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

lrushe

sparkling sea wrote: »

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.

Of course I could keep my dogs on a leash, but why? They are well behaved, friendly, obedient and don't approach strangers or their dogs. Dogs spend enough of their lives cooped up behind walls, is an hour a day free run really too much to ask for???

LisaO

Discodog wrote: »

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.

With all due repect I think it is unfair on other dogs & their owners to walk a dog that is in season & I don't think it is justified to then complain of receiving unwarranted attention from other dogs.

sambuka41

LisaO wrote: »

With all due repect I think it is unfair on other dogs & their owners to walk a dog that is in season & I don't think it is justified to then complain of receiving unwarranted attention from other dogs.

Just because she is in season doesnt mean she shouldn't get a walk, but I would agree the full males are going to harass you. Cant blame them;)

My little one is in heat,we didn't cop at first but when she was receiving so much attention it clicked. I'll just bring her to a park with less dogs for next week or so,for her peace of mind and mine!! I tell you there are a lot more full males out there than i would have thought. Nearly every second dog was after her!! Following us around,i found the owners to be very apologetic, i didnt mind tho,its natural. (and i was there to stop any unwanted business;))

sparkling sea

lrushe wrote: »

Of course I could keep my dogs on a leash, but why? They are well behaved, friendly, obedient and don't approach strangers or their dogs. Dogs spend enough of their lives cooped up behind walls, is an hour a day free run really too much to ask for???

Yes - play a game of fetch with them in your back garden and leave people walk the streets in peace.

lrushe

sparkling sea wrote: »

Yes - play a game of fetch with them in your back garden and leave people walk the streets in peace.

What an over dramatic remark, as if I walk my dogs off leash on the streets:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
Playing fetch in a back garden with a dog (as it's only means of free exercise), in the same back garden it sees everyday of it's life is about as stimulating as watching paint dry. Dogs are already not allowed on most public transport, in most public places, on certain beaches / parks at certain time, grow up, you can't have it all your own way, that's not how life works.

Graces7

sparkling sea wrote: »

Yes - play a game of fetch with them in your back garden and leave people walk the streets in peace.

The only sensible post in the last week.... Thank you.

Graces7

lrushe wrote: »

What an over dramatic remark, as if I walk my dogs off leash on the streets:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
Playing fetch in a back garden with a dog (as it's only means of free exercise), in the same back garden it sees everyday of it's life is about as stimulating as watching paint dry. Dogs are already not allowed on most public transport, in most public places, on certain beaches / parks at certain time, grow up, you can't have it all your own way, that's not how life works.

Glad to hear of these sensible limitations. Your use of the phrase "grow up' is so repetitive it has no meaning.

andreac

Graces7 wrote: »

The only sensible post in the last week.... Thank you.

How is this sensible?
Do you expect every dog owner to keep their dogs locked up in the back garden because you dont want them walking the streets? You serious? Theres nothing nicer than seeing happy dogs being walked around by their owners and playing ball etc in the park and so on.

I really do wonder about you, if you think its ok to keep your dog locked up 24/7 in the garden getting no proper exercise and seeing the outisde world.

lrushe

Graces7 wrote: »

Your use of the phrase "grow up' is so repetitive it has no meaning.

Do point out where I repeated it???? Prehaps you are mistaking me for one other poster that used it in one other post, hardly that repetitive now is it.
Or prehaps it needs to be said twice to reiterate the point that dog owners have given up or had taken away so much freedom that it is selfish and self centred for people to expect more and more all the time, never once giving anything back or trying to see it from anyone elses point of view.

Whispered

This thread has made me sad, I've lost a lot of respect for a poster I used to think as a voice of caring and respect in the forum.

It is unfair to expect dog owners to keep their pets onleash 24/7 even in places where facilities and places exist for them.

Unless you own a dog who cannot be allowed offlead, due to agression, bad recall etc you should try to find somwhere to allow them off where they will not be causing a problem. If your dogs only off lead time is in it's back garden and you don't make an effort to enrich its life with some offlead exploration, in a safe environment. Then you should be ashamed. Chasing a ball around the garden may be good physical exercise, but we all know that physical exercise is not enough. Nor is human interaction, they need to be able to interact with their environment and learn new things.

If you cannot see that that exploration, swimming, digging, rolling in nasty things, chasing birds and insects and peeing on trees is very important for most dogs then frankly your opinion means very little to most dog owners.

Every dog owning poster on this thread has said how they don't allow their dog to annoy people, they have offlead time in areas it's allowed, or in out of the way areas where you don't meet walkers, their dogs have good recall and are put back on the lead if they meet people. That is still not good enough. The only option left is for people to shrug, say suit yourself, have a little petty moan, bitch and complain, I really don't care. If my well behaved dog, walking by my side is such an incovenience for you then thats your problem.

boomerang

Graces7 wrote: »

The only sensible post in the last week.... Thank you.

I'm sorry, but how is that sensible? Dogs NEED to see the outside world - they are hunters/foragers/ambulatory by nature. They love novelty. Besides, how on earth are you supposed to bring up a well-socialised, well-adjusted dog if it doesn't see the outside world? We all know under-socialised dogs that are nervous wrecks and prone to bite because their owners never take them beyond the front gate or the end of the estate.

Graces7

andreac wrote: »

How is this sensible?
Do you expect every dog owner to keep their dogs locked up in the back garden because you dont want them walking the streets? You serious? Theres nothing nicer than seeing happy dogs being walked around by their owners and playing ball etc in the park and so on.

I really do wonder about you, if you think its ok to keep your dog locked up 24/7 in the garden getting no proper exercise and seeing the outisde world.

Interesting and very revealing response.

Who here is saying that dogs should be kept in a garden? And "locked up"? So emotive and dramatised.

This is about walking on leads; had you forgotten? Not about no exercise etc

There is also a great deal of anthropomorphism in your replies.

What a dog needs most is its owner and close interaction play with that owner.

A hectic game of ball exercises a dog wonderfully; and what stronger way to build on the trust and affection?

As many with limited mobility and limited space know.

As for "nothing nicer"" depends on what you enjoy.

I honestly do not believe that there is any dog that is to be fully and totally trusted offlead; period. And this is what this is really about. Any dog can be spooked at some stage.

The OP asked a question and a good one; it is not impossible; simply many do not choose to do so regardless of the impact on others.

Graces7

boomerang wrote: »

I'm sorry, but how is that sensible? Dogs NEED to see the outside world - they are hunters/foragers/ambulatory by nature. They love novelty. Besides, how on earth are you supposed to bring up a well-socialised, well-adjusted dog if it doesn't see the outside world? We all know under-socialised dogs that are nervous wrecks and prone to bite because their owners never take them beyond the front gate or the end of the estate.

Interesting angle; but again, you are dramatising and misinterpreting...No one is advocating that a dog is kept confined. where do you get that idea from please? ON A LEAD is the issue here.

Hunters? foragers? Interesting idea there also in today's pet world. Ambulatory on a lead!

Well socialised yes of course! No one here is arguing with that. Why do you say that?

Graces7

lrushe wrote: »

Do point out where I repeated it???? Prehaps you are mistaking me for one other poster that used it in one other post, hardly that repetitive now is it.
Or prehaps it needs to be said twice to reiterate the point that dog owners have given up or had taken away so much freedom that it is selfish and self centred for people to expect more and more all the time, never once giving anything back or trying to see it from anyone elses point of view.

Emotional and inconvincing. "the phrase "grow up" accuses of immaturity; because someone disagrees with your opinion?

Al that is being asked is that a dog is kept fully under control in public. That is all.

Many here understand you but simply from experience and from a very caring angle, disagree and see a need for dogs in public to be fully and totally under control at all times.

That is all.

Nothing as emotive as you are making of it.

Graces7

Whispered wrote: »

This thread has made me sad, I've lost a lot of respect for a poster I used to think as a voice of caring and respect in the forum.

It is unfair to expect dog owners to keep their pets onleash 24/7 even in places where facilities and places exist for them.

Unless you own a dog who cannot be allowed offlead, due to agression, bad recall etc you should try to find somwhere to allow them off where they will not be causing a problem. If your dogs only off lead time is in it's back garden and you don't make an effort to enrich its life with some offlead exploration, in a safe environment. Then you should be ashamed. Chasing a ball around the garden may be good physical exercise, but we all know that physical exercise is not enough. Nor is human interaction, they need to be able to interact with their environment and learn new things.

If you cannot see that that exploration, swimming, digging, rolling in nasty things, chasing birds and insects and peeing on trees is very important for most dogs then frankly your opinion means very little to most dog owners.

Every dog owning poster on this thread has said how they don't allow their dog to annoy people, they have offlead time in areas it's allowed, or in out of the way areas where you don't meet walkers, their dogs have good recall and are put back on the lead if they meet people. That is still not good enough. The only option left is for people to shrug, say suit yourself, have a little petty moan, bitch and complain, I really don't care. If my well behaved dog, walking by my side is such an incovenience for you then thats your problem.

Again, a most interesting and revealing response.

So because someone you respected here does not agree with every idea of yours you devalue them?

And in this case, there is huge compassion and caring. From a slightly different viewpoint is all.

We are not clones.

And again, there is little most here disagree with in your post; there is again this misintepretation and dramatisation.

This is not about not exercising a dog; and if your dog is walking alongside you? Why not on a lead then?

OF COURSE all these things are good for dogs; but not in a public place is all we are saying.

As for interaction with the environment etc? A dog does that in a house even. They are domesticated.

DBCyc

Graces7 wrote: »

Again, a most interesting and revealing response.

So because someone you respected here does not agree with every idea of yours you devalue them?

And in this case, there is huge compassion and caring. From a slightly different viewpoint is all.

We are not clones.

And again, there is little most here disagree with in your post; there is again this misintepretation and dramatisation.

This is not about not exercising a dog; and if your dog is walking alongside you? Why not on a lead then?

OF COURSE all these things are good for dogs; but not in a public place is all we are saying.

As for interaction with the environment etc? A dog does that in a house even. They are domesticated.

Okay this thread is going around in circles. I will explain a typical scenario to you:

An owner has a breed of dog with high energy requirements, the breed is irrelevant it could be a springer, a labrador, a jack russell, a siberian husky, whatever. Their dog is kept in their house and has a relatively small back garden. The owners are responsible and commit to adequately exercising their dog on a daily basis.

Now, because of the dog's high energy levels, a fairly intensive form of exercise is required. A run around the back garden is not sufficient for any dog in terms of their physical or mental stimulation, as any decent dog owner would be aware of, so lets not even consider that.

A standard walk on the lead is better but still not sufficient to meet the dog's energy requirements. The owner has trained their dog to be obedient and trustworthy and has a reliable recall. They go to their local park every evening and play a game of fetch and have a run around. The dog is well behaved and does not approach other dogs or children. Regardless of this, out of respect, the owner puts his dog on the lead whenever another dog approaches on their lead or whenever there is children around.

Now do you see anything wrong with the scenario above? In your opinion should the responsible owners still be forced by legislation to keep their dog on a lead at all times? Think about the potential consequences of having a dog that is not exercised properly such as frustration, destructive behaviour and other psychological problems that could potentially result in an attack.

Everyone here is aware of the problems relating to off lead dogs that are not under control and dogs that are left to roam. These dogs all have irresponsible owners. Explain to me why the responsible owners should be punished because of the actions of a minority. Let me clarify that this is a minority of owners we are dealing and the frequency of these incidents are relatively low, despite the sensationalist claims by some that this is an everyday occurrence.

Whispered

No Graces, because a poster does not respect the true nature of an animal they claim to love I devalue them.

Whatever way you put it, in my opinion, someone who only exercises their animal in their garden and who values their home environment as the ONLY place a dog needs to explore is a BAD owner. It leads to nervous, under socialised dogs. The joy to see them play together, or discover something new (there is not a whole lot of discovering to be done in your own garden/home is there) is something you will not make me, or most good owners, feel bad about facilitating. Some of us care enough to disregard hysteria and do what is best for our animals.

You are also purposely misinterpeting my post re the dog walking by my side. So I will say it again Graces and see if you understand what I, and almost every other poster here means. My dog, is offlead, in a park or public area where this is allowed, if I see someone coming, I will call the dog back to me, the dog will walk by my side until I tell him to run along again, If I cannot trust said dog to STAY by my side, his lead will be clipped on. To expect more from owners is unreasonable.

A defination of a public place is, well public. So long as a dog is not causing a problem, you have absolutely no right to judge or try to dictate how people use the public space.

lrushe

Graces7 wrote: »

Emotional and inconvincing. "the phrase "grow up" accuses of immaturity; because someone disagrees with your opinion?

You misunderstand, I used the phrase 'grow up' not because the poster didn't agree with me but because they couldn't see a compromise and yes I think that does show a level of immaturity so I stand by the comment.

iguana

DBCyc wrote: »

Now do you see anything wrong with the scenario above? In your opinion should the responsible owners still be forced by legislation to keep their dog on a lead at all times? Think about the potential consequences of having a dog that is not exercised properly such as frustration, destructive behaviour and other psychological problems that could potentially result in an attack.

Even worse than that. I had to take Toby to the vet yesterday because of problems he's having with his existing front leg. After I outlined Toby's background I was told that the vet has very little doubt that it was a lack of exercise in his puppyhood which caused/exacerbated the weakness in his front legs which led to his crushed elbow and amputation.

It's also imperative that he has free swimming several times a week and he must never, ever, ever play fetch on land as the sprint/stop nature of the game is too rough for his leg. I also can't play fetch with Dougal as it's impossible to play with one dog and exclude the other. And he should almost never be walked on lead if I can help it as it's not conducive to his three-legged lope. It's also advised to keep him off-lead so I never unwittingly force him to go too far and so I can easily gauge the state of his leg. He does however need extensive (compared to people - less energetic breeds) exercise in order to keep his weight low and his front leg strong.

If I had to keep Toby on a lead I'd have little choice but to put him to sleep. And there is no way I'd end the life of a dog, who despite his injury is the happiest, most cheerful, sweetest dog in the world, just because some people are so selfish about who can and can't walk about out of bondage.

Whispered

DBCyc wrote: »

Everyone here is aware of the problems relating to off lead dogs that are not under control and dogs that are left to roam.

This is a very good point actually. The most testing thing for an offlead dog (well mine anyway), is another offlead dog showing too much interest/ trying to initiate a game etc etc. This is usually when I have to leash my boy again because he gets excited and wants to run and play. (ah bless him )

ISDW

DBCyc wrote: »

Okay this thread is going around in circles. I will explain a typical scenario to you:

An owner has a breed of dog with high energy requirements, the breed is irrelevant it could be a springer, a labrador, a jack russell, a siberian husky, whatever. Their dog is kept in their house and has a relatively small back garden. The owners are responsible and commit to adequately exercising their dog on a daily basis.

Now, because of the dog's high energy levels, a fairly intensive form of exercise is required. A run around the back garden is not sufficient for any dog in terms of their physical or mental stimulation, as any decent dog owner would be aware of, so lets not even consider that.

A standard walk on the lead is better but still not sufficient to meet the dog's energy requirements. The owner has trained their dog to be obedient and trustworthy and has a reliable recall. They go to their local park every evening and play a game of fetch and have a run around. The dog is well behaved and does not approach other dogs or children. Regardless of this, out of respect, the owner puts his dog on the lead whenever another dog approaches on their lead or whenever there is children around.

Now do you see anything wrong with the scenario above? In your opinion should the responsible owners still be forced by legislation to keep their dog on a lead at all times? Think about the potential consequences of having a dog that is not exercised properly such as frustration, destructive behaviour and other psychological problems that could potentially result in an attack.

Everyone here is aware of the problems relating to off lead dogs that are not under control and dogs that are left to roam. These dogs all have irresponsible owners. Explain to me why the responsible owners should be punished because of the actions of a minority. Let me clarify that this is a minority of owners we are dealing and the frequency of these incidents are relatively low, despite the sensationalist claims by some that this is an everyday occurrence.

Sorry to be pedantic, but a siberian husky should never be let off the lead in an unenclosed space due to their high prey drive.

Jinxi

Graces, you mention you have a collie. I also have one and I was wondering how you manage to keep them optimumly excercised without having them off leash, especially as they are one of the most high energy breeds and have usually an aversion to water? Also running them alongside a bike usually ends in disaster as they can try and herd you/moving vehicles.
In my experience collies who are excercised inadequately usually have behavioural problems like digging/obsession with balls/circling/herding etc.

ferguson

Graces7 wrote: »

Is there not a law about this in Ireland?

.

can be off leash if under effectual control of owner. if attacking someone else they are not under effectual control of owner. some breeds are never allowed off as far as i know and must be muzzled

Whispered

Jinxi, I asked the same question earlier about how she manages to exercise her dogs sufficiently and she told me that I was posting off topic and refused to answer.

DBCyc

ISDW wrote: »

Sorry to be pedantic, but a siberian husky should never be let off the lead in an unenclosed space due to their high prey drive.

Of course not, I was just naming a few breed of dogs that may require a high level of excercise. Bad example

Shane Fitz

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.

any chance you might know which breed of dog it was that bit that child.. i'd give good money it wasn't a RB!

Shane Fitz

Shenshen wrote: »

See, the thing I don't get about this legislation is the following : People who can control their dog are allowed to let if run off the leash. Fine by me, I've got not the least bit of problem with that.

My problem comes in with the second bit : People who can't control their dog aren't allowed to let it off leash.
What happens if they do? Apart from people and other pets getting attacked, I mean? What legal consequences are there?
And : who decides who has their dog under control and who doesn't? Does this get decided retrospectively, once the dog proved to be dangerous? And what then? How do I, as unsuspecting public, know about this? How do you know if a dog that's running up to you is actually too dangerous to be let off the leash, but was let off anyway? And what do I do about it? How do I protect myself, children, other dogs?

.
Now you've hit the nail on the head, and why many of the posters here have issue with the RB legislation.

Shenshen

Shane Fitz wrote: »

.
Now you've hit the nail on the head, and why many of the posters here have issue with the RB legislation.

I honestly couldn't care less about the breed.
The one that attacked me years back was some German Shepard mixed with I don't know what, and I don't know the breed of the dog that bit the kid I was talking about earlier.

I'm talking about any kind of dog running around in areas where kids are playing without a leach on him.

sparkling sea

Labradors, GSD's and other high energy dogs work as Guide Dogs and are constantly on a lash. Most of these dogs maintain an excellent standard of health without being left to run free in public places. They also develop brillant emotional intelligence.

In an ideal world their would be dog only areas in parks, on beaches etc, but we haven't progressed enough a society to allow for such things, and until we do dogs should be kept on leads - human rights will always supercede an animals right in a civilized society. A person should be able to go for a walk with being worried about being accosted by another persons dog.
People feel afraid for good reason, some people who post here seem to breeze over this point and don't address in a realistic way?

I cant find figures for Ireland but I took this from irishdogs.ie
Police figures show attacks by dogs to be a growing problem, and in March last year the Department for Environment, launched a consultation on the issue.

In 2008/09, 5,221 people had to be admitted to hospital as a result of such attacks, an increase of almost 100 per cent since 2002/03. Almost a third were children or teenagers.

It is believed thousands more people are attacked and either do not go to A&E or go there and are treated without being admitted.

iguana

sparkling sea wrote: »

Labradors, GSD's and other high energy dogs work as Guide Dogs and are constantly on a lash. Most of these dogs maintain an excellent standard of health without being left to run free in public places.

Do you know many guide dogs. I know four and they are all given daily off leash time. Guide dogs generally aren't "on" 24 hours a day, they have time off too and they usually really let loose when they can.