Why is it impossible for some dog owners to walk their dogs on a leash?

andreac

kalie wrote: »

I just thought i'd share something that happened to me recently. I have a 9 month old boxer pup, she's a lovely dog and very well socialised and trained. The only time she's let of the lead is in parks because she's not that road wise.
We were walking through the park when a young Collie appeared from nowhere (the owners were miles away) at the same time a woman walked past with her dog on a leash, the collie went over to see her dog instead. She then starts shouting at me that my "bulldog" should me mussled and leashed. I explained that she was not a bulldog just to get a long line of abuse thrown at me. So i walk off with my dog beside me. The next thing ya know she's screaming her head off at me drawing lots of attention about my other dog attacking her... seems the collie had got a bit excited and was jumping around her (owners nowhere in sight). I had great fun telling her it wasn't my dog and pointed to the owners who were across the field... but in the end i did walk the collie back to them.

I get alot of abuse for walking my "dangerous" dog off the lead in a park where most people let the dogs run free. She knows she's aloud play with other dogs off lead and shes not aloud run up to dogs on leads unless the owners come over to her.

God thats awful, your poor little puppy was probably having fun and then you get abuse like that. I really do wonder about these type of people that own dogs as they obv arent dog lovers and havent a clue how to behave around dogs in general and then calling your boxer a bull dog?? I would have just laughed at her, stupid woman!!

iguana

Graces7 wrote: »

Sorry you suffered that; have you had counselling? If they caught the man of course he will be locked up.

This post is an example of why sensible, adult discussions get derailed here. Hurl insults if someone has a different view from you? Ah well! happens so often.

If you cannot respond sensibly why bother?

You are the one who is having trouble responding sensibly. All you have come out with is, "Won't somebody please think of the children!!!!!" The Helen Lovejoy comparison is so apt.

And as it happens Graces the only insult hurling on this thread has been from you. (Your raspberry comments for example). I posted about what happened to me in order for you to maybe get some perspective because the level of hyperbole coming from you is out of order. Your response to me is a case in point, a ridiculous platitude and then you are straight back on the attack.

IIRC, you are hugely in favour of allowing cats to wander free and completely unsupervised. Despite the damage they do to people's pets (birds, rodents, cats), livestock (chickens), indigenous wild birds (cats are the single biggest killer in many areas) and the risk their faeces can cause to the unborn human feotus (spontaneous abortion and birth defects). And the huge safety issues to your own cats (life expectancy reduced by 80%). You feel justified in letting some of your pets roam around by themselves but have problems with people who allow their pets to play under supervision. You are a massive hypocrite.

Shenshen wrote: »

I'll go tell that to the mother of the little child that was bitten yesterday while playing in her front garden in an estate around the corner from where I live by a dog whose owner had decided it was perfectly safe to leave it to run around without a leash.
I'm sure it will be great comfort to her to know the dog got its full right to exercise.

So I assume then that you are in favour of all men being kept under control because of what happened to me which I can assure you was an absolute damn sight worse than being bitten by a dog as a child.

A minority of bad people do bad things, whether that be rapists or irresponsible dog owners. But if you attempt to punish all people because of that minority, even with the best of intentions, you only make things much, much worse.

leelee_m

Gonna give my two cents on this.
First off I have no problem with a dog of lead as long as it is kept under effective control by the owner, i.e it will come back to the owner when called. I have no problem with a dog off lead once it is in an area that allows dogs to be off lead.

Where I do have a problem is dogs off lead in parks that specifically state that dogs must be kept on lead. Nearly all Coillte forest parks have signs that state that dogs must be kept on lead. However every single time that I go to the forest parks I encounter dogs off lead. Can people not read or do they just have a blatant disregard for rules?

It bothers me when I am walking my dog on lead and a random dog with no owner in sight comes along and starts to bother my dog. I don't mind dogs playing with my dog as long as the owner is there to supervise in the event of anything happening but nine times out of ten the owner is far off and the dog won't listen when the owner calls.

The amount of badly behaved off lead dogs I have come across is just ridiculous. I will not however tar all off lead dogs with the same brush, I know there are good owners out there who have trained their dogs and whose dogs will behave while offlead. It's just unfortunate that those owners seem to be few and far between, where I walk anyway.

In regard to the comments that some people have posted saying that a dog can't get proper exercise unless it's off lead is just a load of rubbish!
There are some breeds that can't be let off lead due to poor recall, such as huskies etc. I am the proud owner of a husky and the fact that she can't be let of lead in no way impedes her ability to exercise. I hike with her, I do cani-cross(running) with her, I go dryland mushing with her, and all the while she is still attached to me while getting exercise. So the notion that your dog must be off lead to get proper exercise really is a ridiculous statement.

I think the main thing in this, is that people just need to have more common courtesy when out and about with their dogs.

sparkling sea

All reasonable people will accept that some people are afraid of dogs. All reasonable people will accept that children, people who are frail, are suffer from illnesses like arthritis etc are entitled to walk in parks, beaches and public spaces and not be impeded in anyway by other peoples pets. All reasonable people will accept that we don't have ESP and no more know the specific circumstances of any member of the public, then they know ours.

So for example if an elderly person wants to walk in a park or a parent wants to bring their child for a walk on the beach, or I just want to walk to my local shop, they shouldn't have to worry about encountering another persons dog off a lead who may or may not jump up on them where in a friendly way or not.

Dogs off leads are a problem for many people, that is why it is so problematic, there is no way round this, people need to keep their dogs on leads in public places to allow all members of the public feel safe.
Its not a difficult thing to do, its a very easy thing to do, so why won't people do it. Why do their rights trump everyone.
May a need for a public place, like an open field where people can exercise their dog also exists and that is a different matter. But dogs off leads do cause problems for people and anyone who has any regard for the people in their community should remember this and keep their much loved pooch on a lead.

sparkling sea

lrushe wrote: »

The health and well-being of my dog(s) is not an excuse to let my dogs off leash, its a fact and its v.thoughtless of YOU not to realise that.
My dogs do not approach strangers, they have no interest in meeting people they don't know unless given to ok by me. They are usually far more interested in their walk.
Don't even get me started on how parents should teach their children how to act around strange dogs, that's a topic in itself, hence why I rarely allow a strange child to go near my dogs (much to their parents annoyance I might add).
You're right it would be nice if we lived in a world where people considered each other, but don't forget consideration works both ways, you can't have it all your own way. This is why I think people should have to complete an obedience course before being allowed to let their dogs off in public and have something that is visible for all to see so people know that this dog is trustworthy. That's my idea of consideration.

The health and well being of your dog may be a fact, it could also be said that it was very thoughtless of you to get a dog if you didn't have a big enough space to exercise it in - but that would be just a stupid thing to say.

The health and well being of humans will always come before dogs and everyone should have a right to exercise freely in public places without being impacted by other peoples dogs.

With the best will in the world why should I have to think of your dogs health, its your pet, a responsibility that you took on, its up to you to figure it out in a way that doesn't impact on me, my dog or anyone else. Bringing a dog for a walk on a lead is great exercise, I keep mine on a lead, he gets l exercised, 3 miles twice a day and he very healthy , whats so different about you? takes about half an hour in the morning and evening.

I totally agree that obedience classes would be the ideal, but not everyone can afford them - and how would you get an agreed standard of behaviour that everyone would be comfortable with.

No matter how you try to justify it alot of people, even people who like dogs, do not like encountering a dog off a lead- the simple answer therefore is to keep all dogs on leads. I think if this doesn't happen eventually the government will be forced to legislate for it because people cannot use their own judgement even when they are aware of the problems dogs off leads cause.

andreac

sparkling sea wrote: »

The health and well being of your dog may be a fact, it could also be said that it was very thoughtless of you to get a dog if you didn't have a big enough space to exercise it in - but that would be just a stupid thing to say.
The health and well being of humans will always come before dogs and everyone should have a right to exercise freely in public places without being impacted by other peoples dogs.

With the best will in the world why should I have to think of your dogs health, its your pet, a responsibility that you took on, its up to you to figure it out in a way that doesn't impact on me, my dog or anyone else. Bringing a dog for a walk on a lead is great exercise, I keep mine on a lead, he gets l exercised, 3 miles twice a day and he very healthy , whats so different about you? takes about half an hour in the morning and evening.

I totally agree that obedience classes would be the ideal, but not everyone can afford them - and how would you get an agreed standard of behaviour that everyone would be comfortable with.

No matter how you try to justify it alot of people, even people who like dogs, do not like encountering a dog off a lead- the simple answer therefore is to keep all dogs on leads. I think if this doesn't happen eventually the government will be forced to legislate for it because people cannot use their own judgement even when they are aware of the problems dogs off leads cause.

Sorry but that line is crap!! No one unless they have acres of space would have enough space in their gardens to exercise their dog, plus they need to get out of their homes to be exercised properly and stimulated too.

iguana

andreac wrote: »

Sorry but that line is crap!! No one unless they have acres of space would have enough space in their gardens to exercise their dog, plus they need to get out of their homes to be exercised properly and stimulated too.

Funnily enough I had two Springer Spaniels for 3 and a half years in urban regions of London and never had a problem exercising them adequately or legally. I knew people with multiple GSDs, Rottweilers, Dalmations, Akitas, Border Collies, Great Danes, Wolfhounds etc and they never had any problems exercising their dogs adequately or legally either. And that's in one of the most built up and densely populated regions of the western world. There were parks all over big and small, and if anyone is in any doubt - London parks are constantly FULL of people - they are loved and used by large groups of people all the time, especially during summer heatwaves. In all but the Grade 1 and 2 Listed dogs were allowed off lead at all times.

I never, ever once saw a dog attack a person. Ever! I did see some dogs attack other dogs, especially when I lived Tottenham, which is an area with more than a few "hard men" with "viscous" (read mistreated) dogs. I also never, ever saw a dog knock a person over.

A lot of the people on this thread need to actually get out more and stop letting their imaginations overrun themselves.

sambuka41

sparkling sea wrote: »

So for example if an elderly person wants to walk in a park or a parent wants to bring their child for a walk on the beach, or I just want to walk to my local shop, they shouldn't have to worry about encountering another persons dog off a lead who may or may not jump up on them where in a friendly way or not.

The level of intolerance is shocking,not only this post but through out the whole tread. Are you this intolerant of people or just animals?? Do you honestly think the world should bend to your liking???

There is a lot in Ireland that i dont agree with but you just have to suck it up and learn to live with other people and their animals.

Graces7

andreac wrote: »

Sorry but that line is crap!! No one unless they have acres of space would have enough space in their gardens to exercise their dog, plus they need to get out of their homes to be exercised properly and stimulated too.

It is not so.

For years our wee JRT cross was happily exercised in a small garden. All it took was a ball, a bit of training and a lot of healthy interaction between us, with our limited mobility, and the wee dog. She loves and loves this game...

sambuka41

Graces7 wrote: »

It is not so.

For years our wee JRT cross was happily exercised in a small garden. All it took was a ball, a bit of training and a lot of healthy interaction between us, with our limited mobility, and the wee dog. She loves and loves this game...

Theres a big difference between a small JRT and a larger dog. I have a duty to make sure that my dog is happy and healthy. That means acknowledging her instincts as I mentioned i have a collie cross and she is at her happiest in a large field running around.

I would consider myself a neglectful owner if i did not provide what she needs. I walked her around Glendalough for 5 hours on the lead and she was still full of energy after.

Graces7

iguana wrote: »

You are the one who is having trouble responding sensibly. All you have come out with is, "Won't somebody please think of the children!!!!!" The Helen Lovejoy comparison is so apt.

And as it happens Graces the only insult hurling on this thread has been from you. (Your raspberry comments for example). I posted about what happened to me in order for you to maybe get some perspective because the level of hyperbole coming from you is out of order. Your response to me is a case in point, a ridiculous platitude and then you are straight back on the attack.

IIRC, you are hugely in favour of allowing cats to wander free and completely unsupervised. Despite the damage they do to people's pets (birds, rodents, cats), livestock (chickens), indigenous wild birds (cats are the single biggest killer in many areas) and the risk their faeces can cause to the unborn human feotus (spontaneous abortion and birth defects). And the huge safety issues to your own cats (life expectancy reduced by 80%). You feel justified in letting some of your pets roam around by themselves but have problems with people who allow their pets to play under supervision. You are a massive hypocrite.



So I assume then that you are in favour of all men being kept under control because of what happened to me which I can assure you was an absolute damn sight worse than being bitten by a dog as a child.

A minority of bad people do bad things, whether that be rapists or irresponsible dog owners. But if you attempt to punish all people because of that minority, even with the best of intentions, you only make things much, much worse.

Boy oh boy! I have no idea who this Helen person is; but if she cares about children and the elderly as much as I do then that is fine.

And yes I have strong views; but so do others here; the only difference is that their views coincide with yours whereas mine differ from yours.

The raspberry comment was because this is a very simple prqctical issue being made into something theoretical and "intellectual"; and I stand by that;the bias in this thread is so anti my views and those of others that that is unfair indeed.

Your words here and heavy handed and unacceptable; and per se a personal attack... I have reported this post but!!!! :rolleyes:

Asking people to keep their dogs under full control is not punishing them. How is it that? It is asking people to behave responsibly and in thought of others who use a public area.

I have no fear of dogs; and mine have excellent recall. BUT I would never, ever leave them off lead anywhere where people are .. especially children. Not ever.

My whole life's work has been with children and I care deeply about them. Many here are trying to educate the little ones in the safe handling of dogs.

So you mock that caring?????

People are more important than dogs.

That maybe is the bottom line.. and children and the elderly especially

Last year when I was resting on a small isolated beach, a pair of wolfhounds came racing over. Jumping up etc.

The owner was a long way away; he caught up ( and by then the dogs and I were getting along fine) and admitted that he had no control over them , that they were too strong for him and that he had been terrified when he saw them run to me.

He had a head collar on one to try to control it but...

No one has any means of knowing if a dog running like that is aggressive or not.

To most the term "under control" means on a lead - period.

As the OP asks, WHY do some folk persist in this?

DBCyc

Graces7 wrote: »

...Hysterical ramblings...

You think that it is unfair that people do not agree with you? What?

Also nobody has suggested anywhere in this thread that dogs are more important then people, this is all going on in your head.

Graces7

sambuka41 wrote: »

The level of intolerance is shocking,not only this post but through out the whole tread. Are you this intolerant of people or just animals?? Do you honestly think the world should bend to your liking???

There is a lot in Ireland that i dont agree with but you just have to suck it up and learn to live with other people and their animals.

Where is this word "intolerance" coming from? Many of us, myself included, love dogs passionately. Ours, others....
we involve in rescue work,,

But we care about people also. And the danger is there,. A few very intolerant dog owners on this thread have "ordered" others to stay home if they don;t like dogs running loose; that is unacceptable indeed and shows great intolerance.

Why should anyone be told to be a prisoner because a few others cannot be bothered to think of others?

The needs of others come first always.

The law here is open to too much interpretation clearly..To most. control means physical controls ie on a lead.

Suck it up? No way; things can be changed at need.

andrewire

OK everyone please calm down! I know this topic is highly controversial. As the OP I understand your frustrations and opinions. Most of the dogs that attack others are owned by irresponsible people. My experience have been mixed as I said before and it usually involves small dogs (Shih Tzu). I have encountered several off lead dogs that are well behaved and friendly with my puppies so it really depends on the nature of the dog.

I would recommend people to keep their dogs on a lead but I understand many disagree --that's fine, as long as they are under control i.e. not attacking others and the owner should always be close to the dog.

Graces7

DBCyc wrote: »

You think that it is unfair that people do not agree with you? What?

Also nobody has suggested anywhere in this thread that dogs are more important then people, this is all going on in your head.

Far from it. It is walking about on four legs in many places..

And I did not say unfair anywhere...nor do I think that.

So many folk were terrified of the collie we took in where she lived before so, although I knew she would do no harm, I kept her on a lead when anyone was near.
It is called courtesy.

To read that it is OK for folk to feel scared to use a park?

Did I really write that!!! Wonderful phrase!! lol!

Graces7

andrewire wrote: »

OK everyone please calm down! I know this topic is highly controversial. As the OP I understand your frustrations and opinions. Most of the dogs that attack others are owned by irresponsible people. My experience have been mixed as I said before and it usually involves small dogs (Shih Tzu). I have encountered several off lead dogs that are well behaved and friendly with my puppies so it really depends on the nature of the dog.

I would recommend people to keep their dogs on a lead but I understand many disagree --that's fine, as long as they are under control i.e. not attacking others and the owner should always be close to the dog.

:rolleyes::P:pac:

sambuka41

Graces7 wrote: »

Where is this word "intolerance" coming from? Many of us, myself included, love dogs passionately. Ours, others....
we involve in rescue work,,

But we care about people also. And the danger is there,. A few very intolerant dog owners on this thread have "ordered" others to stay home if they don;t like dogs running loose; that is unacceptable indeed and shows great intolerance.

Why should anyone be told to be a prisoner because a few others cannot be bothered to think of others?

The needs of others come first always.

The law here is open to too much interpretation clearly..To most. control means physical controls ie on a lead.

Suck it up? No way; things can be changed at need.

Im sorry I cant agree with needs of others always coming first.

It is intolerance; lacking respect for practices and beliefs other than one's own. I also work with children and elderly so I care about them and getting respect for them and FROM them. From my work i have seen the danger in wrapping them in cotton wool. The world is not exactly the way each of us want it to be. The sooner kids learn that they better,because they'll be happier adults when they learn tolerance, and acceptance for other people and how they choose to live their lives.

Irresponsible owners are inconsiderate, definitely. You have a right to be annoyed with individual dogs but not with all dogs off the lead. I am considerate of others and i trained my dog to be as well, but as some posters have said they have not received the same level of consideration. Some being shouted because of the way their dog looks. No one has the right to verbally abuse someone else. So there are inconsiderate people on both sides of this argument.

I also will not be a prisoner walking my dog around her garden all day. A lot of people get enjoyment from my dog, when she runs around the park she gets excited and flips in the air,the amount of people who have come over to us to pet her, and brought their kids to play with her. I wouldn't deny them or her that fun. There are some positives to allowing a dog off the lead too.

iguana

Graces7 wrote: »

My whole life's work has been with children and I care deeply about them. Many here are trying to educate the little ones in the safe handling of dogs.

So you mock that caring?????

Are you trying to play "caring" Top Trumps? Do you think that it somehow gives credence to your hyperbole? That just because you have worked with children you get to be nasty to people who disagree with you, even posters like Seamus who has been measured and intelligent in his posts? That you get to throw pragmatism, common sense and the law out of the window? That you can use that work to belittle others? Or that by virtue of that work your argument trumps everyone else's.

Because if that's what you are trying to do you won't win. My whole life's work has been with Oxfam and then Barnardos. I've also volunteered with Red Ribbon Project, Help the Aged, Jubilee South, Ruhama, Amnesty International and various local youth groups and campaigning organisations. I've worked with kids who were terrified of animals and taught them how to learn to deal with them properly and allay those fears. I've worked with the elderly and the infirm and helped them work out what they can and can't do in physical situations, including with animals. I'm currently working on a project designed to provide support to the families of alcoholics and other addicts. My three legged dog, Toby, is in the process of become a therapy dog.

But none of that makes my argument worth more than anyone else's. If it did we might as well just hand over control of the world to the doctors and nurses of MSF, and the firefighters who went to Haiti after the quake, because they are just about the bravest, most caring and useful people on the planet. (Might not be a bad idea considering who is in control .) But while I'd bow to their superior knowledge of issues of medicine, war and disaster zones, etc. It doesn't give the greater knowledge of dogs and how to exercise them. With the exception of the firefighters who work and train with S&R dogs, obviously.

As it happens in Tottenham one of my neighbours was a firefighter/S&R dog trainer and he was firmly of the opinion that all dogs needed off-lead exercise and freedom. Especially active breeds, his dog was an ESS like mine and he felt 2-3 hours daily off-lead walks was ideal for that breed. Preferably in woods or along a river so the dog's mind is kept active. And that was a dog who had more mental stimulation than most people in the course of his extremely important job.

iguana

Graces7 wrote: »

Why should anyone be told to be a prisoner because a few others cannot be bothered to think of others?

At last. Glad you are finally getting it.!!!!!:D

DBCyc

Graces7 wrote: »

Far from it. It is walking about on four legs in many places..

And I did not say unfair anywhere...nor do I think that.

So many folk were terrified of the collie we took in where she lived before so, although I knew she would do no harm, I kept her on a lead when anyone was near.
It is called courtesy.

To read that it is OK for folk to feel scared to use a park?

Did I really write that!!! Wonderful phrase!! lol!

Okay this does not make any sense whatsoever

oh and...

Graces7 wrote: »

...the bias in this thread is so anti my views and those of others that that is unfair indeed.

Our man in Havana

Thread moved to premoderated forum.

lrushe

sparkling sea wrote: »

The health and well being of your dog may be a fact, it could also be said that it was very thoughtless of you to get a dog if you didn't have a big enough space to exercise it in - but that would be just a stupid thing to say.

The health and well being of humans will always come before dogs and everyone should have a right to exercise freely in public places without being impacted by other peoples dogs.

With the best will in the world why should I have to think of your dogs health, its your pet, a responsibility that you took on, its up to you to figure it out in a way that doesn't impact on me, my dog or anyone else. Bringing a dog for a walk on a lead is great exercise, I keep mine on a lead, he gets l exercised, 3 miles twice a day and he very healthy , whats so different about you? takes about half an hour in the morning and evening.

I totally agree that obedience classes would be the ideal, but not everyone can afford them - and how would you get an agreed standard of behaviour that everyone would be comfortable with.

No matter how you try to justify it alot of people, even people who like dogs, do not like encountering a dog off a lead- the simple answer therefore is to keep all dogs on leads. I think if this doesn't happen eventually the government will be forced to legislate for it because people cannot use their own judgement even when they are aware of the problems dogs off leads cause.

I have a big enough space to exercise my dogs, its called the local park. Plus I am doing agiltiy with my biggest dog. Off leash exercise is not just about exercising the physical body but also stimuating the mind.

A person's health or well-being is not being harmed by an off leash dog and a responsible owner, that's mere hysteria. I get that there are some irresponsible owners but why should mine and many others pets be punished for that???

With the best will in the world if you're not going to consider me or what makes my dog happy, then why in the world would I even give you a second thought??
You can argue till you are blue in the face that a dogs can be happy and well exercised on a leash but it will never (imo) have a patch on a free run / swim.

If obedience classes were mandatory and became everyday like injections and neutering than people would become accustomed to having to do them as a formality of owning a dog and except the expense. A standard of obedience would obviously have to agreed if a programme such as this were to come about.

The simple answer for YOU would be to keep dogs on a leash but not for others, so were is that consideration for others you like to talk about, I'm not seeing much of it from you. At least I'm trying to see it from others points of view and have tried to come up with a solution, you are just jumping straight to a blanket ban on dogs off leash because it doesn't suit you.

sparkling sea

lrushe wrote: »

I have a big enough space to exercise my dogs, its called the local park. Plus I am doing agiltiy with my biggest dog. Off leash exercise is not just about exercising the physical body but also stimuating the mind.

A person's health or well-being is not being harmed by an off leash dog and a responsible owner, that's mere hysteria. I get that there are some irresponsible owners but why should mine and many others pets be punished for that???

With the best will in the world if you're not going to consider me or what makes my dog happy, then why in the world would I even give you a second thought??
You can argue till you are blue in the face that a dogs can be happy and well exercised on a leash but it will never (imo) have a patch on a free run / swim.

If obedience classes were mandatory and became everyday like injections and neutering than people would become accustomed to having to do them as a formality of owning a dog and except the expense. A standard of obedience would obviously have to agreed if a programme such as this were to come about.

The simple answer for YOU would be to keep dogs on a leash but not for others, so were is that consideration for others you like to talk about, I'm not seeing much of it from you. At least I'm trying to see it from others points of view and have tried to come up with a solution, you are just jumping straight to a blanket ban on dogs off leash because it doesn't suit you.

Again I totally agree that off leash exercise is better for stimulating the mind but this type of training is easily done in a small space.

I keep my dog on a lead as I have pointed out and I don't cause anyone any problems - the title of this topic is why is it impossible for some dog owners to walk their dogs on a leash, the implication being that in general, people don't feel comfortable when dogs are off their leash and further their owners seem to show little consideration for this.
The vast majority of dog owners do keep their dogs on leashes and I have yet to hear an arguement that allows for dogs of leashes.

Finally there is nothing hysterical about people who are afraid of dogs: it is estimated that Cynophia affects at least 25% of the population, which means this affects their well being . Thats 1 in every 4 people and as I have previouly pointed out not every one who are unafraid of dogs are comfortable with a dog off a leash.

LisaO

A lot of this boils down to the amount of effort & consideration that owners put into their dogs. I would say that many, if not most (or all?) of the posters on this thread (& judging by other posts they make on this forum as well), who advocate allowing dogs off-lead have put a lot of time, effort & cosideration into ensuring their dogs are 100% under their control whether on or off a lead & therefore pose no problem to the wider public. To me it is unreasonable to expect such owners who have made this huge investment in their dogs to keep them on-lead due to the inconsiderate behaviour of other dog owners.

I've 2 dogs, a JRT who I can trust 100% around anyone, including kids, other dogs. Never on a lead unless walking on the road. My lab, on the other hand, is very nervous-aggressive around other dogs & can be with strangers as well. He is always on-lead unless I am totally sure I am in an appropriate area, there is no-one around & I can guarantee to get him back on lead immediately if need arises.

However, I would agree that as a large & energetic dog he needs off-lead exercise as well for his physical & mental well-being. So I will often be doing 4 or 5 walks a day - short walks for the JRT (he's nearly 14), drive to town to walk lab in busy park on lead to help his socialisation & drive (up to 30 mins) to isolated woodland/mountain area so he can have a good run off-lead.

Would be much easier for me to just let lab off lead in the park & to hell with the consequences but I'm not able to cope with the inevitable stress & grief that would ensue. Unfortunately the irresponsible dog owners have no such qualms :mad: Don't know what the answer is - everyone has a right to feel happy & safe in public places, simply putting dogs on a lead is not going to achieve this. If all I did was put my fella on a lead I would just have a barking , lunging out-of-control dog on the end of a lead - it takes a lot more than just attaching the dog to a length of rope or leather strap to bring it under effective control!

leelee_m

lrushe wrote: »

I have a big enough space to exercise my dogs, its called the local park. Plus I am doing agiltiy with my biggest dog. Off leash exercise is not just about exercising the physical body but also stimuating the mind.

A person's health or well-being is not being harmed by an off leash dog and a responsible owner, that's mere hysteria. I get that there are some irresponsible owners but why should mine and many others pets be punished for that???

With the best will in the world if you're not going to consider me or what makes my dog happy, then why in the world would I even give you a second thought??
You can argue till you are blue in the face that a dogs can be happy and well exercised on a leash but it will never (imo) have a patch on a free run / swim.

If obedience classes were mandatory and became everyday like injections and neutering than people would become accustomed to having to do them as a formality of owning a dog and except the expense. A standard of obedience would obviously have to agreed if a programme such as this were to come about.

The simple answer for YOU would be to keep dogs on a leash but not for others, so were is that consideration for others you like to talk about, I'm not seeing much of it from you. At least I'm trying to see it from others points of view and have tried to come up with a solution, you are just jumping straight to a blanket ban on dogs off leash because it doesn't suit you.

But the fact is that dogs can and do exercise happily on leash. As has been stated before there are some breeds that cannot be let off leash so they have no choice but to be exercised while still attached to the owner.
I'm talking about in public of course as many people who own a dog that cannot be let off will obviously have a fenced in garden where the dog can run.
And I know from experience that a dog can still be happy and exercised while attached to the owner because I own one very happy, very well physically & mentally exercised husky.

But I think dogs exercising off leash isn't exactly a necessity, it's just something people allow their dogs to do. Which is all well and good in areas where they are allowed to do so.

I think in areas where it states that dogs must be kept on lead that it is just common courtesy to abide by that rule.

lrushe

LisaO wrote: »

it takes a lot more than just attaching the dog to a length of rope or leather strap to bring it under effective control!

This is true. Just today I was walking in the park and this black JRT type dog slipped its leash and ran over to my dogs. I hesitate to say it attacked my dogs as there was no physical damage or anything but there was snapping and a bit of skirmish. The owner came over, got his dog and apologised, I smiled and continued my walk. Accidents happen and there was no harm done.
My point is even though this dog was initally on leash it still wasn't under control!!

lrushe

sparkling sea wrote: »

the title of this topic is why is it impossible for some dog owners to walk their dogs on a leash, the implication being that in general, people don't feel comfortable when dogs are off their leash and further their owners seem to show little consideration for this.
The vast majority of dog owners do keep their dogs on leashes and I have yet to hear an arguement that allows for dogs of leashes.

Finally there is nothing hysterical about people who are afraid of dogs: it is estimated that Cynophia affects at least 25% of the population, which means this affects their well being . Thats 1 in every 4 people and as I have previouly pointed out not every one who are unafraid of dogs are comfortable with a dog off a leash.

The title of this topic is someone's opinion, not a fact. I see more off leash dogs than on leash where I walk and in 25 years I could count on one hand the number of bad experiences I've had.

If people do indeed have a fear of dogs (and with the greatest of respect) that is their issue, I have my dogs under control so why should I have to be punished for someone else's fears. The world can't bend to every Tom, Dick and Harry's personal issues or society would have to live in a bubble. Everyone has issues that they just have to grin and bear or get help with.

lrushe

leelee_m wrote: »

But the fact is that dogs can and do exercise happily on leash. As has been stated before there are some breeds that cannot be let off leash so they have no choice but to be exercised while still attached to the owner.
I'm talking about in public of course as many people who own a dog that cannot be let off will obviously have a fenced in garden where the dog can run.
And I know from experience that a dog can still be happy and exercised while attached to the owner because I own one very happy, very well physically & mentally exercised husky.

But I think dogs exercising off leash isn't exactly a necessity, it's just something people allow their dogs to do. Which is all well and good in areas where they are allowed to do so.

I think in areas where it states that dogs must be kept on lead that it is just common courtesy to abide by that rule.

I have already stated why an on leash walking isn't an option for me, I have multiple dogs with different exercise needs. I have been responsible enough to train my dogs and raise them to be good dog citizens, why can't people respect how much hard work that takes instead of only see the bad that the minority of dog owner do.

I don't bring my dogs to places where dogs must be kept on a leash as these areas are of no use for me

sparkling sea

lrushe wrote: »

I have already stated why an on leash walking isn't an option for me, I have multiple dogs with different exercise needs. I have been responsible enough to train my dogs and raise them to be good dog citizens, why can't people respect how much hard work that takes instead of only see the bad that the minority of dog owner do.

I don't bring my dogs to places where dogs must be kept on a leash as these areas are of no use for me

It a personal choice that you make not to walk your dogs on a leash - you always have the option but you have decided it is not the right on for you and your dogs.

Its great that you have taken time to train your dogs, I know it takes alot of time and effort and I think it is equally as important to train a dog as keep it on a leash outside. I not really sure why your trained dogs cannot be kept on a leash in your opinion, lots of people with lots of dogs manage it. It would make people feel more comfortable around dogs and there owners - well thats been my experience.

Discodog

I have avoided this thread because, to me, the answer is so obvious. Your dog must be under control. If you can be confident that your dog won't run up to someone else's dog, which drives me nuts, won't chase a jogger, won't approach someone uninvited then leave it off lead.

I was recently asked to help a friend walking her dog which happened to be in season. It was a total nightmare. We were surrounded by dogs, some with owners & some apparently without. The owners seemed to think it great craic that their dog was trying to shag my friend's dog.

I will always put my two on the lead if I see another dog or person that I do not know. Once I know that the person or dog are ok with company then I let them off. Surely this is a common courtesy. Responsible dog ownership is sometimes about reassuring people who do not like dogs or are afraid of them.

We can hardly complain if draconian dog laws are introduced to control dogs that their owners refuse to control.