Let's Talk About Dog Fights

[SkySoaringMagpie]

I do love it when "boundaries" and "rules" somehow override something as essential to being a dog as competition with conspecifics and conflict resolution. My two dogs have never done more than shout at each other , and it has nothing to do with how I manage them.

This is one of the reasons I specifically asked in my first post for the experiences of those who own more than two dogs. Anedotally no issues between two dogs is common. Triple that number and things can be very different, especially as dogs age or are introduced and when they are entire.

One of the reasons my OH and I don't take holidays together is that there are exactly 2 people in the whole of Australia who we would trust to run our pack while we are not there. Both of them have over 30 years experience running large pack households with our breeds and are already basically familiar with our pack dynamics. Anyone can do two dogs.

[espinay2]

Agree very much that the dynamic changes when you have more than two dogs. It can be a whole other ballgame.

My breed is pretty well known as being same sex aggressive. Not an uncommon thing. There have been a couple of times over the years where I have needed to keep dogs separated and have experienced some pretty large fights which would not have ended well if I had not broken them up.

First experience was with a younger entire bitch who decided an aging desexed bitch was fair game. This was not a 'dominance issue' as the older bitch was always lower down the order. As some others have experienced, this was an older unwell animal that was for some reason no longer tolerated. We managed it through separation which worked well until the older bitches death from her heart condition 6 months later. This same bitch also around the same time had a number of altercations with another entire bitch. This one more establishing position (and yes, the two situations were likely tied in together even though individually they appear different - it was basically a time of change in the pack as an older dog was leaving and a younger dog was maturing with the resulting shuffles in between). The situation was managed until things settled and they then got on fine for the rest of their lives.

Another situation where we have had fights was years later - new players by this stage - where we were again adjusting the pack dynamics with the introduction of a 10 year old desexed male who had previously had limited dog interaction. This time the situation was with a younger entire male who was the only male in a pack of females. We practiced separation in the beginning with active management and habituation to the older dogs presence. It took about 12 months of active management and a number of all out fights which we needed to break up before the situation was settled and they could be together without issue (until the older dog passed away a t age 14.)

My current dogs all cohabitate well (one entire male and three entire females). We have agonistic behaviour at times (lots of noise and grumbles) but to date no major issues. I am risk averse though and actively manage the group. When we are out they are separated with no more than two together. They are separated for meals. If tensions are high we generally step in to manage it such as separation with a baby gate in the house till things calm down or a simple step through between them (classic 'splitting') from me to remind them to calm down. I am always actively watching for issues. When girls are in season everyone is managed more closely. I also currently have dogs from lines that are better known for their ability to cohabitate and actively select for that. But I am always aware that changes could occur, particularly around pressure points where pack dynamics are changing. For example, I also have a younger entire male that comes to stay for a month at a time several times a year. Up till now his regular re-integration back into the pack has been smooth (with a several day reintroduction with the resident male before they are permitted together). But now the young male is over 2 years of age, the two males will not be permitted together but will be kept separate with pens, runs and baby gates as the young male is at an age where we will have a pressure point on the pack dynamics with the existing 9 year old male (who also now has a leg injury). So being aware of this pressure point, I manage it.

I agree that comparison to wolf packs is not helpful except to explain how they are different from our domestic packs. As Mech has explained, a wolf pack in the wild is basically a family unit. You have an older parent pair and younger generations. The dynamics are family based. The pack also has the freedom to expel a pack member or for the pack to split. Mech has also explained how the same rules do not generally apply in 'captive packs' - both wolf or domestic dog. In captive situations we put dogs together who would likely not live together in the wild. We contain them and do not provide opportunity for 'expulsion' from a pack or a pack split. We don't often have a single multigenerational family unit. When it comes to managing captive wolf packs, they often need to be managed the same way as dogs (based on my experiences at Wolf Park in the US with ethologist Eric Klinghammer). Older wolves or wolves not tolerated by the pack are for the most part removed to separate enclosures by themselves or in 'mini packs' or relocated to other facilities. They don't expect them to 'get on' or sort it out as sorting it out would often end in death in these types of situations. With our dogs it is a similar situation. We do not give them the freedom to decide who their pack is and who they do and don't live with. So we need to actively manage that situation.

Edited December 2, 2015 by espinay2

[YippeeGirl]

When you have multiple dogs running together, you also have to watch that other dogs don't jump in if a fight does break out. First thing we had to do when our bitches started fighting, was to grab our male and get him out of there. Otherwise, he would get stuck into one of the girls (usually whoever I was holding for some reason), and just escalate things even further.

[corvus]

I do love it when "boundaries" and "rules" somehow override something as essential to being a dog as competition with conspecifics and conflict resolution. My two dogs have never done more than shout at each other , and it has nothing to do with how I manage them.

This is one of the reasons I specifically asked in my first post for the experiences of those who own more than two dogs. Anedotally no issues between two dogs is common. Triple that number and things can be very different, especially as dogs age or are introduced and when they are entire.

Boundaries and rules keep dogs safe in households where there is a pack and where you run breeds where dog to dog issues are not uncommon. "Being a dog" as you see it can mean maiming and killing other dogs. THAT is also "conflict resolution". Best not to forget that when reviewing the experiences of households outside your own. "Let them work it out" is not an option for many households any more than it is down the dog park.

I think you missed the point I was trying to make. From an ethological perspective, killing other dogs is not common as far as any data published on the issue in free ranging dogs goes. It may be more common in households with multiple dogs, but you have to ask yourself why that is if it's not that common in free ranging dogs. I expect that free ranging dogs can move out and hide and successfully avoid other dogs if need be. Not so easy in a multi-dog household. I was not suggesting dogs should be allowed to work it out. I was suggesting it is common for them to do so peacefully if the conditions allow it. If the conditions do not allow it, or the dogs are not inclined to pursue this, the likelihood of escalation and injury dramatically rises. Zoos face this kind of problem all the time. In a natural setting, animals can escape and this can be a huge contributor to peaceful relations. In a zoo enclosure, they can't, and animals die, sometimes out of the blue. In the case of two dogs in a household, often there is enough room for those two dogs to adopt measures that avoid trouble. There is nothing like tight spaces in a house to highlight this. Equally, yards at least are big open spaces, but if there are no obstacles to break it up, the only place a dog can go for refuge is into a fence where they are cornered. I'm not saying it is everything because household aggression is a notoriously difficult problem in behaviour. My only brush with it (two dogs, several vet visits, large house and yard) suggests that even when you have an environment that facilitates good relations you don't necessarily have dogs that want or are particularly good at that.

[corvus]

Incidentally, I am not actually sure what people mean exactly when they say "boundaries" and "rules", so I probably should have asked for definitions before raising an eyebrow and expressing my disbelief. I jumped the gun because competition is a fact of life with any species, and the degree to which dogs compete is at least partially beyond human influence in the short-term. We have Scott and Fuller to show us that. Dogs that have a problem behaviour are usually doing something that makes a whole lot of sense to them, and that includes inter-dog household aggression. Some dogs are just very agreeable, but the rest of them will keep doing things that make a whole lot of sense to them and there's nothing you can do short of physically preventing them until you address the function of the behaviour.

[Salukifan]

I do love it when "boundaries" and "rules" somehow override something as essential to being a dog as competition with conspecifics and conflict resolution. My two dogs have never done more than shout at each other , and it has nothing to do with how I manage them.

This is one of the reasons I specifically asked in my first post for the experiences of those who own more than two dogs. Anedotally no issues between two dogs is common. Triple that number and things can be very different, especially as dogs age or are introduced and when they are entire.

Boundaries and rules keep dogs safe in households where there is a pack and where you run breeds where dog to dog issues are not uncommon. "Being a dog" as you see it can mean maiming and killing other dogs. THAT is also "conflict resolution". Best not to forget that when reviewing the experiences of households outside your own. "Let them work it out" is not an option for many households any more than it is down the dog park.

I think you missed the point I was trying to make. From an ethological perspective, killing other dogs is not common as far as any data published on the issue in free ranging dogs goes. It may be more common in households with multiple dogs, but you have to ask yourself why that is if it's not that common in free ranging dogs. I expect that free ranging dogs can move out and hide and successfully avoid other dogs if need be. Not so easy in a multi-dog household. I was not suggesting dogs should be allowed to work it out. I was suggesting it is common for them to do so peacefully if the conditions allow it. If the conditions do not allow it, or the dogs are not inclined to pursue this, the likelihood of escalation and injury dramatically rises. Zoos face this kind of problem all the time. In a natural setting, animals can escape and this can be a huge contributor to peaceful relations. In a zoo enclosure, they can't, and animals die, sometimes out of the blue. In the case of two dogs in a household, often there is enough room for those two dogs to adopt measures that avoid trouble. There is nothing like tight spaces in a house to highlight this. Equally, yards at least are big open spaces, but if there are no obstacles to break it up, the only place a dog can go for refuge is into a fence where they are cornered. I'm not saying it is everything because household aggression is a notoriously difficult problem in behaviour. My only brush with it (two dogs, several vet visits, large house and yard) suggests that even when you have an environment that facilitates good relations you don't necessarily have dogs that want or are particularly good at that.

Yes, I did. I still don't get the point you are trying to make. I don't see how you denigrating boundaries and rules is in any way justified by your explanation. Your examples of zoos and free roaming dogs, while clearly of interest to you, have little relevance to a domestic household. As you've discussed, the situation is different.

I care about how I manage the dogs in my home to ensure continued harmony. That's the subject up for discussion. If you think it is the norm for conflict to be resolved peacefully between household pack dogs then all I can say is you clearly don't have a heck of a lot of experience with households with more than two dogs. Two dogs do not a pack make. The experiences of knowledgeable posters here should at least prompt you to consider that your zoo and free roaming dog behaviour knowledge may not cover the field for household pets.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Haredown Whippets

[The Spotted Devil]

Something that makes a big difference in my house is permissions. If you want to go out or come in or go through a door or gate you offer a sit. You release when I say so. If food drops on the floor (both in training and accidentally) you back off. And are then rewarded for doing so. Etc. This is just part of our lives - it means that you haven't got 3 dogs (plus visitor dogs) rushing through doors, pinching food etc.

[*kirty*]

I completely agree with Cosmolo. My dogs never fight, they never even argue. The most that might happen is s grumble if another dog comes too close to one that is eating. It's pretty much always been that way. But if we hadn't been home when the Dane attacked the Grey, I have no doubt the Grey would have been killed.

[espinay2]

This is a genuine question and not intended in any way to be snarky or confrontational. I'm asking as someone who has only ever owned the one dog that I have now and hasn't had to manage a multi dog household. What are the pay offs or benefits of having so many dogs that outweigh the amount of work and vigilance that must go in to managing them the way that you do? I don't mean the pay off of no fights but the personal value to you as an owner? I adore Justice and he adds a huge amount of value to my life but I really don't think I'd be able to relax and just enjoy being with my dogs if I had to constantly be on alert and separate or rotate them and watch for any signs of tension and be ready to intervene. Maybe it's not as full on as what I perceive from your description but I guess it makes me wonder what the benefit is of more than two dogs if it requires so much management? I hope that makes sense and hasn't come across poorly.

Having multiple dogs is very rewarding, at least for me. I enjoy seeing them interact and work as a team. I can indeed watch my dogs for hours and enjoy watching them together and being with them as a group. I enjoy seeing the older dogs teach younger dogs and how their relationships develop in the group.

Management is about reducing risk so that things run smoothly and are happy. The better set up you are and the better you manage it, the less stress for both dogs and owners. It is about being proactive and situationally aware. I don't really consider it being 'more management' as it is now habit and we have set ourselves up in a way that assists us. Though for a person new to owning multiples it may require learning some new ways of doing things (I have just got off the phone from explaining to someone that to prevent fights at dinner time among their dogs, separating them so they can not get to each others bowls will reduce stress significantly and prevent arguments over resources - sounds simple and it is, but for some this is a huge adjustment in practice and thinking). I will say that without the proper infrastructure in place things are infinitely harder and can definitely be more stressful (noting that good infrastructure can range from simple things such as crates and baby gates to pens and runs or divided yards etc).

I can remember many years ago, going from owning two dogs to owning three was a big eye opener for me. I could see more clearly the dynamics of the group and my dogs 'being dogs' in how they related to each other. Owning multiple dogs does require more skill and awareness (spidey senses just like a mother knows what her children are doing behind her back LOL!). It is certainly not for everyone, but it can be very rewarding done well.

Edited December 2, 2015 by espinay2

[Cosmolo]

Deleted

Edited December 2, 2015 by Cosmolo

[huski]

This is a genuine question and not intended in any way to be snarky or confrontational. I'm asking as someone who has only ever owned the one dog that I have now and hasn't had to manage a multi dog household. What are the pay offs or benefits of having so many dogs that outweigh the amount of work and vigilance that must go in to managing them the way that you do? I don't mean the pay off of no fights but the personal value to you as an owner? I adore Justice and he adds a huge amount of value to my life but I really don't think I'd be able to relax and just enjoy being with my dogs if I had to constantly be on alert and separate or rotate them and watch for any signs of tension and be ready to intervene. Maybe it's not as full on as what I perceive from your description but I guess it makes me wonder what the benefit is of more than two dogs if it requires so much management? I hope that makes sense and hasn't come across poorly.

Some dogs required more management than others, you could probably ask the question in reverse by saying how could owners live with the level of management you use with Justice when you take him out or plan to. If you accept your dog/s require a specific level of management you get so used to it that you don't think about it any more, you just do it.

I don't need to strictly manage my dogs when they are together in that they get along and can be around each other and interact appropriately with each other, but the Mals require a higher level of management in general compared to other dogs. They are never loose in the house when visitors arrive for example. If I do let them out, they are on a place bed or in a down stay next to me. They greet people on my command only. They understand these are the rules that come with the privilege of being in the house, so when I let them in the house they automatically go to their crates, they won't come out even if I leave the door open, unless I release them. If I put them on their place beds they stay there and don't get off for any reason, unless I tell them to. I build these default behaviours in as part of management. It might sound extreme to some people who have their dogs loose in the house 24/7, but it is second nature to me.

Edited December 2, 2015 by huski

[huski]

My home life with the dogs is very relaxed too because I don't have them loose in the house 24/7 :laugh: I wouldn't raise a dog any differently now, it's just the consequence of mismanaging dogs like the Mals is much more severe than the average pet dog.

The girls will chill out on the lounge with me at night time while I watch TV and stuff, but I only give them those sorts of privileges when they are good at chilling out in the pen/crate/bed etc.

[Salukifan]

I've coined a saying I think fits these situations: "you're not choosing a dog, you're choosing a lifestyle".

Most of the multi-dog homes I know are breeding and/or dog sports homes. They have dogs in work, dogs maturing and retired dogs. They manage the multiples because it goes with "doing something" with their dogs.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Haredown Whippets

[The Spotted Devil]

I've coined a saying I think fits these situations: "you're not choosing a dog, you're choosing a lifestyle".

Most of the multi-dog homes I know are breeding and/or dog sports homes. They have dogs in work, dogs maturing and retired dogs. They manage the multiples because it goes with "doing something" with their dogs.

Yes you've pretty much nailed my household. Retrieving, agility and obedience. One winding down at 9 years, one in her prime at 5 years and one rascal puppy at 7 months. My dogs have quite a bit of freedom at home and travel a lot with me - a) they are pretty soft by nature, and b) they do a lot of activities - training, competing, demos etc. Even pup happily sleeps the day away when I'm out.

[Katdogs]

It's important to keep in mind that what happens when you are there can be vastly different to what happens when you are not there.

Breed, sex, status, resources, age, number of dogs, critical period socialisation all have a part to play in inter dog aggression- sometimes more so or just as much as the owners input.

Without trying to scare anyone- in some cases, it's all fine and they get along beautifully- until the day they don't. And you'd just want to hope that on the day they don't, you're there to intervene.

Yes.

I suspect though that it was me being there that was the problem

Still trying to work out what happened with my two that resulted in Jodie's exposed carotid and a few months of careful managing. We seem to be balanced again but I don't take that for granted.

And the third dog was nowhere near the altercations.

[sandgrubber]

Breed is relevant, though dogs are not always true to breed stereotype. I've had a lot of Labs. They run free inside and out. The closest thing to a fight I've seen is play fighting. With my present three, the puppy (2 yrs) often gets rolled, with the older dogs standing over her. But everyone wags and no one gets hurt. And they get up and do it all over again.

I once read a sled-dog book where the author said his dogs enjoyed fighting. Hence he had to keep them staked. That left me wondering if play fighting was a behavioral relic. Also left me wondering whether some dog fights were a dog's version of recreation. Chase, dig, fight . . . all things dogs 'like' to do.

[Leah82]

I only have the two softies but even I was impressed by my dog's ability to share a bone the other week. We cut the flap off a lamb roast and gave it to Collie for 10 mins, then took it off Collie and gave it to Sarah for about the same amount of time then back to Collie. After awhile with most of the meat gone and the tendons taking a bit more effort one dog would get bored and wander off and the other one would have a go.

I was watching from inside and both dogs were completely respectful of the other when they had the bone. I love my low management pair

[corvus]

Yes, I did. I still don't get the point you are trying to make. I don't see how you denigrating boundaries and rules is in any way justified by your explanation. Your examples of zoos and free roaming dogs, while clearly of interest to you, have little relevance to a domestic household. As you've discussed, the situation is different.

I care about how I manage the dogs in my home to ensure continued harmony. That's the subject up for discussion. If you think it is the norm for conflict to be resolved peacefully between household pack dogs then all I can say is you clearly don't have a heck of a lot of experience with households with more than two dogs. Two dogs do not a pack make. The experiences of knowledgeable posters here should at least prompt you to consider that your zoo and free roaming dog behaviour knowledge may not cover the field for household pets.

Whoa, smackdown.

All right, I'll stop trying to make the point that is not successfully being made. Sorry for piping up. I will return to my ivory tower.

[corvus]

Although I feel compelled to defend myself. I said peaceful conflict resolution was the norm between two dogs and in free ranging dogs. I never said it was common in multiple dog homes. I was drawing attention to the disconnect between ethology and multiple dog homes. Because time and time again, it is a valuable exercise in figuring out why things occur and persist. I know lots of people that have more dogs than I ever would, and some of them run a very tight ship, which IMO is a great way to minimise the times that dogs may come into conflict. But problems still arise.

[Staffyluv]

Touch wood, I have been VERY lucky here.

Zig pretty much takes everything in his stride and doesn't seem to care if a foster wants to be the boss.

With fosters, they have all seemed to be nice enough dogs and no real aggression issues (apart from the last two wanting to eat my chickens).

If play gets a bit over the top, I just tell them to chill and so far that has worked in curbing any over the top behaviour.

So far all dogs are fed together (note that I only have one foster at a time here), play together and even have bones together (supervised of course).

Like I said - I have been very lucky..

I am thinking that Mila will probably be my last foster here because I can't handle them wanting to eat my chickens.

The chickens are as much pets as Zig is and he is fine with them (we leave the gate permanently open and they interact with no problems).