‘So, to me it was incredible [to meet the sled dogs]. I mean, it was incredible to be able to spend time with them and stuff. But in the back of my mind, I feel a bit, you know, sad for some of them that had to pull the sled and stuff, but maybe they liked it, I don’t know.’ (Interviewee 4)
This quote is from my master’s thesis where I studied tourists’ ethical views on sled dog safaris. I had a great opportunity to research sled dog safaris as a commission for the PAWWS project. The research data consisted of six interviews with international tourists who visited sled dog kennels in Finnish Lapland. I conducted the research via video calls in spring 2025 and I focused on four larger safari operators. In this overview, I present the findings of my research.
The context of my research was animal tourism and sled dog safaris, which are major tourism attractions in Finnish Lapland. These experiences are popular among tourists and serve as a significant pull factor for travel to the region (García-Rosell & Äijälä, 2018). Despite their appeal and the economical and branding value (Bohn et al., 2018, pp. 3–11) sled dog safaris have raised ethical concerns. The discussion reflects broader societal discussions on animal welfare and treatment. While the tourism industry has increasingly acknowledged these concerns and begun moving toward more ethical practices, both previous research and my own findings indicate that further improvements are needed.
My research focuses on tourists’ ethical perspectives. Tourists influence the supply and nature of tourism activities. Earlier studies have shown that tourists often express concerns about animal use in tourism (e.g. Shani & Pizam, 2009; Curtin, 2006). They generally want to see healthy and well-treated animals, which encourages companies to meet these expectations (Shani & Pizam, 2009, p. 94).
Key Findings
The findings of my research reflect tourists’ ethical considerations and align with earlier studies. I divided the findings into four main themes: Motivations and Background Factors; Acceptance; Care, Empathy, and Concern and Justifications.
Motivations and Background Factors
Firstly, I asked the interviewees about their thoughts on animals and animal tourism and to describe their experience in the safari. All six interviewees expressed a general fondness for animals. Five of them currently own or have previously ‘owned’1 a dog, which likely influenced their perception of sled dogs. All participants considered animal encounters important while traveling, and five had prior experience interacting with animals during trips.
I also asked the interviewees how they would describe animal welfare. They mentioned physical and emotional welfare. Animals should be healthy and have good conditions such as shelter, enough space and suitable food. Humans should take care of the animals according to their needs. Two interviewees defined animal welfare as an organisation that cares for animals.
All participants described their visit to the sled dog safari as a positive experience and it was their first time. The main motivation was to meet the sled dogs and to experience the sled ride. Location was the key factor when choosing the safari. One interviewee mentioned researching the ethics of the activity but did not find anything concerning that would have changed their mind about visiting.
Acceptance
The second theme focused on acceptance which is affected by the hedonistic nature of tourism and the desire to experience new things. The overall pleasant experience in the safari was the basis to which the tourists based their opinions. All the interviewees generally described their visit as an amazing, even a once-in-a-lifetime, experience that was part of their Lapland visit. Interaction with the dogs evoked positive feelings and the sled ride was described as a memorable experience: ‘I always loved dogs and animals and every kind of animals, especially huskies, so, for me to go to the Husky park is such a big deal to me’ (Interviewee 4). All the interviewees said that they would recommend the visit to friends and family.
Tourists generally found the practices of the sled dog kennels acceptable. Unlike more controversial forms of animal tourism (e.g., zoos or elephant riding), sled dog safaris were seen in a more favourable light. The interviewees’ views on animal welfare aligned with the things they saw and experienced on the safari. They said that the dogs seemed happy and excited to run and were well cared for by the dedicated staff: ‘They looked comfortable with the employees who are working there.
If they were not taking care of the huskies, I don’t think huskies would, you know, jump and cuddle with employees’ (Interviewee 1). Still, some concerns remained.
Care, Empathy, and Concern
Tourists showed empathy through their interest in the dogs’ wellbeing. Close physical and emotional proximity to the animals during the safari likely strengthened these feelings (see Tallberg et al., 2022, pp. 10, 13). I claim that the proximity made the tourists care for the dogs, and one interviewee even expressed a desire to adopt a sled dog. Tourists were also active and asked questions from the staff relating to the dogs’ wellbeing.
Tourists expressed concerns regarding, for example, the dogs’ fatigue, retirement, capturement, and sledding as well as the conditions of the dogs and the exposure to cold weather. The dog’s retirement was especially a topic that raised some concerns and empathy. I asked the interviewees if they know what happens to the dogs after their retirement. Some of them had received information from the kennel while others hadn’t and expressed interest. When I explained the typical outcomes—retirement at the kennel, adoption, or, in some cases, killing—interviewees generally preferred retirement or adoption and some were upset by the idea of killing, though some accepted it as a last resort.
Justifications
As it can be noticed the tourists had somewhat ambivalent views of sled dog safaris. At the same time, they had positive feelings and empathy for the dogs, and at same time, even with concerns, they generally accepted the practices. This leads to a conflict between the tourists’ actions and values which is also called cognitive dissonance. Tourists might participate in the contradictory activity which causes them to make arguments to justify the activities and ease their worries (see. Curtin, 2006, pp. 312, 321; Winter, 2020, p. 16). This pattern was also seen in my research. In the next quote the cognitive dissonance can be observed as a tourist didn’t view the sled dog safaris completely ethical but still wanted to visit:
‘So yeah, but to be honest, I feel like, I am not 100%, you know, agree with having dogs in the park and you know. Having tourist coming and like pulling the sled and everything, I don’t know if in the past maybe they already used that in Finland. But here, right now, I feel like it’s cute and everything, even me I wanted to see it, but it’s not right for animals’. (Interviewee 4)
The interviewees made several justifications for the safaris and for the concerns that they presented. Arguments in favour involved the good relationship with the dogs and the workers, fulfilment of the dog’s natural behaviour and wellbeing, the dog’s urge to run, visitor’s safety, gain of information, tradition, own knowledge of the dogs, and the positive experience in the safari. The Finnish law and overall public opinion seemed to be seen in favour of the ethicalness of the sled dog safaris. Following some quotes from the interviewees:
‘Some of the dogs were in big cages, but they were…it was because for our own safety. I believe some of them playfully bite it or not viciously though. Just playfully bite so they get them in the cages.’ (Interviewee 1)
‘So, I had dogs all my life and I think those dogs were very happy and they’re very excited to run’ (Interviewee 3).
‘Honestly, I wouldn’t say I have a lot of concerns about countries like Finland. Yes, Lapland region because the law works well and people are really in nature oriented there’. (Interviewee 5)
‘With all the information I have now, I would recommend that type of that one because I have seen that the dogs are in good condition, not wounded or tired, and the guys [staff] really had a connection with the dog and really cared about the dogs.’ (Interviewee 6)
As I brought up, retirement was a topic that caused mixed feelings. Still, justifications for killing were also made. The next quote shows the mix of empathy and acceptance that the interviewee had about the dogs:
‘So, I get that they sometimes maybe have to kill them. I get that. Only when it’s not when they can’t adjust to retirement or family life, I think. They have to do it because it’s better maybe for the dog to not experience all these feelings of –well, loss of their pack and their other dogs. So yeah, I get that.’ (Interviewee 3)
Uncertainty and a lack of knowledge were common in the answers. Even with some information provided during the safari, tourists were not always sure whether what they observed was good or bad for the dogs.
Conclusion
The findings suggested that tourists generally perceive sled dog kennels as an acceptable form of animal tourism. All interviewees had a positive experience and had already accepted the idea of visiting before the trip. Visiting the park did not seem to change their opinion significantly. While they showed genuine interest in the wellbeing of the sled dogs, they also voiced uncertainties and concerns about the dogs’ living conditions.
These contradictions pointed to a deeper conflict between tourists’ ethical values and their behaviours. Tourists are often aware of the issues surrounding animal tourism but generally have a positive view about it (Shani and Pizam, 2009, pp. 93–94, 97). It seemed the pleasant experience may have overridden their concerns. As noted in previous research, sometimes the drive to experience animal tourism is stronger than the tourist’s moral consideration (see. e.g. Curtin, 2006, Shani & Pizam, 2009). Even though the sled dog safari was not seen as unethical, the interviews suggested that not everything was completely aligned with tourists’ values.
This research provided a broader understanding of sled dog safari operations and identified areas for development. The findings can support tourism companies, tourists, developers, animal welfare organizations, researchers, and initiatives such as PAWWS. Animal tourism reflects the prevailing relationship between humans and animals which remains largely human-centred. Changes in people’s attitudes towards animals also influence animal tourism. The contradictions in tourists’ perceptions on sled dog safaris indicate that the operating environment of animal tourism and the tourists’ ethical perceptions do not fully align. The operating environment that enables the operation of sled dog parks as well as the prevailing perceptions of animals, should be raised for wider contemplation.
Sled dogs have a fundamental role in the safaris (Äijälä, 2022, s. 75) as well as in tourists’ experiences. Animals and the sled dogs clearly bring joy to the tourists, and tourism may also encourage the appreciation of animals (Franklin, 1999, s. 87). I feel that the sled dogs and animals overall deserve to be treated with respect and care. Tourists adapt to the animal welfare practices in society and tourism, but they also have an influence on the tourism activities. Anyone can say they care and love animals, but actions are what speak for themselves.
‘– they were my answers with information I have and I’m always open to learn new things and yeah, see what can be better’. (Interviewee 6).
The final master’s thesis Matkailijoiden käsityksiä rekikoiratarhojen eettisyydestä will be published in Finnish in Lauda during summer 2025.
- ‘Owned’ here is the word used by interviewees. In PAWWS there is a focus on creating more ethical understanding of human-animal relationships that problematises the anthropocentric categorisation of animals which ownership, although a societally normalised practice, does not support, ↩︎
References
Äijälä, M. (2022). Tourist Landscapes as Multispecies Trails: Storying a Mushing
Landscape Through Mobile Video Ethnography. Doctoral thesis. University of Lapland. https://lauda.ulapland.fi/handle/10024/65184
Bohn, D., García-Rosell, J.-C. & Äijälä, M. (2018). Animal-based Tourism Services in
Lapland. MTI, University of Lapland. Retrieved February 18, 2025 from https://blogi.eoppimispalvelut.fi/matkailuelaimet/infograafit-2/
Curtin, S. (2006). Swimming with dolphins: A phenomenological exploration of tourist recollections. The international journal of tourism research, 8(4), 301–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.577
Franklin, A. (1999). Animals and modern cultures: A sociology of human-animal relations in modernity. Sage.
García-Rosell, J.-C. & Äijälä, M. (2018). Lapin matkailijoiden käsityksiä eläinmatkailusta. MTI, University of Lapland. Retrieved February 18, 2025 from https://blogi.eoppimispalvelut.fi/matkailuelaimet/infograafit-2/
Shani, A. & Pizam, A. (2009). Tourists’ attitudes toward the use of animals in tourist attractions. Tourism analysis, 14(1), 85–101. https://doi.org/10.3727/108354209788970225
Tallberg, L., García-Rosell, J.-C. & Haanpää, M. (2022). Human–animal relations in business and society: Advancing the feminist interpretation of stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 180(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04840-1
Winter, C. (2020). A review of research into animal ethics in tourism: Launching the annals of tourism research curated collection on animal ethics in tourism. Annals of tourism research, 84, 102989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2020.102989
Author
Janina Pajunen, student at University of Lapland, Tourism Research
Article image by Valderamas D. from Pexels