-term use anyway.

I'm not quite as dismissive of this one. Increased frustration in an average dog owned by Joe Blow could cause issues. This would be legislation imposed on everyone, all at once. Would they know that a basket is the only appropriate muzzle? Would the legislators know to put that into the legislation?

I can tell you from experience (and I know you have too) that dogs in muzzles are 'heightened' in nerves and reactions when wearing a muzzle. A nervous dog in normal situations may 'lose it' when confronted while wearing a muzzle.

Originally Posted by spidey

4. I don't think random dog attacks really happen all that frequently, there's usually lots of posturing and vocalizing with a strange, aggressive dog (which a muzzle doesn't interfere with), but not actual attacking. I don't think self defense is necessarily a good argument against muzzles.

Agreed. The risk is small but it does exist. Bully dogs (non-muzzled) may take advantage of a situation like this that they normally may not.

These are additional concerns (not necessarily arguements against). Does anyone have some to add? The fact that they're being implemented by non-canine experts - being imposed upon average Joe Dog Owner - is a HUGE concern for me.

[LORHEL]

Sorry, I may not have caught this, but is this an issue for you folks in Canada coming up soon??? :( I sure hope not. It definitely would not be good. I may have read this earlier, but couldn't remember.

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by LORHEL

Sorry, I may not have caught this, but is this an issue for you folks in Canada coming up soon??? :( I sure hope not. It definitely would not be good. I may have read this earlier, but couldn't remember.

There is a little town that quietly passed a muzzle order on some breeds - including Rottweilers; while on municipal property. I was just there 3 - 4 weeks ago and had NO IDEA! I don't even own a muzzle.

Some towns feel that this is a viable option to banning the dog breeds altogether - just breed specific muzzle orders.

So I was looking for opinions here - maybe some ideas that I hadn't considered.

Personally? I'm against ANYTHING that is breed specific. The individual actions warrants a reaction against that individual - not the breed. Period.

[Brooke&Ryan]

Originally Posted by TrishB

2. Increase of fear of people viewing the dogs with muzzles - without justification.

I agree with the others that this might be the biggest ramification. I'm a quite a bit more hesitant around dogs that I see are muzzled. Makes me nervous.....

My mother always though Gentle Leaders were muzzles up until a few months ago (like Wookie's Mom said) until I told her otherwise. We would take Julius for walks & always see this Newfoundland with a Gentle Leader on. After seeing the dog 4-5 times she mentioned something about the dog wearing a muzzle. I told her that it was a Gentle Leader & explained it's function. So I think that having the so called "dangerous dogs" wearing muzzles would be a SERIOUS detriment to their reputation.

:)
Brooke

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by Brooke&Ryan

So I think that having the so called "dangerous dogs" wearing muzzles would be a SERIOUS detriment to their reputation.

:)
Brooke

I agree with you! But sadly, although this is a HUGE concern to us as owners - this IS NOT an arguement against it for legislators. They're already afraid of our dogs, which is why they want the muzzle orders in the first place. So stating this to them would only encourage them. :(

Does anyone else have any insight into canine behaviour with a muzzle?

[LynnS]

This is not exactly comparable, but there is a law in San Francisco that dogs are allowed to ride on some public transportation systems if muzzled (except service dogs which do not have to be muzzled)

There was a 2 yr period where I took advantage of not needing a car to get around and I took my Akita on the bus and underground all the time muzzled. Dog never had an issue with it. BUT if I had to have a muzzle on my dog just to leave the house I would be generally pissed off. Still wouldn't worry about the deteriments to my dog. She seems to take most things in stride...

[Judi W]

Breed specific ordinances are bad on their face, however - what really makes a breed look bad is when a dog bites or attacks. Those incidents do a whole lot more to damage a breed's reputation than looking at a dog wearing a muzzle. Those are the incidents that stimulate breed ordinances in the first place.

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by Judi W

Breed specific ordinances are bad on their face, however - what really makes a breed look bad is when a dog bites or attacks. Those incidents do a whole lot more to damage a breed's reputation than looking at a dog wearing a muzzle. Those are the incidents that stimulate breed ordinances in the first place.

I agree with you Judi - but there are other points to consider:

1) Owner Responsibility should be the focus, not breeds.
2) Breeds are very often mislabeled.
3) Cross breds are often attributed to purebreds (and often to the incorrect majority of the cross).

I compare this to cars. If a guy drives his Ford recklessly and injures someone - and statistics show that Fords are involved in more injuries and deaths than any other type of car - do they ban them? Of course not, that would be silly. The individual drivers are punished for their actions - as they are responsible for the injuries caused by their vehicles.

ANY car can kill a person.

The same mentality needs to apply to dogs. Parker has never bitten anyone or caused injury. I'd like to think that it's because he's a solid tempered, well socialized, trained dog that is a good canine citizen. And that is true!

However, he's never left in a position where he MAY bite or he MAY be provoked or he MAY injure somoene. It's called Responsible Dog Ownership. He never runs at large, he's never unattended with small children, he's not left to his own devices to defend himself.

Is it because I'm worried that he might bite someone? No. It's because he's an animal and NOT a human - and therefore responsibility dictates that I don't set him up for a possible failure.

The moment I hear of a dog attack, I want to know:

1) Where was the owner
2) Where was the dog
3) What was the situation
4) What was the mental state of the dog
5) What was the physical state of the dog
6) Who was the victim
7) What was the victim doing
8) What was the state of the dogs socialization
9) What was the degree of the dogs training
10) How did the bite occur

To make a long story short - yes - dog bites create a bad impression of the breed - but that's because we're looking at the wrong thing!

Do you care what kind of car was in the crash or whether the driver was drinking / high at the time?

I'd like the public to see dog bites / attacks as the same. Who cares about the breed of the dog - where the #ell was the owner and how could they let this happen?!?!

[rottnshepard04]

I like many others that have replied don't know much expect about my own rottie. I would be very fearful of any imposed muzzling since i too get stares from people when Franco is wearing his halti. I do muzzle him when he is off leach at a dog park since he has been known to get dominant on leash around other dogs. He has never had a problem and spends most of his time at the park going over to any free hand to beg for the muzzle to be removed.
Back to the original question though, i think forced muzzling is not an answer for any dog related problem.