Who was in the wrong?

[loopyloulou87]

I have a 9 month old puppy, we are on holiday and there is a communal dog field for everyone to use.

I just wanted to check if it was us or the other owners that were wrong in this situation? Our dog was playing in the dog field, another dog came in while still on its lead and my puppy ran over to the other dog, I will admit that he was jumping up close to the other dogs face, the dog then told off our puppy and the owner shouted at us that we should never let a dog run over to another dog like that and that’s how dog fights happen.
My dog was just being friendly, were we in the wrong or should the other dog not have reacted like that (and the owners).

I mean incredibly tolerant to me is letting puppies hang off your ears as one of my friend's dogs would. Mine are slightly less tolerant, but a dog still really has to push it before they'd even resort to air snapping and they're pretty good at distinguishing between exuberance and ill intent.

Fair enough.

I guess the point I was trying to make is OP didn't know this dog from Adam and is very lucky that it only snapped at her puppy. It only takes one bad experience for dogs to become reactive for life, so it was a big risk to take.

Sorry but whether the other dog was on lead / off lead / in the woods / at the beach / at the park / or in an enclosed field like mentioned, you should never let your dog run over.

The reason doesn’t matter. Could that dog be reactive, or training, or injured … yes.

But that really doesn’t even matter.

The debate gets a bit muddied with the on lead / off lead debate but the real issue is, dogs shouldn’t approach other dogs.

and there doesn’t need to be a reason.

Agree. If she wants to allow her dog to approach unknown dogs then she will have to accept the consequences.

That's why it would get told off, but a full, aggressive bite would be unusual.

I don't disagree with you, generally speaking.

But a puppy doesn't need to be on the receiving end of a "full, aggressive bite" to end up reactive themselves - sometimes all it takes is a nip, or for the puppy to be pinned - and that's it, you have a big problem on your hands.

Completely agree, but then we go full circle to my original point that it would be the owner of the other dog that would be likely to give such a bite that shouldn't be in a place such as described by the OP.

Not sure I agree with that, tbh. Dogs should be allowed in dog-friendly spaces without having to worry about rude dogs bouncing all over them.

If OP’s dog had been bitten it would have been her at fault for having an “out of control” dog off the lead, not the fault of the on lead dog.

Dog friendly space does not mean “your dog can run riot and bother other dogs”.

If this was a dog field, designed for dogs to run around, don’t slightly different rules apply? The person, entering the field, would know there were dogs loose and running around.

I guess if you were slow in getting your dog on seeing the other one was upset, then that’s wrong, but the other dog (and owner) seemed a little reactive.

You were in the wrong and a nine month old dog is not a puppy. In a shared field you are responsible for ensuring your own dog acts appropriately - they were not responsible for assuming your dog wouldn't!

You still have to keep your dog under control though.

I think my point is that, in my view, such spaces are for dogs to interact with others of their species in the same way they would in the wild. This is an important part of dog ownership. In fact the law decrees that it is mandatory (animal welfare act 2006, section 9 if memory serves).

In the wild, if dog A ran up to dog B, dog B would consider it rude, and would tell dog A off. Dog B would also likely moderate the intensity of the telling off depending on many factors, one of which is age. This is actually the most effective way to teach a puppy not to be so rude.

My point is that if the owner of dog B has one that either has not been socialised, or is unable to moderate its response, or is in some other way "reactive" (to use the modern vernacular), then the onus falls to the owner of dog B to either solve the issues their dog has, or to not take it to places where dogs should feel free to be themselves.

If they had not been in such a space, then the onus falls to the owner of dog A to not let it run up to dog B.

@HappiestSleeping while I do somewhat agree with your logic, the law around dog control applies regardless of whether the dogs are out in public or in private spaces like dog fields.

It may be space where dogs can run free but that doesn’t mean they don’t have to be under control. The law is very clear that you must control your dog regardless of where it is.

But spaces like that aren’t for dogs to interact though - that’s why they’re enclosed and only for certain users, in this case people using the holiday accommodation.

So, given that the best way for a puppy to learn would be to interact with another dog, how and where will it go to learn if it is always restricted from interacting with another dog? It is unlikely that the owner would be as effective as an interaction with another dog. Dog fields are an ideal place for this to happen in controlled circumstances and under supervision. It is, IMHO, exactly what such places are for.

The 'under control' part of the legislation is also an interesting one, and, if taken to extreme (on lead), conflicts with the other legislation of allowing animals to exhibit their natural behaviour. I think too many people interpet 'under control' too literally.

@HappiestSleeping some do take, 'under control' literally. But, in this instance, there's no way around the fact that if a dog is running toward another dog, ignoring it's owners recall, it is no way under control.

OP was incredibly lucky. I don't think that can be emphasised enough.

Honestly, I think snapping is a normal reaction. Biting is OTT in such circumstances. As I said upthread, my older dog is an absolute enforcer; she is also very protective. She has told off numerous young dogs, but she has never bitten

You either prearrange meet ups with people you know… or you talk to owners of dogs you meet out and about.

Because there’s no guarantee a random dog is going to react appropriately to yours... especially if yours is off lead and they’re on lead.

Dogs shouldn't approach other dogs.

What? Ever? Or do you mean the owner should ask first before allowing their dog to approach another?

@HappiestSleeping if you want your dog to interact with other dogs then you either pre-arrange it in advance or ask permission from the other owner - you don’t just let your dog barrel over and hope for the best.

Random dogs you don’t know - yes never.

Why would you?

Your dog can and should have friends - I’m not saying they should never interact with another dog, but these need to be planned interactions with dogs they get on with, not some random dog across a field.

I meet up with friends who have dogs, that I know are trained and friendly with my dog, and we go on a walk together. She has lots of friends. She gets very excited to see them. She does not care at all about dogs we don’t know and ignores them.

The problem I have with the view of, ‘but surely it’s okay if you ask first’, is that for most people who even bother to ask (the majority don’t), by the time they are asking, their dog is already over here face to face with my dog. It’s a bit late by then.

Yes, in an ideal world everyone’s dogs would be trained well enough to wait to come over so that you can ask the other owner if it’s okay, but that’s just not the reality. So I would rather a blanket rule of no dogs should approach other dogs they don’t know.

But it was a dedicated dog field, so dogs would be off lead, and other dogs were also off lead (op said her dog had been playing with another dog earlier).

I mean, by bite I don’t necessarily mean attack and draw blood, but air snapping can always end up with contact and a nip if it goes wrong, which is always a risk if one unknown, bouncy, dog barrels over to another.

It doesn’t matter - you still need to have control over your dog.

I definitely think puppies need corrected (ie removed) if they are in other dogs’ faces or behaving inappropriately. But tbh op, a lot of what I read on MN like dogs should never approach other dogs, is just nothing like what I see in our friendly local park. I and others read situations, and if you see a dog on lead or other indicators they might be reactive, I recall my dog. Generally my dog ignores other dogs unless there are signs they want to interact, and that has come through training and socialisation with other dogs. My dog went through a bit of a reactive time after being neutered so I do understand the stress when other people seem oblivious. But in RL I don’t think a majority of dog owners think in these ways about dog interactions.