But the dog will NEVER have any say in it , it will always be what suits the owner, not the dog!

And to be honest, I can't see that I would do it either where the dog was left on its own on a long term basis. But just because we wouldn't do it with our dogs doesn't mean that it is cruel.

There are very many dogs that lead happy, fulfilled lives yet spend a good proportion of their time tethered. Look at all the sled dogs as an example.

Excellent post.

As for dogs having a say in things, well I am afraid I do not ask the opinion of my dogs on most things.

I used to tether my dogs at agility shows (many moons ago()---until one got tangled. I'd have said up till then that it wasn't a problem. Since then I have heard of a lot of dogs who have hurt themselves when tethered.

As with many other things which can be dangerous to dogs our views on it often depend on personal experience. The more personal experience we have the more things we try and avoid.

Tethering, tennis ball, collars on while playing, playing with sticks---its a long list.

rune

I have never said it is cruel, but unacceptable and dangerous in my opinion.

Sled dogs would be an exception I guess, as with the nature of their job (on the move every day from A to B) you can hardly carry kennels and runs with you.

But I wonder how many accidents happen there.

There are accidents when they are on the line, but then I guess if you look at the overall risks, then for example they may not be a priority as the same situation replicated in the UK.

After all we rarely have polar bears, wolves, thin ice etc etc

The main reason we stopped camping was because the dogs had to be tethered even in the tent, it felt cruel to us and we felt awful doing it.

Yes, I've heard of injuries and even a death through tethering, though I have no idea how the figures for these incidents compare with the number of dogs who are tethered. But from the people I know who do tether, the percentage has been very small.

But I've also known of accidents and even a death (well had to be pts) through agility. I'm sure many working dog owners would consider the risks of injury/death doing something 'for fun' as being unacceptable.


I guess you could say even a small risk is unacceptable, particularly where it could be avoided. But as you remove one risk, you have the potential for another. For example, someone asked why the dog couldn't be trained rather than having to be tethered. I should imagine the risks of relying on the dog to keep out of harms way on the farm would be greater than the risks of being tethered (though the risks of kennelling I should imagine, would be lower).


(and JB, sorry the comment about it not being cruel wasn't meant specifically for you, but to address the posts by others who do think that)

I suppose ultimately it depends upon your definition of happy and cruel.
It also depends on how you view your relationship with a dog.

For me? Chaining is not an option. I wouldn't do it. It stops a dogs natural behaviour and allows it no chance to escape from potential danger. It also holds it around the neck and the potential for it being hurt is immense.
Kennelling is another thing entirely and the two things shouldn't be compared.
As for pet dogs? Again the problems encountered by pets shouldn't be compared.

Saying chaining is okay because some dogs are left home alone is meaningless. The comparison is irrelevant.

Which is one reason I don't do agility any more --at least not competitively. It is for me too much stress on the dogs joints. Too many have suffered so much in old age and I am not prepared for it to happen any more.

rune