Atehsaz,
Please take this as kindly meant - because I do wish you well. But the responses you have got so far indicate that there is a problem with your survey design.
When collecting data, you must present your questionnaire in such a way as to show the legitimacy of your project. This becomes even more important when collecting data from a self-selecting sample, as potential respondents who doubt - or simply does not understand - the motives of a project generally tend to chose not to participate. Anytime your questionnaire gives potential respondents a reason to not respond you are at risk of further biasing your sample.
Your first error is in not providing bonafides. A more detailed preamble here on EF would have served you well, but an introduction is essential at the start of your questionnaire itself. Something like:
"My name is X, I am a masters student in program Y at university Z. I am conducting research in topic A. The input of dog owners in Switzerland with would be very valuable to our project. The project is non-commercial, all responses will be kept confidential. This questionnaire was developed under the direction of Professor B and has been approved by the university.'
Or, if the research is being done for a commercial program:
My name is X. On behalf of Company Y, an independent research organization, I am conducting a study in to topic A among dog owners in Switzerland. All responses will be kept confidential.'
Then at the end (either version), add a statement 'Questions may be addressed to...'
Look at it this way:
First, you ask for breed and size of the dog. Then you ask if the dog stays at home or accompanies the owner when he/she leaves the house. Then you ask when the owner leaves the house. Being of a cynical bent - since after all you have not established the legitimacy of your project - can you see how this might make a respondent think that you have questionable motives, that you could even be casing homes for break-ins? A fundamental rule of survey design - look at your questionnaire with a respondent's eyes.
A few other points:
How would you expect an owner of more than one dog to respond - several of your questions could elicit different answers depending on which dog in the household. Should a respondent answer for all dogs sequentially? Or for only one dog, and if so, which? You need instructions for this case.
As mentioned, Q2 needs definition.
Your open-end question 10 is far too broad; relevant to what? Are there specific topics (housing, BSL, attitudes of the general public, general expense, vet care, product availability, transportation, etc.) that you are interested in? If so, narrow down your focus. Overly broad open-ends often end up unquantifiable. Much depends on how you plan to use those responses - work backwards from your analysis plan to develop these kinds of questions.
But more importantly, your Q10 has nothing to do with the previous questions, to a respondent it can sound like the kind of 'hook' hot-button question that a push-poll often uses to disguise the intent of a questionnaire. As presented it is too obviously different from the rest of the questionnaire. Again goes to legitimacy.
You ask for demographics as an afterthought, providing no structure. Again, this can be interpreted with suspicion by your average respondent. Demographics are a touchy subject, handle with care. If you need the info for your analysis, say so outright. 'These last questions are necessary so that we can better understand blah blah blah. Your answers will be use for statistical purposes only and will kept confidential.' Then you need to ask structured questions, preferably giving defined ranges for answers rather than open-ended responses, as respondents are generally more comfortable - and truthful - when given a multiple choice.
If you really do not need demographic data, don't include the questions, avoid the suspicion such questions generate.
But by tossing it out as an afterthought, you again undermine the legitimacy of your survey.
---
Good luck with your project.