PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Dog escape rates and biting history by fence type on owner property

By Starinsky, Nicole S et al.·Published in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association·2017·View original on PubMed

PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →

Original publication title: Escape rates and biting histories of dogs confined to their owner's property through the use of various containment methods.

Species:
dog

Plain-English summary

A survey of over 1,000 dog owners found that dogs confined by electronic fences were more likely to escape than those kept in physical fences or tethered. About 44% of dogs with electronic fences managed to get out, compared to only 23% of those with see-through or privacy fences. Interestingly, the method of confinement didn't seem to affect whether a dog had a history of biting people or other dogs. However, dogs that displayed aggressive greeting behaviors, like growling or snarling, were more likely to have bitten before. Owners with such dogs should consider seeking help to manage these behaviors.

People also search for: why is my dog escaping the yard · dog biting history and behavior · how to stop dog from growling at strangers

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To determine escape rates for dogs confined to their owner's property by various containment methods and determine whether biting history was associated with containment method. DESIGN Cross-sectional survey. SAMPLE 974 owners of 1,053 dogs. PROCEDURES Individuals patronizing pet stores in Columbus, Ohio, were recruited to complete a survey on the method they used to confine their dogs to their property and their dogs' behavior history. RESULTS Dogs were confined to their owner's property by a physical fence (821/1,053 [78.0%]), electronic fence (150/1,053 [14.2%]), or tether system (82/1,053 [7.8%]). Dogs confined by an electronic fence were more likely to have escaped (66/150 [44.0%]) than were dogs confined by a see-through fence (153/658 [23.3%]), privacy fence (38/163 [23.3%]), or tether (22/82 [26.8%]). Forty-eight (4.6%) dogs had reportedly bitten a person in the past, and 81 (7.7%) had reportedly bitten another dog, but containment method was not significantly associated with whether dogs had ever bitten a person or another dog. Greeting behavior (growling, snarling, or trying to bite) was significantly associated with a history of biting a person or another dog. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Results suggested that escape rate, but not biting history, was associated with the method owners used to confine dogs to their properties. Greeting behavior was associated with biting history, suggesting that owners of dogs that growl, snarl, or attempt to bite when meeting an unfamiliar person or dog should seek assistance to prevent future bites.

Find similar cases for your pet

PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.

Search related cases →

Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28117644/