UKC

My daughter has two small placid Bichons, should she muzzle them in public when/ if this becomes law ?
( England's dog law comes in 2016)

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/258379-muzzling-and-microchipping-of-scottish-d...

My gut feeling is yes, as no matter how low the risk is from these dogs, it is better not to draw a line.

In reply to Jim C:

I would rather it was for the feral children instead.

In reply to Jim C:

Has anyone got a sledgehammer I could borrow. I've got a nut that needs cracking...?

Glad I don't live in scotland if this is the best policy the can come up with to stop dog attacks.

In reply to higherclimbingwales:



You might well be glad you don't live in Scotland, however, England Wales and Ireland announced their microchipping law FIRST. Scotland is only going through a consultation.
(Following the rest of the UK's lead

"the UK Government confirmed the move for England, Wales and Northern Ireland from April 2016 onwards."

In reply to Jim C:
My dog is chipped. I would never muzzle her. That would be cruel. I would disobey that law.

In reply to Jim C:

If you read the sentence you quote in full, you will notice that it refers to compulsory microchipping only and not muzzling.

Muzzling a dog does nothing to stop that dog from being dangerous once the muzzle is removed. it merely serves to mitigate poor training and ownership.

In reply to Jim C:

Thanks for the link to this, I've just taken part in the consultation.

I agree with compulsory micro chipping and I also feel that all dog owners should pay to license their dog alongside an agreement of responsible ownership and it should be a criminal offence to be found wanting in any of the above.

As for muzzling, no (unless the dog has proven to be aggressive and in these cases owners should be vetted for their responsibility and treated accordinly). Muzzling of all dogs is cruel and unnecessary.

In reply to higherclimbingwales:

Also, if you read the actual consultation, the Scottish Government do not themselves believe that compulsory muzzling is a good thing but they would like interesting parties to comment.

In reply to higherclimbingwales:


I did say 'microChipping' in my response, specifically for those outside Scotland , so I was aware of the geographical limitations , you did not however, make a distinction in your response between Chipping and muzzling., you just expressed that you were glad not to live in Scotland because of the terms of consultation, I therefore now gather that you are perhaps not objecting to microchipping, but just the muzzling?
( but perhaps you are objecting to both? I don't want to be putting words in your mouth)

(I understand that this may not be big news outside Scotland, but it is getting front page coverage on one large circulation Scottish news paper at least, and there are dog owners on UKC that do live in Scotland, that this would effect if both chipping and muzzling was adopted)

In reply to Sonya Mc:


And if you read my post as closely I did say " when/if this becomes law"

In reply to Jim C:

I have chipped my dog, but I probably wouldn't muzzle him, how would he fetch the ball for me? I think what someone suggested with licensing is the answer, like when you rehome they check your house is safe etc I think it should be harder to get a dog, to save idiots having them!

But then again we don't need a license to have children.....

IMO muzzling is too far, but it would prevent 100% of dog attacks should all dogs wear one, so it does make sense in theory. In practicality most dogs would not take well to a muzzle and to some it would be unfair, maybe they should introduce it slowly so dogs are brought up wearing one?

I put a nylon one on my dog, he damaged his tail and gets very growly, and we have a child so it was not worth the risk. He took to it fine but i wouldn't want him to have it on all the time, as he is often of a lead at our local field etc.

This could be interesting!

In reply to Skol:


I believe you would disobey that law ( in the unlikely event that it became law) thanks for answering the question posed.

In reply to Jim C:

apologies I missed that and assumed, wrongly, you thought England and wales had already said they were implementing compulsory muzzling.

I welcome compulsory chipping and mine was done at the same time he was neutered - chipping is nothing to do with the behaviour of the dog.

In reply to happy_c:


He took to it fine but i wouldn't want him to have it on all the time, as he is often off a lead at our local field etc.

Interesting that you say don't want to take the risk at home (with your own child) but go on to say that you let the same dog off the lead at your local field, ( etc.) Where presumably there are , at times , other's children .

In reply to Jim C:

I chipped my dog and she goes like the clappers now, and she goes much further on one bowl of food.

In reply to Jim C:
N.b
Just in case anyone is wondering,

No one in my family, nor anyone I know , adult or child , has ever been scarred by a dog attack . ( so feel free to wade in

In reply to Jim C:

Chipped dog? Isn't that a Korean pub snack?

Seriously, I wouldn't muzzle, a muzzled dog cannot eat or drink should it get lost.

In reply to happy_c:

Not really: dogs would only have to be muzzled in public, and most dog attacks happen within the home.

I'm all for compulsory microchipping but think that education would be more useful than muzzling.

In reply to higherclimbingwales:



Agreed, my daughter chipped her's because she is worried about losing them, not so that she can be traced and held to account for their actions ( not unless licking becomes a crime .
They are two of the most useless, ' toothless' balls of fluff I have ever come across, and I much prefer the working dogs on my sisters sheep farm.

(Which opens up another question, would working dogs ( like sheep dogs be exempt?) I have not checked that .Sonya might know .

But anyway, I guess my daughter would muzzle her two harmless mutts , if that was the law
( which was my question)
no matter how ridiculous that would look in their case

In reply to Jim C:

slightly off topic sorry but, I was thinking about muzzling my Labrador purely out of frustration of being unable to stop her obsession with eating other dogs poo when off the lead. as for chipping I agree that it should be compulsory, cheers

In reply to Jim C:

My dogs are chipped but what will it gain, pit bulls are banned but still exist in some numbers, unless the police take serious action (unlikely) it's just another headline grabbing load of rubbish!

In reply to Removed Userlfenbo:

A muzzle is no substitute for something that can be prevented through training. Granted, it isn't as instantaneous as a muzzle but is a fairer way of dealing with it.

In reply to Jim C:

The thing that annoys me the most about the suggestion of muzzling is not that it's cruel on the dog, it's the assumption that muzzling is the ONLY option. Like when a dog goes for a person everyone is quick to say 'it's the dog, it's the dog: it should be put down'. Euthanasia is not the ONLY option. Not all dogs are stupid: they can be trained and even those that can't be trained by their owner will benefit from training from a professional.

In reply to Jim C:

Does anyone disagree with chipping or agree with muzzling in public? Seems pretty straightforward to me

In reply to Jim C:

Hi Jim,

I think you mis read that, he was injured and therefore I did not want to risk at, as injured dog cornered by toddler would not be good, and toddlers being toddlers would always do this.

Normally he is never muzzled, even in the house.

The fields do sometimes have children in, but unless one is dressed as a giant tennis ball it is very unlikely my dog would even give them a second look. The same applies for other dogs and any farm animals

As the law would state he is 'under control and would not be a nuisance etc etc

Andy

In reply to ceri:

True, I read a journal somewhere which is reviewing hundreds of dogs attacks for motives etc, the biggest one being resource guarding of some kind e.g. Food , toys or area etc which primarily occur at the home? (Presumption)

Chipping only makes people responsible , this doesn't prevent it. I don't think it is possible prevent them, idiots are idiots, combine them with unpredictable animals bred for different kinds of aggression and you get accidents. Horrible but true, I think all dogs including my own have the ability to bite under certain circumstances. Those circumstances vary dog to dog, it is the owners responsibility to not allow the dog to be put in these circumstances.

In reply to Sonya Mc:


Interesting parties? ()

In reply to happy_c:



I did mis read that, thanks for the clarification.

I do wonder though, if people who are around large dogs a lot ( which I am not) realise , when they are out in public parks etc. just how concerning it can be to others, to have a large unknown dog bound towards them off the lead, (especially if they have a young child in tow. )

I'm sure all they see is their pet playing, and enjoying itself.
The other view is quite different, and decidedly uncertain.