UKC

I only know here what I’ve read online. Apparently a Mr Paul Finnegan from Shotts abandoned his 12 year old collie on Beinn Sgulaird when the collie collapsed. The quote from Finnegans family was “he was forced to put his own survival first and leave the dog behind.” The dog did not survive.

So a couple of questions:

1) Would you totally abandon your best mate if he collapsed or went lame.

2) Would it make any difference if your mate happened to be a dog.

Unless you are actually faced with such a situation I don't think anyone can say what they would do. It's all very well making judgements from the comfort of your home, but none of us REALLY know.

Without judging Mr Finnegan in any way I know what I would have done. An example......three of us had just finished a climb on the Ben from the CIC hut. At the halfway Lochan we found an elderly lady who professed to being lost. Her son had gone ahead to the summit because she was slow. She then introduced us to a foreign girl who spoke no English but was also apparently abandoned by her partner who had gone ahead. Naturally we bogged off back to the CIC.........not......one of us went down with the ladies to the car park and the other two went back to the CIC to collect all our gear. The partners appeared some time later. You do what you can to those in need but no judgement to others.

I've faced both scenarios;

Friend hit by boulder on a moraine and injured. Travelling light despite bad windy Patagonia weather and pre mobile phones and no radio, had to carry/drag him back to our base camp, approx 6k. Took hours of toil. Wrecked and slept for days after.

Second, in the days when we had bad winters, my dog collapsed on Bleaklow, weighed down by ice and suffering exposure. I carried it on my shoulders on top of my sack, holding its legs. Before we got back down it came round and by the time we reached Glossop it was back on its feet

youtube.com/watch?v=GiX2PbrBXCQ&

Even less, it seems,  than you could find by 2 minutes searching.

1. he attempted to carry the dog down and only stopped when he could not continue and 2. he later went back and spent days looking for the dog. http://metro.co.uk/2018/01/19/man-left-dog-scottish-mountain-7243369/

He was dog tired.  

Would you call mountain rescue for the dog when you can no longer manage it yourself?

I'd leave me mate, I wouldn't leave my dog.

Without knowing all the facts it is hard to comment however I am pretty sure if it was the other way round the dog wouldn't leave him... What I do know is I would never leave my dog there no matter what... and if I did the wife would probably kill me anyway when I got down.

i would have to be on the very cusps of death before i could abandon my dog. im not talking tired, injured, hungry, cold and frostbitten. im talking borderline dead. you never give up on your mate, for he would never give up on you.

I love my dog but I wouldn't choose to die with him if I had other options and he didn't. I'd be heartbroken but and hate myself for getting him into the mess but the survival instinct is strong. Best not to judge others for the hard decisions they sometimes have to make.

jk

My team will usually respond to dog rescues, but normally when dogs have gone over crags rather than left behind by exhausted owners. It's good training experience, plus if we don't rescue the dogs, a member of the public or the owner might try to and get into difficulty themselves, so it's also a preventative measure.

This may sound harsh to our nation of dog lovers, and I count myself among that number, but I would very much rather go and pick up the body of a dead dog than the body of a dead human. If he had to make the awful decision to leave his dog because staying with her would have put him in serious jeopardy and risk his life in the conditions, should we be judging him?

(this is just a response to Lion Bakes' question about mountain rescue and canine callouts; the other comment is just mine and not a reply to Lion)

"What I do know is I would never leave my dog there no matter what... and if I did the wife would probably kill me anyway when I got down."

I think I can leave.

All of our answers are avoiding the elephant in the room. The question is:-

"When making a difficult choice like this do you consider human life to be of greater value than that of an animal?"

The first rule of first aid and any incident management is look after yourself first. Whether it's dog or human, you are no use to them if you get yourself into the same predicament. 

I would really struggle to leave a friend, my husband or my dog, but the correct thing to do in that situation if you are deteriorating is to leave and call for help. I am not sure how I would bring myself to do it, but it is the correct response. My dog is not huge, but I doubt I could carry him for long. I would almost certainly struggle to carry a friend and wouldn't have a chance to carry my husband!! 

I've seen this line used as an argument many times online but it really is a stupid thing to say.No the dog wouldn't leave you. Because it's a dog. If the dog could think in any other way than like a dog it might consider leaving you whilst it goes down to get help. But it can't work out that rather than both of you dying it might be able to save one or both of you. Cos it's a dog!

What a truly horrific decision to have to make and try to explain to your family. I hope I never get into that situation, and the guy should feel absolutely no shame or guilt for having to make such a terrible choice.

You could of course wrap your dog in your spare clothing. Put them in your bivvy bag. Mark the coordinates. Then go seek help / assistance.

I wouldn't, but I can understand why some one else might. Depends on whether the Mr. Finnegan in question was capable of rescuing the dog in the circumstances, and also whether he wanted to. 12 is quite old for a Collie, it may not have been a pet and it's not unheard of for owners to euthanise working dogs when they can't work any more. Not saying whether that's right or not, just saying it could be a factor.

Very true. At the weekend I was driving on some iced up road at night and saw a car off the road on it's side with the lights still on! It crossed my mind to stop immediately and check for injured people, but I was on a busy main road on a series of blind bends with nowhere to pull in. I remembered the 'first rule' from my first aid course, stopped a minute further down the road, called 999 and found out that the driver was fine and already arranged recovery of the car.

In all honesty I am pretty sure she loves the dog more than me.. However as said before I don't know all the facts , I did have a little look online however seems to be focussing around the abuse the guy is getting. Is 12 years old for that type of dog old? if so should he have been taking him up there in the first place?  was he aware of weather conditions before he left home.

I was just stating that our dog is like a child to us, dog or not he is loved as if he was our son and I know for a fact I would be very close to death before I left him.

But it easy to say this from where I am and I am sure when faced with this for real its a whole lot harder to make those choices.

I can only imagine how hard it must of been for the guy.. heartbreaking. 

I'd try and carry our dog out even if it meant dumping the contents of my rucksac and putting him in there (head poking out).  

Assuming the accounts and other info i have on this case are half accurate, i would not head out in bad weather in winter with no torch, emergency shelter or ability to navigate. And there were two men out with the dog.

Dogs aren't aware of their own mortality so thats a bit of a false equivalency, they also cant understand how dire a situation is at the same complexity as a person.

So is the dog dead or missing? 

Unfortunately dead.

Yes Always. Every year you hear of people venturing onto frozen lakes to save a dog - far too often the owner drowns/freezes and the dog gets out on their own.

However it's a very different thing between theory and reality - people put themselves in harms way for those they love - this is rarely a rational thought through decision

Didn't Benedict Allen eat his own dog on one of his expeditions ?? Credited the dog with saving his life. Which I suppose it did.

On another note, a forum friend's Weimaraner died while he was on a mountain walk. He carried it down on his shoulders. That must have been pretty awful. 

Looking at it another way, if he had stayed with his injured dog and both had died on the mountain when he could have descended alone and saved himself, I wouldn't look upon him as a hero but rather foolish for sacrificing his life unnecessarily. Possibly his family (wife, children?) would have thought the same.

If I came back down off the hill minus the dog I went up with, Mrs G would ensure I'd be wearing my bollocks as tonsils

Of course as we don't know all the facts in this case, we should probably reserve judgement, but it would literally have to be a life or death situation, for me to leave anyone stranded on the mountains, be it friend, stranger or dog.

He had an elephant as well?  Did he save the elephant?

LOL!!

Have a Like!

Same here.

One of mine has run off a couple of times chasing things. (Kinder and Ben Lawers) I had to just stay where I was and keep whistling him. He eventually came back, but boy was I shitting it..........I didn't take him after that.

Some comment here with a pertinent quote from Edward Abbey:

http://tohatchacrow.blogspot.co.uk/2018/01/of-mice-and-men-death-of-self-re...

It depends how hot his wife/girlfriend was.

Eyes on the prize.

Polar explorers, including Scott, at the beginning of the last Century relied on eating their dogs for survival, although Scott and party still died.

That certainly gives new meaning to doggy style.

Remember reading about one of those polar expeditions, it was discovered later that dog meat contains extremely high levels of vitamin A. This explained why they had huge amount of hair and skin loss and were actually poisoning them selves to death.

Probly best to follow the old saying, don't eat the yellow snow or your dog.

I hope I would abandon my best mate if I judged that going to get help was their best chance of survival.

The tricky situation would be if I was sure they were going to die anyway and staying with them was putting myself at serious risk. I would probably leave once they were clearly beyond consciousness and I might leave them earlier if I thought they believed I might be able to get help. But it's difficult to know without being in the situation.

As for a dog, I very much hope I wouldn't put myself or anyone else in any real danger for a dog. And I hope I'd eat a dog if it was my best chance of survival. After all, it's only a dog. Sorry.....

My thoughts too. The idea of sacrifing yourself to save a pet, especially if you have loved ones who depend on you, is incomprehensible to me.

My wife loves the dog, but I'm certain she would never forgive me if I put my own life on the line to save it. Would our daughter rather have a dog or a dad? Not a difficult decision is it?

It's a Dog

 priorities or. It may get realy bad

see link   Blackpool 1983

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1983/01/06/Drowning-dog-pulls-four-to-sea-deat...

One thing I remember from school is never to eat Polar Bear liver due to its toxic level of vitamin A. Wikipedia's page on Hypervitaminosis A confirms that, adding that the liver of Bearded Seal, Walrus and Moose are also particularly toxic. Their article on Douglas Mawson indicates that too much Husky liver was the problem Mertz and he suffered on their expedition. The meat itself, though tough, is safe. Dog is widely eaten in Asia where the main cause for concern is if the dogs have rabies.

The Norwegians, who can ski by the age of four, strongly advised Scott, who hailed from Devon, to take "dogs, dogs and more dogs" on his South Pole expedition but being British he knew better and relied on ponies (for which were devised snow-shoes) and primarily the men themselves to haul the sledges. Scott and his four companions were beaten to the pole by Amundsen and all died on the way back.

If the forecast is iffy don't take the dog. Dogs on the hill in bad weather is like dogs off lead on the pavement next to a road, or around livestock - why take the chance? 

Depends on the bad weather surely? And unless it was truly and exceptionally raging, most proper dogs would be fine. Worst case scenario it would need to go on the lead

(I'm thinking about walking here, not scrambling)

I would leave an injured person in the hills to go for help if there was no other means of obtaining it (i.e. no mobile signal), having tried to make them comfortable as much as possible first, and I would expect the same to be done for me.  Not quite the same thing I give you, but the best chance of survival over just sitting there.

Though I suppose that's not total abandonment.  I suppose the scenario outlined is a bit more like the "cutting the rope" one.

I can't imagine myself choosing to die with another anything...it just doesn't make sense.  If absolutely only one can survive, one might as well survive.  It's a waste of life otherwise, and there is always that odd side chance that the one "left to die" will actually only be severely injured and the one that got away may be able to get help for them.  I also think (hope) I would tell someone to go in such a situation if I was the one with no hope.

I can half imagine myself (or hope I would, anyway) choosing to die *so someone else might survive*, but that's different.

Along similar lines I don't see why we have the thing about the captain going down with his ship.  He should do everything he possibly can to get everyone off before leaving, but there is no point in him basically committing suicide out of principle, particularly as there are things he may be able to do for the passengers in boats etc once the ship has gone down to increase their chances of survival by way of his seafaring knowledge.

There's also the related question of why one animal may be and another not.

Any meat eater (and yes, I eat meat) by definition agrees with the above for the animal providing the meat, otherwise they would not be providing the meat.

I'm a member of a collie group of FB and it's interesting reading the differing opinions between here and there.

I posted saying we didn't know the full facts and should probably reserve judgement on the guy as I'm sure he's devastated and didn't make the decision lightly.

If I was in a bad situation and had to abandon the dog or die, I know which choice I'd make, because as much as I love him, he is just a dog. I did post that on the group and got torn a new one for being a disgusting human being that shouldn't be allowed to own animals!

I'm glad I'm not a walker's or mountaineer's dog, expected to spend days out naked in wet and cold with only a couple of biscuits for lunch if I'm lucky, possibly in the company of a human who doesn't deserve my loyalty.  

Surely the decision as to whether to take the dog depends on the conditions you expect to encounter? Dogs can't complain of feeling cold or dizzy or weak and will go on until they drop with exhaustion so surely dog planning should receive the same consideration as route planning, weather forecast, bail-out and contingency routes, kit and one's own fitness and mental attitude on the day?

Since you carry spare food and clothing for yourself, surely it would make sense to carry a coat for the dog and perhaps some athletic nutrition or carbohydrate bars to feed the dog if it begins to flag? 

A few comments along the lines of "the dog wouldn't leave you", and here in Edinburgh that very sentiment is a big hit with the tourists (Greyfriars Bobby). 

However, there is the Jack London short story "To Build A Fire" which my mum used to tell me as a wee kid, and which still gives me goosebumps (as I'm typing this!). Spoiler alert, but the dog is very oragmatic about survival.

I feel very sorry indeed for Mr Finnegan; however, the positive is that this thread has thrown up some thought-provoking posts (and some larfs too!); wouldn't it be something special if this thread saved a life?

Old enough to start to be slowing down. Average lifespan for BCs is 13-14 years, apparently. I have a similar breed who is 13 years old and at 12 he'd manage anything I could but no longer wanting to run ahead, at 13 he's getting tired after 4-5 miles.

Probably time to stick my oar in again before dropping off in the chair. From my point of view I didn’t view my dogs as “only a dog” It was something that I’d taken responsibility for. If it meant that I had to carry extra gear then so be it. In winter I generally carried water although they didn’t always drink on the move. Extra food also plus first aid kit, dog booties etc.

Would I have died for my dogs? Not willingly but just because I’m human am I more important in the great scheme of things? Personally I never thought so but then again I’m a very small cog and of no real value to the world in general. In other words just a joe getting through life.

Would I have stayed with a sick or lame dog on the hill. My answer would be yes.

As regards human partners I did once stay with a dead body once the guys mates had gone for help. They had thought that he was dead and unfortunately they were right. Myself and another guy spent the night out in winter until the M.R. arrived. Not pleasant but it was something that had to be done. He might have had a spark of life but.......

Right that’s it. It’s a dreich day so time for a cuppa or a snooze!

Agree with a lot of that.

My dog is my duty and i take that seriously. A life I have elected to care for. My own life and that of anyone else is of equal value to any life aside from the worth we chose to ascribe to them and to our ourselves. 

I always take food for my dog and a waterproof insulated coat if in winter or at any other time depending on the forecast.

In regards to the comments about 'the dog wouldn't leave you...'    I'm sure many would.  Being animals, their instinct is to survive and while some dogs would stick to their owner until death, others would take off and save themselves and others, well, it depends on how hungry they are and how tasty the owner looks. 

I was 'left' by a dog on a mountain while we were happily hiking towards the summit, alive and sprightly.  Bloody thing trotted into the clag and didn't reappear for ten days, in spite of people looking for her.  Maybe not great survival instincts in that case, as she left the source of food (me) and spent ten days in the Arrochar Alps wilderness, where there was no chorizo. 

I highly doubt there’s many walkers out there that would disagree....

hence I feel you might be arguing with yourself here

Yes

Yes, it's a dog FFS! Fido's got no chance if it's him or me.

There was a story a couple of years ago about a dad and his son skiing, they had an accident, he left his son, for something like 3 days to go and get help. I'd have probably stayed with him and we'd have both died.

That has nothing to do with saving lives, it's about protecting the ship owner's property. Once the captain abandons ship it becomes salvage, and fair game for anyone who can take it. In the old days a captain who abandoned a salvageable ship would never work again, so he had to stay on board until it was definitely beyond saving. He would then be free to save himself, but obviously it would often be too late by then.

FFS. The attitudes on that blog are scary. Especially today's update from "Action4Meg". What do people on here think of this gem?

"Lastly the group is investigating whether a permanent memorial can be placed at the location."

???

Top bloke. I agree with your view.

Complete non-starter. Wholly inappropriate, and seldom appropriate for people on mountains either.

A lot of folk feel quite strongly about the death of a dog by an ill prepared group. It’s RSPCA territory. There’s plenty of memorials to dogs that have stayed with dead owners so why not one to a dog that was wronged?

Because 'a permanent memorial at the location' would be out of place here even if you feel the dog deserves it.

Only if the owners will look right on chugging flyers about how the RSPCA tirelessly prosecute evil animal abusers.  

I agree. Although they may become quite historic and sought after sites like any other man made memorial. I’m quite fond of visiting the Lake District ones.

Probably going to get some flack for my view but here it goes. It's a dog, unfortunately a dog's life is not as important as a humans. Regardless of whether you are cared for by others. You dying on the hill will create much more loss in the world than a dog.

Look at it this way, if you came across a dog and its owner on the hill struggling and you could only save one. Who would have priority? If you go for the dog then please explain your decision, because to me that's nonsensical.

I would definitely try and help one of you than your dog.

Edit: With regard to the memorial, totally unnecessary.

I find it hard to have a strong opinion on this as a specific case, although I have real sympathy for the owner and the dog.

Ultimately though, if the case is being discussed because it was a dog, it's simply an example of the complex and messy relationship that humans have created for themselves with non-human animals. I certainly find it hard to sympathise with any bandwaggoner getting on this guy's case unless they can truly say they protect the rights of animals in all aspects of their lives. Animal rights is a nice concept but almost meaningless in reality. So it remains a 'moral choice' how each of us relates to non-wild non-humans but in one sense the breeding and keeping of pets at all is a form of exploitation.

We have a cat, part of me would love to have a dog, but if I'm honest with myself I know that it can't be properly squared with some of my other beliefs.

I expect I'll regret posting that all that but it's done now.

Depends who the owner is?

If I came across Jacob Rees Mogg, struggling in the hills carrying a tin of sardines, it would be the tin of sardines which got back down safely.

I have to say I wouldn't behave like you then. I'd eat the sardines rather than carry them down.

1. Strongly disagree with permanent memorials in wild places. Full stop. Maybe if a person made a significant contribution to an area, then a memorial in a spot that was already well marked by human activity would be appropriate, but it would have to be a very special case.

2. It's a dog. It hasn't made a significant contribution to anything. It's only claim to a memorial is that one person cared about it, so a permanent memorial to it would be for that one person. How self centered is that?

3. It's not even their dog! They never even met it! They want to permanently despoil a wild place to commemorate that someone they never met left their pet to die. These people need to get a grip FFS.

" These people need to get a grip FFS."

It is all quite strange. I walk my dog in a forest where many dogs become lost each year and some are never found. There must be hundreds of other places where similar stories play out. Yet teams of volunteers do not form to search day after day, they don't form Facebook groups and they don't see fit to make Facebook comments or issue public statements questioning the manners or morals of the grieving owner. Somehow this particular situation has escalated beyond reason.

Just like the Italian captain of the cruise ship Costa Cocordia he ran onto the rocks? Wasn't he one of the first into the life boats and spent the night comfortably in an hotel ashore whilst 30 plus of his passengers died? Last I heard he got 16 years for manslaughter.

At the Inquiry it emerged that he had a glamorous female passanger on the bridge and was showing off the ship's speed to her.

I think he was a bit of a sea dog..........

Hundreds of feckless dog owners are careless enough to just lose their dogs every year and social media is full of sympathy.

One owner has to make the tough decision to leave their pet behind in harsh conditions and it is out with the pitchforks.

Man's behaviour turns a little weird when we start to humanise animals.

One dog went missing round our place before Christmas, and the place went mad

https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/local-hubs/telford/2017/12/30/found-tel...

One of the searchers promptly lost her dog, and the place went mad again - for a week. 

The place was awash with people. 

The happy ending is that the dog was found. 

The unhappy ending is tevery other fecking tree or gatepost has a find Binky sign on it, and still has. 

Never abandon a best mate, especially a dog. Thems calories you might need later.

Don't forget the furry items of clothing you could make to help keep you warm as well.

If two people went up a mountain with a 12 year old child that collapsed, abandoned the child when the weather got bad and after a 5 day search the child was found dead - would that be understandable?

Obviously not. The dog was 12, this was foreseeable. You're telling me at 12 years of age your dog never had any health issues and then just collapsed out of nowhere high up a mountain? Did you not check the forecast and see dodgy weather was coming? Did you not consider marking your position and sending your friend to go and get help if you really couldn't carry on? At best this was foolish neglect. As the MRT said, he will have to live with that memory of walking away from his dog and leaving her to die a cold and lonely death. 

If my best mate was a dog I'd just lie down on the storm ravaged hillside and die with him/her.

If I leave the dog in the house alone he finds something of mine and leaves a puddle of piss on it. If it was possible to leave him on a mountain he might come back and do something more serious!

Humans never have sudden health issues when they're in the mountains, do they?

No, you never hear of someone who seemed perfectly fit when they set out, suddenly having heart problems...

Quite.  This one isn’t going down so well either...  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/police-shoot-dog-dead-hartle...

Grylls would have torn it into a jacket so that it would live on in our memories.

If Grylls was here they could have just popped the dog into the film crew's helicopter.

After they'd got all the shots of Bear risking his life to rescue the dog in extreme conditions of course.

Well the older you get the higher your risk of problems. This dog was about 70 in human years so I'd be shocked if the dog was not slowing down or showing any issues. The body doesn't just give out, there are almost always warning signs. 

I tell you what you don't hear of, people having heart attacks up a mountain and being left to die because they can't be carried down (high altitude doesn't count because you knowingly take the risk that rescue is almost impossible). 

Yeah, but if your human mate collapses or breaks a leg or whatever on a Scottish mountain, they get a helicopter,  weather permitting,  or carried out by a 30 MRT guys and gals if they can't get a chopper in.

If you were on a mountain with a dog too big to carry and it could not continue for whatever reason, and the weather was turning nasty which made it risky for you to stay out all night with the dog (especially if you are under equipped for winter, say), would mountain rescue send people out to carry your dog down the hill?  I don't know.  I'm sure the people who have been in MRT can answer.

You can't equate dogs to humans because significant rescue resources will be used to rescue humans. Like helicopters.  

They would send them out for you if someone realised you were overdue, or you called it in realising you were going to die of hypothermia, but then you're the casualty, and arguably have  put their lives at risk and used their resources unnecessarily, because you could have got yourself down without the dog. 

With the amount of human lives saved by MRT dogs you would hope there would be some reciprocal appreciation. 

I must admit I am surprised by the amount the amount of people basically equating a dogs life with a humans. Probably in most of the world it is still acceptable to eat dog meat, but even in the UK we treat dogs as less than human, they can be bought and sold, put down if sick, families are split up, we neuter them, control their breeding etc. They don't even have the vote.

I am obviously not a dog owner! But this thread has been an interesting insight.

It sounds like you're suggesting that because MRT use dogs in rescues, they should treat a lost or injured dog the same way as a human?

Really?

Obviously humans treat various species differently, the moral relativity of that is debatable. That being said, inflicting unnecessary suffering on any creature is repugnant to anyone but the most twisted of beings. Taking your companion animal up a mountain and leaving it there when it can't come down doesn't sit well with people because from what I can see it seems like it shouldn't have happened. 

Are you suggesting that if I called mountain rescue and told them my dog had a broken leg high on the mountain, their answer should be "sorry, we don't help non-humans" ? 

It's not for me to say what MRT "should" do, but I think it would be ridiculous to mobilise a helicopter and send volunteers out in serious life-threatening conditions to rescue a dog.

This thread has been pretty balanced in terms of opinions IMO. Check out some of the links further up to be treated to a thread filled with dog fanatics. I genuinely found them disturbing.

Of course it shouldn't have happened but we're not all perfect and we make mistakes. This seems to have been overlooked as people who don't know the full story rush to claim that it would never happen to them.

Actually I really feel for the guy, he made an error of judgement which anyone can do and lost his dog who I'm sure he loved. I just feel more for the dog who actually died a rather unpleasant death. 

What qualities give one life more intrinsic value than another? Note 'intrinsic' rather than subjective. And, at least for this argument, leave out the 'soul' / religion.

Intelligence? Does this give me just dominion? Should those humans with lower IQs serve the brightest or have less rights?

Shared genetic heritage?

I doubt anyone could name a quality that transcends simple 'specism', aka ingrouping (us Vs them) that is shared by all humans and not present, to some degree, in animals. And if such a quality can be found, does this justify a hierarchy? 

Much of what is on the net is dated and betrays a lack of rigorous research historically and inherent bias in 'bigging up' ourselves. Sort of like the pseudo-science commonly used to elevate one race over another.

Take 'episodic memory'. Previously scientists assumed unique to humans (how unscientific!) but latest research shows that other primates and dogs have it too. In fact it may be common in all mammals according to studies looking at hippocampus activation (Cambridgeblog - Cognitive Neuroscience of Memory by Dr S Slotnick.)

One trend is clear - the more we study animals, the more we find them capable of.

Then don't take your dog out into terrain he doesn't know, and weather he can't predict if, with risks he hasn't consented to, if you or society aren't willing to help him when it hits the fan. 

Companion animals aren't disposable toys you get rid of when it's no longer convenient, bad weather or not. 

http://www.economist.com/news/essays/21676961-inner-lives-animals-are-hard-...

That's a matter of opinion. It's a harsh fact that many dedicated working dogs are disposed of when they are no longer capable of doing their job. I'm sure their owners don't like doing it, but they have to face economic realities.

But that's not the point anyway. The person didn't get rid of his dog because it was inconvenient, he did it because he believed that it was necessary to save his own life. A perfectly reasonable decision in most same peoples book.

I agree with the point of your post, but...

Having recently helped provide terminal care to someone, I think in this instance that we can treat dogs as more than human.

A dog tale with a happy ending. Got to love a collie!

http://metro.co.uk/2018/01/25/border-collie-missing-week-found-alive-stuck-...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=63s&v=31gkBkMniNw

True friendship. 

It seems contradictory to protest so about animals' rights whilst keeping pets. To take just one aspect, the carbon footprint of owning a dog is surprisingly high, in some cases as much as a Chelsea tractor! Of the mammal and bird species threatened with extinction, over 700 are being affected by climate change. Our near relatives, the primates, are amongst the worst hit (you can always rely on your family ...) If those creatures deserve a chance of survival, it makes no sense to buy a dog.

^

The claim of the book "Time to eat the dog". There's an analysis https://climatesanity.wordpress.com/2009/10/23/bad-professors-bad-the-truth... which thoroughly debunks the SUV comparison.

Rights of animals and effects of climate change are separate things. Though of course climate change endangers animals as it does millions of humans yet pratically any activity you engage in will add to some minute degree to climate change.

Climate change will not be solved by anyone not having a dog. It will require serious effort by large multi-nationals and governments. 

Getting back to the OP. Whilst I don't know the specifics of this case, the conditions and size of the dog. Both of the Border Collies I've had have been carried or put in my pack in deep snow or problematic river crossings. However, my dogs were both small for breed. Reckon I'd always give it go to get the dog off the hill.

Interesting comparison. Whoever's assumptions you prefer, they agree that the environmental impact is significant. The Vales' 'eat the dog' title is tongue in cheek but I notice Moriarty's  entire site seems devoted to proclaiming climate change "myths". He believes his children are being "indoctrinated with climate change alarmism" in school. I would therefore tend to treat his figures with the more suspicion.

Who will only act if we insist they do

... and are prepared to accept change ourselves.