WHO’S WALKING WHO? THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PULLING ON LEAD AND PET DOG WELFARE IN THE UK AND IRELAND

Walking may be integral to pet-dog welfare, providing exercise, social exposure, outlets for species-specific behaviours and being positively correlated with owner attachment, despite these probable benefits an estimated 40% of dogs are never walked. One previously unexplored reason for this may be pulling on lead, whereby the dog walks in a manner, or position, or both, that creates pressure on the lead, causing it to become tense and taut. This study aimed to investigate the nature and scope of lead-pulling behaviour amongst pet-dogs and identify potential associated welfare risks. Between February and March 2019, we surveyed pet-dog owners (n=2,886) in the UK and Ireland online, regarding owner and dog demographics, dog-walking practices, training methods and equipment. Univariate analysis evaluated associations between the independent variables and pulling intensity (p < 0.05) — the force with which the dog pulled on lead. Binary logistic regression identified predictors of pulling frequency (p < 0.05) — how often the dog pulled. Of dogs 82.7% (n=2,093) pulled on lead and 30.9% (n=770) with moderate to severe/worst imaginable intensity. Over the 30 day study period, dogs that pulled received shorter walks (mean (± standard deviation): (47.6 minutes (± 22.6)), than dogs that did not (50.2 minutes (± 27.7)). As pulling intensity increased, walk frequency decreased, from (51.4 times, (± 38.2)) for no pulling, to (42 times, (± 22.4)) for severe/worst imaginable pulling. At risk groups were dogs aged 6–23 months (p <0.001), small (5–10 kg) (p <0.001), medium (11–25 kg) (p <0.001) and large (26–40 kg) dogs (p <0.001), and dogs owned by younger (p <0.001), less experienced owners (p = 0.014) or owners of one dog (p = 0.04). Head-collars, front, and back-connection harnesses were associated with increased lead-pulling (p ≤0.046). Training classes including loose-lead walking exercises increased the odds of pulling frequency by 2.5 times (p <0·001). However, a cross-sectional study such as this can only provide correlational results; although certain factors were associated with lead-pulling, we cannot infer causality. This study is, to our knowledge, the first to explore lead-pulling behaviour. The results indicate that it is a widespread, undesirable behaviour with potentially serious welfare implications and that further research on the most effective, welfare-centred lead-walking training methods, equipment and practices is essential. Fostering enjoyable, symbiotic dog-walking experiences could increase enrichment and exercise, whilst reducing stress and aversion for pet-dogs and improving owner attachment, all of which contribute to higher welfare.