And yes, I have weighed the fact that my off leash dogs might eat something that makes them sick/get in a fight with something else and lose (they are small)/run off past my ability to track them with the GPS. I will feel terrible and miss them greatly if this happens.
However, I have done what some people like to call a "cost benefit analysis." Having them off leash on the collars makes going for hikes tolerable. Were it not for the collar, having three dogs leashed and enforcing a heel the whole way would make the hike intolerable, and thus hikes would not happen. Additionally, my yard is teeny teeny tiny and my high energy hooligans do not get enough exercise in just the yard or on leashed walks alone. I do my best to keep them safe but this must be balanced against their other needs: mental stimulation/exercise/etc. They would be safest locked in their crates all day. If I let them out of their crates for even a minute they MIGHT get into the aspirin!
So, since I do not have several acres of fenced property to go on hikes with them in, and since in my calculation for me and my dogs the benefits outweigh the risks, they go off leash. My point being that dog owners across the country make the same call every day.
I am tired of the judgy pants histrionics everywhere in the universe these days, when anyone can see that reasonable people can make a reasonable call to allow their own watched dog loose on their own freakin' property. There is really no need to try to make the OP feel as chastised as humanly possible about it and I wonder what benefit you personally derive from treating OP in this manner.