Questions about muzzling your dog

[ArkAtEe]

My dog's never hurt anything except a field mouse he dug up but he is very insecure and will bark/growl/lunge at certain dogs he doesn't know (usually males, it tends to be females he never has a problem with) so he's kept on the lead around dogs he doesn't know.

We're pretty sure he's just insecure/fearful not aggressive as we've successfully managed to bond him with plenty of dogs he's previously hated (with their willing owners of course) but obviously this is not practical with every dog we come across.

So we're thinking of muzzling him as people are always letting their off-lead dogs approach my on-lead dog and there is a 50/50 chance my dog will now be happy about this. I'm just wondering if anyone has any experience with muzzles and if they helped or hindered??

Also, before anyone suggests avoiding places with off-lead dogs -- Walking my dog on the road side is not practical as I have had to rush across busy roads to avoid an oncoming dog and we can't get very far without walking along a main road where I live. At least with parks and fields I can give others a safe distance to pass my yappy dog.

Riiight, for your information I have read very many peer reviewed studies
You wont win many arguments that way. Don't just type it, share the links.

There are very few journals these days that don't publish the abstract of published papers online.

Sorry @Doggydoggydoggy but it’s pointles trying to have a reasonable discussion with someone who thinks their own personal anecdote trumps the wealth of scientific research and advocates abusive training tools. Yes of course science is always developing - that’s how we know that dominance is outdated and that whilst training techniques that rely on causing pain and distress may be ‘effective’ they are neither ethical nor without adverse consequences.

You are clearly wedded to your own viewpoint and arrogant enough to think that you are somehow ‘ahead’ of the scientific field.

Regardless of your own experience the evidence is clear that aversive training techniques compromise dog welfare you can deny it as much as you like but it’s pretty arrogant to think that your opinion trumps the wealth of scientific evidence and pretty sad that you are trying to encourage abusive techniques online.

Doggydoggydoggy I am also surprised at your insistence that "balanced" training is the answer as looking at your previous posts you are still having issues with your dog - so this has not worked.

Balanced training or training that punishes a dog (especially a dog in a high emotional state) will never change the emotional response of a dog to a situation or trigger. - never it never has in any breed. It may change a behaviour short term but the behaviour will return in the same or usually aggravated form.

OP I am a fan of muzzles BUT and a big but only if they help my dog. Dogs will still approach your dog whilst he is wearing the muzzle and if he is still anxious this will make his reaction worse. So I know this is not want you want to hear but initially restricting his contact with dogs approaching is the best way to deal with this situation. Over time when he is less stressed you can the start to counter condition him to seeing (and only seeing not interacting with other dogs) an eventually greeting specially chosen dogs .

It’s not just my personal experience.
It is the experience of very many dog owners, not just myself.

Arrogant indeed. Utter nonsense.
I appreciate positive training works for many dogs.
But not all.
There is absolutely nothing arrogant in that view.

My issues are FAR better than they were.
It is repeatedly said on here that positive training takes a long time so why is balanced expected to be instantaneous?

I have this problem. I have an elderly small bitch. In areas with dogs or which I don't know, she's on lead. Luckily there's a small park near me where (if it's empty) I can daily throw balls, let her run. She also loves swimming so in another park she can spend some time in the water (off lead). Another one who was bitten savagely on the head as a young bitch and has been aggressive ever since.

I socialise her with family dogs both walking on leads. She's fine with that. I practice walking past other dogs on leads with a warning if necessary to their owners. The problem comes when you meet off-lead dogs who bound up and want to make friends (and even with warning the owner doesn't have recall) or thankfully more rarely, off lead dogs (esp two or more) who see a dog on lead as a focus of attack.

Muzzles can help owner feel more relaxed in the interactions so not tensing up & making dog more anxious.

My greyhounds all wore them early on while learning that dogs come in all shapes & sizes. I would still avoid walking in some places with high % of the 'just being friendly' types as these dogs charging over & harassing them (dogs with good social skills don't do this) would have a negative impact so wanted to minimize this.
It was sad seeing/hearing the reaction the muzzle had on people though, technically that dog is safer as can't bite, but you soon become used to it.
My dogs were used to wearing muzzles & while out distracted by sights/smells weren't too bothered but would rub on me when stopped or once at home. It just became another thing they wore for walks like collars. I have trained new dog to accept wearing muzzle too as its useful skill. Soft muzzles may seem kinder but are more restrictive as dog can't pant properly so totally unsuitable for walks.

Hi all thanks for your replies.

Regarding training, we generally do try to keep it positive and set him up for success by limiting negative experiences with dogs. We go to open areas where I can keep a distance and if we can't avoid a narrow path, I just turn around if I see someone coming. We do try to read his body language and the 'stern no' works to calm him enough for us to move away without him getting all riled up when we start to see him tensing up. We are seeing improvement. If his behaviour escalates I don't escalate from my 'no', there is no point and I think anything more corrective would just make things worse for my dog. The no comes before he starts to kick off.

Thanks to those who have shared their experiences of the muzzle. I think they can be useful tools if done right. I'm not too worried about what people would think of my dog, after all I don't let my dog make the first move to socialise anyway. Either a dog approaches him and he likes them or he doesn't. Or I know the owner and the owner is aware of my dog's issues.

Not to drag out this debate, but just to be clear I use 'no' as an instruction not a punishment/correction. I see it the same as any command such as stay, leave it, be quiet... it's a clear and concise way to communicate with him. He gets rewarded if he obeys but I don't punish him if he doesn't.

The ‘no’ is punishment.

What you are doing is balanced training - rewarding good behaviour by treating when he is relaxed and correcting (stern no) bad behaviour when he starts to get aroused and think about aggressing.

As I said earlier, balances training is not about dragging dogs on prongs and shouting at them.

The majority of balanced training is food rewards, toys and praise and a correction/punishment for ‘bad’ behaviour.

Correction punishment can be a stern no/ah sound, a touch to the flank, a prong collar correction, an e collar correction, depends on what the dog responds to.

Correction punishment can be a stern no/ah sound, a touch to the flank, a prong collar correction, an e collar correction, depends on what the dog responds to.

It can be all these things but for the sake of ‘balance’ let’s be clear that e-collars are illegal in many part of the country (for good reason) and that in operant conditioning terms ‘correction’ does not exist. Terms like balance and correction are simply window-dressing for punishment, and some of the punishment techniques you are promoting are illegal and likely to be detrimental to animal welfare - at least be honest and call it what it is.

You may also be interested to know that your ‘advice’ contravenes government codes of practice abd has implications under the animal welfare act:
‘Defra’s Code of Practice for the Welfare of Dogs advises that ’good training can enhance a dog’s quality of life, but punishing a dog can cause it pain and suffering ... All dogs should be trained to behave well, ideally from a very young age. Only use positive reward based training. Avoid harsh, potentially painful or frightening training methods’.

Lots of good advice on here OP. I noticed that you said that you wonder if wasting a muzzle might allow you to let your dog off lead. I have a couple of thoughts about this.

IME dogs do try to get their muzzle off, especially when off lead. They use their paws, the ground, fences and branches. A determined effort can remove a muzzle that appeared to be firmly in place. If your dog goes off lead there is a good chance that it could get free of its muzzle.

If your dog does remove its muzzle and then buts another dog you will be in a position of needing to explain the situation . I think this would be tricky as the fact that it had a muzzle strongly implies that you feel it carried a bite risk.

Please excuse my typos- hopefully you get the drift anyway!

What am I ‘promoting’ exactly?

I stated that in balanced training a ‘correction’ or punishment can be a verbal ‘no’ or ah sound, or a touch, or a prong correction, or an e collar correction.
Depending on what the dog responds to.
If the dog responds to a stern no then use that..

I haven’t told the OP to run out and buy a prong or e collar (yes I am aware they are illegal) have I?

Personally, I use a prong (because my dog doesn’t always respond to verbal, I tried that first) but I haven’t once said the OP should use one.
Why should she?
Her dog responds to verbal.

What exactly is ‘abusive’ about telling the dog ‘no’?

Detrimental to welfare indeed.
What is detrimental to animal welfare is keeping on at a training style that isn’t working (for those that pp trains doesn’t suit), allowing the animal to get more and more stressed and dangerous, then pumping it full of anxiety medications then killing it if/when it doesn’t improve.

Death before discomfort.

peoplepleaser1 yeh that's a good point, so really there is very much little point to a muzzle if letting him off lead is my underlying motivation.

Personally, I use a prong (because my dog doesn’t always respond to verbal, I tried that first) but I haven’t once said the OP should use one.

You are suggesting training techniques that are illegal (electric shock collars) and abusive. You can defend prong collars all you like. They are abusive, and rely on causing fear and distress through pain in the sensitive neck tissues.

What exactly is ‘abusive’ about telling the dog ‘no’?
Nothing necessarily - which is why my post clearly referred to e-collars.

Detrimental to welfare indeed.

Please please show me your ‘evidence’ that prong collars do not cause fear, pain, anxiety or distress?

What is detrimental to animal welfare is keeping on at a training style that isn’t working (for those that pp trains doesn’t suit), allowing the animal to get more and more stressed and dangerous, then pumping it full of anxiety medications then killing it if/when it doesn’t improve.*

You clearly have zero understanding of clinical animal behaviour. Just as with Human medicine, anti anxiety meds result in documented faster and better treatment outcomes than behavioural modification alone. Again i’d Suggest that it’s pretty arrogant to think your own opinion supersedes vast amounts of peer reviewed clinical, ethnological and veterinary research and experience, which you seem to delight in sneering at - and by doing so simply demonstrate your own ignorance. You’ve certainly not provided any evidence for how the methodologies you promote result in good welfare for the trained animal

My guess would be that you simply aren’t a very good trainer and didn’t seek appropriate clinical support for your dog. Because a prong collar is easier for you.

I do not ‘suggest’ shock collars.
I said the correction for some dogs under balanced training principles is an e collar.
That is not quite the same as suggesting them.

I will defend prongs because I have seen with my own eyes how used properly they do not cause distress to dogs.

Again, I have not recommended e collars.
What I said is that under balanced training one of the correction methods used may be an e collar.

There is a wealth of evidence freely available for yourself to peruse over.
If you bothered to educate yourself, spend time with real life balanced trainers and their dogs you could see for yourself how the dogs are not in any way shut down or distressed or in pain.

So all the people whose dogs have been medicated and still troubled are lying then??
I take it no positive trained dogs have ever been euthanised then on the grounds that they are suffering and can’t be helped have they?

Delight in sneering at?
I don’t think so.
I take no enjoyment whatsoever in arguing with people.
The only reason why I persist in debating on this is because I think there are a lot of dogs out there who could be helped by a different training style that clearly communicates what is expected of them.

I appreciate that positive training works for some dogs and that is great.
People should follow whatever training style works for their particular dog.

Positive training does not work for all dogs.
If it did large numbers of positive only trained dogs would not be losing their lives.

You guess whatever you like.
You forget that I used to be just as vocal a supporter of positive training as you are!
The fact is some dogs do not respond to that training style.
They just don’t.

Properly done balanced training is not abusive and it does not damage dogs.

Your refusal to be open to new possibilities and learn about and educate yourself about that training style and go out and actually spend time with these trainers and their dogs says a lot more about you than me.

Follow the training style that works for your dog.

If you get good results with positive only do that.
If you get good results with correction do that.

@Doggydoggydoggy it’s impossible to have a reasonable discussion with you because you insist on ridiculous extremes.
So all the people whose dogs have been medicated and still troubled are lying then??

Umm no, and no one has sugggested that, but I don’t know who these hypothetical people are or how they are evidence of anything.

I take it no positive trained dogs have ever been euthanised then on the grounds that they are suffering and can’t be helped have they?

Again another ridiculous question -there are multiple reasons why behavioural pathologies develop and to simplify euthanasia down to a result of training techniques is ludicrous - there are a whole host of genetic and lifestyle factors. Though you may be interested to know that aversive training techniques are a much bigger risk factor for euthanasia than positive reinforcement. Of course there are good at bad trainers in every discipline. But that’s kind of missing the point - animals that have severe issues such as anxiety don’t need just ’training’ they need clinical behavioural support alongside behavioural modification. If you think it’s simply a ‘training’ Issue you are massively underestimating the neurological impact.

Properly done balanced training is not abusive and it does not damage dogs

Then I ask again - please show me the evidence of this - i’ve Done extensive literature searches and cannot find it.

Your refusal to be open to new possibilities and learn about and educate yourself about that training style and go out and actually spend time with these trainers and their dogs says a lot more about you than me.

On the contrary - i’ve Searched for evidence to support your viewpoint so that I can learn, i’ve Asked you multiple times to show me the evidence - you’ve refused. It’s pretty difficult to learn about this ‘amazing’ training technique that flies in the face of all of the evidence i’ve Read when there’s no evidence that I can find to support it.

If you get good results with positive only do that.
If you get good results with correction do that.

That’s where we disagree. I’ve said repeatedly that aversive techniques get results - of course they do. But they also increase risks of inadvertent consequences, behavioural pathologies and poor welfare. I care more about the risks of behavioural pathology and welfare than I do about training results.

Have you tried a dog trainer ? Honestly it’s amazing what they can do ( ok I am biased my dad is one ) but he does 121 sessions with let dogs and you have free advise on phone after only a couple of times he had to go back ... he understands why the dog does it perhaps what indirectly you are feeding into it and fixes it ( I.e do you tense / change posture because you expect him to react ... be mindful next walk that could be one thing ) he works bomb and drug detection dogs he is always gets dogs that can’t work / that are dog aggressive and fix them and they do an amazing job his best dog was a spaniel that thought he was a fighting dog he had bit his previous handler and numerous dogs and if dad didn’t fix him he was prob going to be put down ... with them
And good handling sid became his best bomb dog and he sleeps with two other dogs and runs off lead on walks no issues.

Never laid a paw on anyone and no
Muzzle needed ... may be worth considering anyhow x x

The only reason why I persist in debating on this is because I think there are a lot of dogs out there who could be helped by a different training style that clearly communicates what is expected of them.

Or because you can't accept that the techniques you are promoting are much more likely to result in undesirable behaviour, poor welfare, or euthanasia as evidenced below. I'd like to see any evidence to the contrary that isn't simply your own opinion (which you seem to think supercedes the wealth of scientific evidence and professional opinion)

www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10888705.2013.768923
owners who used punishment-based collars reported less satisfaction with their dogs' overall and leash-walking behaviors

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168159117302095
Generally, the published studies suggest that the use of aversive-based methods is correlated with indicators of compromised welfare in dogs, namely stress‐related behaviours during training, elevated cortisol levels and problematic behaviours such as fear and aggression.

www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1558787817300436
Canine variables associated with a greater risk of rehoming or euthanasia and/or the owners considering rehoming or euthanasia included heavier weight; mixed breed; aggression to familiar people over resources, resting places, or when groomed/medicated; aggression to unfamiliar people during interactions; a history of biting; and living in a family with children aged 13-17 years. Associated owner variables included the use of punishment-based training and previous consultation with a nonveterinary behaviorist or trainer.

Middlrm, we would love to see a dog trainer, we just haven't found one near us that we would hire...yet!

I've heard tension can transfer down the lead but see my dog is a case-by-case basis. We went on a walk with relatives who assured us the dog walk was an open area but forgot about a path we needed to head down to get back. Anyway, we walked past four dogs. The first two were on-lead, they ignored him and he ignored them. Second was an off-lead dog which stopped ahead, my dog stopped, the off-lead dog slowly started to walk by stopping again as we got closer - my dog and this dog greeted each nicely had a little sniff and we moved on. Lastly the fourth dog was on-lead but this time my dog started to tense up, luckily by then the path had opened up a bit and we could get round them without too much fuss.

I'm just not sure how it could be me if we can walk past some dogs without problem? The dogs are always different sizes and breeds...so it's not like I am thinking "oh shit a labrador best avoid that". Nothing is ever consistent enough to pinpoint down an obvious cause. But I'm sure a professional dog behaviourist would be able find something...

“see my dog is a case-by-case basis“

To me... and obviously you’ve only described one walk...

It sounds like your dog just doesn’t like meeting any dogs, it’s just that it’s taking more than one to stress him out to the point he goes over threshold and reacts.

It’s less likely that he has an issue with only certain dogs than that he’s just reaching his tolerance level at different points depending on what’s happened on that walk, whether he’s still got stress hormones from the day before, stuff like that...

yourdogsfriend.org/spoon-theory-and-funny-dog-gifs/

What you’re finding unpredictable, is how many spoons he has left...

@AarkAtEe
Sorry for the derails in the thread

I agree that trigger-stacking is worth considering - this post explains it quite well. It can happen to any reactive dog at any time, and the triggers don't need to be the same - its usually the reason why a dog bites 'out of nowhere'

woofliketomeet.com/2016/03/trigger-stacking-how-we-set-our-dogs-up-to-fail/

Those trigger stacking pieces are really interesting and link to some handy vids on dog body language for kids.
My DM's two dogs are just big soppy beanbags on legs so it's impossible to demonstrate in real life what an anxious or stressed dog looks like...

Ah yeh I hate those videos where people think it's funny that their dog is clearly in distress!

It sounds like your dog just doesn’t like meeting any dogs, it’s just that it’s taking more than one to stress him out to the point he goes over threshold and reacts.

Ah I see how you would come to that conclusion from my example. However I really don't believe that to be the case. If I made it sound like we meet a lot of dogs on our walks I can assure that you we don't. That particular walk was a rarity, our day to day walks are really very uneventful!

On that walk we were visiting family and were assured the walk would be quieter and more open than it was. Plus my examples come from situations over the past few years. Our daily walk is very quiet and we often see nobody else.

Also he could hate the first dog we see, or be fine with the first, hate the second and love the third. It's not as simple as my dog only tolerating so many dogs before he reacts. He's reacted to the first dog we've seen stepping out the back gate and been totally fine the rest of the walk.

I do really try to minimise the chances of him meeting another dog. I know the distances he's comfortable with and also know most of the dogs around the area by now, so know which ones he likes and which he doesn't.

Whilst it's nice that there are dogs he absolutely adores, it actually makes it harder in some ways! It's kind of heartbreaking when he sees the dogs he likes playing and wants to join in! Lots of dog walkers around here love my dog, he can be so relaxed, loving and playful around their dogs.