To think if you don’t like dogs, don’t walk this route?

[YippeeKayakOtherBuckets]

I’ve just been told off, aggressively, for having my dogs off lead.

We walk to school down a woodland path that is used by literally dozens of dog walkers, I counted fifteen other dog owners just on this walk, the vast majority off lead. There is nowhere on the length of the path that can’t be easily reached by a faster route, the path runs a winding way alongside a quiet road with a wide path.

Anyway, dogs, joggers and the odd cyclist all usually use the route along with pedestrians and it’s generally accepted that you’ll meet several dogs on the way. This woman, who I’ve not seen before, got right in my face and said ‘put your dogs on a lead, I don’t like dogs’.

I’m terrible at confrontation so just apologised and moved on.

But it’s really rattled me. Am I being unreasonable? One of mine is a bouncy 4month old lab, he’s well trained and doesn’t approach people or dogs unless I let him, but he is, as I say, bouncy and large so that might be why she picked on me and not the other dozen people she must have passed.

If I see her again (and have the nerve) wibu to suggest that she walks the other way round?

Ywbu not to post pics with your op . However as the dogs weren't bothering with her and were under control yanbu

"weaponised" dogs - trained to attack - are NOT legal, except for the police and services.

Human being are not the only animal on this planet, (despite what Ruffina seems to think - we ARE an animal). However we seem to be the only one that thinks our own personal likes and dislikes should be catered to at all times.

If any other species bred in the numbers we do, destroyed the environment the way we do, or was as generally aggressive and downright cruel as we are, we would be culling them in their millions. (Though the way we are treating the earth, it looks like we will soon be culling ourselves in our billions).

EVERY living creature has the right to be respected as a species. If you choose to keep one as a pet, you have the responsibility to let it have as full and enjoyable a life as possible - and this (for dogs) includes free running with members of its own kind.

And I would also point out that working types of any breed, such as OP's stunning lab puppy, need MUCH MORE EXERCISE than non-working types - and this couldn't be achieved on lead if you walked them 10 hours a day.

On the other hand, they are also incredibly easy to train - they are bred for biddability and temperament (if that is a word - you know what I mean) and will learn VERY quickly - they are clever and eager to please.

If you want to know why someone would choose a working type that needs exercise instead of the comparatively slothful non-working type of the same breed - the answer is health.

People breeding working dogs don't particularly care what they look like as long as they can do the job, are sweet-tempered, intelligent and are from healthy stock. Beauty is a bonus.

If all dogs were bred with this in mind we'd have fewer unreliable animals anyway.

(And in regard to labs and spaniels - the working type tend to be much leaner and not prone to obesity, because there isn't a breed standard saying they have to be "chunky" or whatever. The dogs are, to my eye anyway, much more elegant.)

But yabu to expect other people not to use the path just to suit you and you should always be ready to bring dogs right back next to you. However Bouncy or well trained you can’t expect everyone to love your dog?

Unless it's a specific dog path, then YABVU. Why does it have to be off its leash anyway? How can you control it? It's a footpath, which means your dog should be under your control!

btw, you may think your dog is under control, but the rest of the populace don't know that. All they see is a free running dog.

Suggesting that non-dog-lovers take a detour is CF behaviour quite frankly.

This is like saying all dogs should wear muzzles because poorly trained ones can bite.

Seems reasonable

Well in that case all children should be subject to wearing electronic tags and given curfews because some children are vandals.

Ah, the good old 'dog=child' point of view.

A dog is not a human being. These equivalencies between dogs and people that some dog owners come out with are plain weird.

Dogs should always be on the lead. Get an extendable one if you want to let them roam a bit.

I don't like dogs but if they're running around and not coming up to me/ jumping me/ putting their nose in my crotch then I'm fine with them existing. If they didn't engage with her then I don't see the problem 🤷‍♀️

Dogs should always be on the lead. Get an extendable one if you want to let them roam a bit.

Given how dangerous extendable leads can be both for dogs and people, no thanks. I'll stick to good training and a combination of on and off lead walks.

btw, you may think your dog is under control, but the rest of the populace don't know that. All they see is a free running dog.

If you see a free running dog that is nowhere near you and not showing signs of coming towards you (as in the Op) and you are still scared then you genuinely should look into addressing your fears. I fully accept the fear may come from previous bad experiences and I understand it must be a horrible feeling, but a well trained off lead dog is still a hell of a lot less dangerous than a poorly trained dog on a lead that may be stronger or more determined than the person holding the other end, particularly in close quarters on a path. Dogs are a part of life and you can't expect every dog to be stuck on a lead or not taken out in public because you can't handle seeing one sniffing some bushes in the distance.

Being afraid of a dog coming towards you that won't be recalled is an entirely different and totally understandable scenario and those dogs should absolutely not be off lead.

Dog doesn't have to be on lead - it has to be under control. If your dogs were under control then she was BU. If your dog was not under control then YABU.

Ah, the good old 'dog=child' point of view

A dog is not a human being. These equivalencies between dogs and people that some dog owners come out with are plain weird.

I've noticed this before, but some people on mumsnet really don't seem to understand analogies. PP wasn't equating dogs and children, just the principle of taking a global measure in response to a small risk. It was an attempt to demonstrate how little sense it makes.

No, NRPDad. Dogs do not always have to be on the lead. They have to be under control. They should be on leads on roads etc. but not necessarily in fields and parks unless there is a local by-law stating that they should, in which case there will be signs up.

Check that with your local Animal Warden if you wish.

i think the long and the short of it is that everyone - dog lovers and dog-averse people - all wish that all dogs were well behanved and trained and never caused a problem. That way dog lovers wouldn't have to put up with the criticism and dog avoiders could, well, avoid them.

Sadly the small %age of badly behaved and trained dogs spoil it for everyone, including other dogs.

It's a bit like the "not all men are violent / dangerous" argument isn't it? Obviously not all men are dangerous but ^enough of them are* to make me wary of them in certain situations. Not all dogs are bouncy / jumpy / bitey but enough of the are to make me wary of them all.

And that's a shame for everyone

It's a bit like the "not all men are violent / dangerous" argument isn't it? Obviously not all men are dangerous but ^enough of them are to make me wary of them in certain situations. Not all dogs are bouncy / jumpy / bitey but enough of the are to make me wary of them all*

Perhaps, but nobody would ever suggest that men should not walk alone on footpaths just because some men on footpaths are sexual predators. And nobody would ever defend a woman telling a man off for daring to walk on that footpath alone if he was doing nothing wrong at the time.

I think you're being a bit unreasonable. If places where dogs are walked were out of bounds, the rest of us would never get past our front gates.

I do think dog owners should control their pets and make sure they don't approach anyone. As a previous poster has said, some dogs can be me the size of small kids; dogs of any size can be intimidating to people who are scared, too. I'm terrified of dogs and have had to shout for people to control their pets a few times. It can be very distressing.

Get an extendable one if you want to let them roam a bit

No please don't. They are dangerous. People can trip over them.

Someone near me has huskies and he is ultra-fit and runs with them for miles every day. So that's another option, get as fit as your dog(s) so you can keep up :)

nordlac

No, decent try but that’s nonsense.

Since you’re so well up on analogies you’ll know a false analogy when you see one. Like drawing an analogy between restraining dogs and restraining children. Inadequate similarity is what makes the falsity.

And you’ll understand the relevance of choosing children, rather than any other of the limitless possibilities, to make the analogy.

It’s plainly an equivalence of the thing to be restrained, not the risk.

I think MNers generally understand analogy rather better than you do.

Dogs should always be on the lead. Get an extendable one if you want to let them roam a bit

Absolutely not! Extended leads are dangerous! Teach your dog a solid recall and there is no need for leads- extendable or not. All dogs need to be kept under control. That doesn't mean they have to be leashed. Extendable leads are the absolute least way in which a dog can be under control!

What a ludicrous, clueless post!

YABU!
If you want to walk your dog off lead, find somewhere private otherwise, use a lead.
I can't stand dogs bouncing around off lead in public places and if they get too close and jump up at me, I'll happily kick out at them. I keep my dog on a lead unless he's running around our garden or at the small local beach when there's no-one else around. If someone turns up, I'll put the lead back on him.

Ruffina I think it's pretty clear the PP was equating restraining well-behaved dogs just because some dogs are not well behaved to treating all well-behaved children a certain way just because of a few badly behaved children. Dunno why you're overcomplicating it so much.

Some dogs are scarey but a 4 month old lab? They're just adorable. You'd have serious issues to be afraid of that!

I was shouted at under similar circumstances, I have a small friendly dog and was walking in woods by my home. All of my neighbours walk their dogs there and people regularly drive to these woods to walk their dogs so it’s obviously well known as a dog walking spot.

I was alone and saw two men quite a way from me walking towards me, one started shouting but was so far from me I couldn’t hear what he was saying. My dog was trotting next to me, as I got closer he shouted at me and said the other man was scared of dogs. I put my dog on a lead and as we got level the man that was scared was screaming! I think he SEN his carer was saying get the dog away! My dog was calm on his lead and we were walking quietly past.

I did say to him there was absolutely no need to shout at me and maybe a polite thank you would have been nice?

Why would you take someone that is THAT scared of dogs to an area known for dog walking and then get angry with everyone else? There are lots of footpaths and entrances to the woods where he definitely would not have met anyone else.

I've noticed this before, but some people on mumsnet really don't seem to understand analogies. PP wasn't equating dogs and children, just the principle of taking a global measure in response to a small risk. It was an attempt to demonstrate how little sense it makes.

Thank you Nordiac

I suppose I could have left children out of it, and suggested jailing all adult men because some are rapists . . .

Some dogs are scarey but a 4 month old lab? They're just adorable. You'd have serious issues to be afraid of that

Knowledable dog owners would agree with you. Dog haters wouldn't see a 4 month old pup, behaving as normal pups do, as a friendly puppy. They would just see a nearly full grown dog. Their fear reaction wouldn't register that the dog/pup poses no threat.

Sad... All puppies need true life experiences to learn how to grow into being sociable dogs. People who bay for all dogs to be leashed and muzzled may learn a great deal if they could overcome their predjuces and begin to learn about dog behaviour and how easily dogs can be trained to ignore others.

I love the dog haters. They pose no threat to me, except for their ridiculous ideology that a dog bit once, a blue moon ago, therefore all dogs are vicious 😂

My pet peeve is people who insist on calling my dog to them, when I am trying to train her to ignore passers by. They boil my piss!

Extendable leads give the illusion of control. They are often used by people who can't be arsed to teach their dogs good behaviour.

Of course she is entitled to use the path but considering the amount of dog walking going on in that area, if she really doesn’t like dogs, she shouldn’t walk that way. She is BU