Discussion in 'Dog News and Articles' started by lakotasong, Feb 27, 2008.
Council Bans Animal Tethering
source: WMAZ News
Wow now more dogs can die in shelters! What a great day for dogs! More dogs will get locked in basements, or crated almost 24/7 What a great day for dogs! (wow I can't say how sarcastically that was typed)
The animal rights activists who don't want humans to share their lives with animals-now they must really be celebrating.
What a sad sad day for pet owners
This is ridiculous. I lived in Macon for a year- I just moved last June. I didn't have a fenced backyard, and the only way my dogs could spend any time enjoying themselves outside was on a long tie-out. If I was still living there, they'd now have to spend their entire day cramped in our tiny house and/or crated, rather than running and playing in the yard.
I'm so glad I moved. Macon is all kinds of screwed up.
I don't think it's unreasonable though. I think it's more for the people who tie their dogs up day and night and leave them like that to go to work etc...
I know of a few dogs that died while being tied up, one jumped off the deck and broke his neck, they came home from shopping hours later to find him. It's actually in Storee's contract that she will never be tied up.
That's the problem though, Storee'sMom...it's techicially "aimed" at those who abuse tie-outs, but everyone else gets caught in the cross-fire. There was a massive thread on this recently on here...it's worth a read.
No there was already a law saying you couldn't tie dogs up for more than 8 hours at a time. I know dogs who have died alone in a house, alone in a yard, supervised in a yard, supervised in a house, playing with a stick etc etc. Life is dangerous.
But this will just make people lock dogs up inside, or surrender them to shelters where they can be PTS. A great day for animal rights activists.
*shamed to live in GA*
I let both my dogs run around outside, offleash. They do not go into crates anytime. They are left to roam our house when we are not here. They ride freely in my dad's truck. Geez guess I'm acting inhumane (sarcasim).
People these days...
you are Dak.. you shouldn't own dogs.. its cruel!
Great for your dogs, but not all dogs are safe in these conditions. Many dogs left loose indoors chew and ingest harmful objects (think power cords and batteries, etc.) not to mention that some cause a lot of damage that could result in them being abandoned to a shelter. As for letting a northern breed, scent hound or sight hound off lead outdoors...it may result in saying goodbye forever. So one can't always judge other dogs and thier owners by what does or doesn't work for oneself.
Tethering is merely a tool. Like anything else, it is as humane or inhumane as the person applying it.
And your red husky (?) looks gorgeous!
You're not going to be happy until no person owns any dog are you?
Ok, maybe I'm just being stupid, but I don't really understand what's so wrong about this bill. I know that several cities in my area have similar laws, so I would love for someone to explain why this law is so bad.
It just says that you can't leave a dog unattended on a tether. So you CAN leave a dog in a fence unattended. You CAN tether a dog outside while you're outside. You can also leave a dog in a kennel/dog run outside.
How many of us recommend that people never leave their dogs unattended outside? If a dog cannot be trusted to be loose inside the house unattended, the majority of us suggest crate training or doggy day care.
And, from what I understand and the way they explained it in my area, is that these laws are not necessarily written for the sake of the dog who's tied out. They're written because dogs who are left unattended on tie outs tendto have aggression problems (obviously, not always), and have caused many dog bite injuries.
Dakotah, nothing you mentioned that you do with your dog falls under this law, so not only are you not inhumane, but you are also not breaking the law.
Lizzy, go read the other thread on this.... This bill and those like them are aimed making sure less people can own dogs. Under this law I couldn't tie a dog out for 1/2 an hour to enjoy the sun. And many people cannot have fences, so now what? If they have a dog who loves to hang out in the sun on the grass, that is not allowed.
THere are some really really great points in the other thread.....
I don't think this is a stupid question at all and I think I know where you're coming from. The problem is there are many dogs who just cannot be contained with any fence and the use of a tether is a humane way of being able to allow them to enjoy the outdoors. Also, some neighborhood associations prohibit fencing and some families just plain can't afford it. This doesn't mean these people would be bad dog owners or should not have a dog. Prohibiting something like a cable run or a tether makes it more difficult for them simply to let the dog out for a while or to use the bathroom, even if these tools are used responsibly. There are also special cases where tethering is recommended as a primary means of confinement, one being sled dog kennels. Though I've never used tethers, I'm not opposed to sled dog owners who do because these dogs are not socially isolated and are typically close enough to interact with neighboring dogs on all sides with an unobstructed view. My understanding is people with multiple dogs prone to not getting along with one another will also use tethers as a means of keeping the dogs separated while allowing them to enjoy the same back yard, fenced or not. So I am opposed to the law because it removes many different options for responsible management without targeting the actual problem...the people who neglect their dogs regardless of where or how they keep them.
Thank you . Fuzzy is a Siberian Husky and pretty much an overgrown lap dog.
I don't post here much but followed your last tethering thread off and on and have to say that it was very thought provoking. I actually was going to post to that old thread, but saw this current one. I have one toy terrier that I am home with all the time, so I would not be affected as far as my own habits by a tethering law and would tend to be very much in favor of one if it had some flexibility. But the more I thought about it, I realized that the flexibilities that I would want in the law would not be practical to enforce.
That seems to be the case here. I am not in favor of tethering in general, but I am concerned about a law banning it. Some of the pit bull owners in the last thread really got me thinking. My terrier is dog-aggressive and first and foremost as an owner, it is your responsibilty to keep your dog from attacking others. These pit bull owners made a really good point about how no fence can contain some dogs. And I was very impressed by how breed knowledgable and cautious they were.
Fencing can be a dangerous way to keep some dogs contained. My brother is a cop and I know of a tragic case where a co-worker of his had two pit bulls escape by blasting through through a heavy wood fence and kill and dismember his elderly woman neighbor. The dogs had to be killed and the cop was tried for negligent homicide. His career and life was ruined, and two dogs and a woman were dead.
If his dogs had been chained like some of the pit bull owners illustrated on the other thread, this would not have happened. The fence was a false illusion of security. Also my former mail carrier was badly mauled by a beagle and 2 pit bulls that broke through a house storm door when she was delivering a package. The owner, who was in the shower, intervened in the nick of time.
Some dogs are very hard to contain. Go to Youtube and search for 'dog escapes'. I got a real education in what people are up against there.
I just want to be able to walk the street safely and I feel worried that the very responsible pit bull owners that told about their challenges with their dogs on the other thread, along with owners of other hard to contain dogs, will be forced to take risks that they would not have otherwise. Also I worry about dogs getting hit by cars, etc, but I really worry about the DA dogs. My dog and I were attacked by a DA golden retriever that was off-leash in the woods. I had my jacket torn up trying to protect my dog and it could have been my face. I had nightmares about the attack. The goldie owner just had no idea this could happen.
Now these wise owners of terriers are really in a pickle and so are the dogs and human and canine bystanders. I just fear chaos from this legislation.
Also I worry that with the economy and housing crisis we are going into, (it is supposed to get much worse), there will be a lot of displaced families with dogs that will move in with family and would temporarily, (hopefully), need to tether a dog. Will this law accomodate that need? If the weather is decent and relatives or friends will not let the dog inside, what will people do? There won't be homes for all these dogs in an economic crisis.
Sorry to be so negative but I do have concerns about tethering laws as much as I do not want dogs to be tethered in general. I hope my worries are unfounded and appreciate that this topic has been covered so thoroughly here. I would think carefully if a law like this were proposed in my area, though I know they are well-intended and I don't fear the motives of 'AR' people as some may. It would just be hard to convince me now that an anti-tethering bill would be effective in improving welfare of animals and public safety in general.
:hail: excellent post ^ LittleBigDog
Much agreed, excellent post!
You're not being stupid at all! Most of these reasons were mentioned in that other thread, but I thought it would be good to put it here, too.
I never would have thought of tethering a dog before Voodoo. All my previous dogs have been very easy to contain. But Voodoo was a big education in athletic, escape artist dogs. Voodoo is normally well-behaved and won't even attempt to escape 99.9% of the time. The problem is that he's very drivey, and if something turns him "on" (and I'm not directly there to stop him), he'll forget everything else. He has:
- Busted through my living room window. Yes, the window was closed at the time.
- Literally cannonballed through part of my wooden fencing. Left a cartoonish dog-shaped hole and everything.
- Gone over my reinforced 7-foot wooden gate
- Learned how to open gate latches and doors
- Figured out multiple ways to open his crate. His current crate has four padlocks on it. I'm not kidding. And thankfully, he's decided to stop ripping bars off of it.
A tether has been a godsend for me. Voodoo's on it for maybe 2-5 hours a day during nice weather. He loves to nap in the sun outside, sniff, patrol the yard, and just be outdoors. We could build him a covered kennel with concrete floor he can't dig out of. But how is that fair to him? He gets far more freedom on his 25-foot tether than in any kennel I could build. I don't see why kennels are considered so superior to tethering for that use.
And my father-in-law, for example, lives in a very nice lakeside home. But there are no fences allowed. Tethering is the main way his two shiba inus can enjoy being outside. Yes, he could walk them on a 6-foot leash. But once again, I don't see how that's fair to the dog. They can't run around or frolic. They're held to the pace of an older man with a heart condition. But on a long tether, they can play fetch and run to their heart's content.
I agree with what many others have said. A dog can be abused in a crate, in a basement, behind a fence or in a house as easily as on a tether. If a person is going to abuse their dog, the presence or absence of a tether is not going to change that fact. All anti-tethering legislation is doing is eliminating a way for responsible owners to confine their dogs.
I tie up Emma. I am renting a farm from my parents. They own it and dont want a bunch of fencing and such out there. So wich is worse having my scent hound on a 60 foot tie (thats a 120 foot diameter. bigger than most yards) or taking her out on a 6 foot leash 3 times a day and having her locked in the house all day?
Separate names with a comma.