Sterilization/Tethering Law Passed

I think a lot of other places have those sterilization rules. Sometimes more extreme for dogs picked up by AC.

Not a fan, just on the surface their rules for what can remain intact are shitty.

Some crummy but purebred rottweiler can remain intact but Traveller & Co would be sterilized... not all breeds are AKC registered, even though they are in a minority they should be protected as well.

I find it scary.

From the anti-tethering to the spaying and neutering any dogs they get before speaking the owners at all to find out how it happened, to the teared system where some are exempt, others get two chances and some get none, to the idea that if they happen upon your dog and it's intact you need to get it altered even if it's them happening upon your dog in your own home.

I can't say I know the laws or the situation very well in this specific place but I gotta think they probably have laws on the books for neglect and letting your dogs run at large that would help if properly enforced.

If someone has a dog on a tie out and it's being NEGLECTED then do something. If it's not, why would they want to waste more time, resources and energy going after people who do care for their dogs and who are being responsible (because, once again, tethering your dog does NOT make you a neglectful or bad owner nor does it make the dog uncared for) just because your law says tethering, whether done right or wrong is against the law.

If someone's dog is running around the town then collect it and charge them to get the dog back and cite them for letting their dog run at large. I'm pretty sure getting fined for that is going to make a bigger impact that altering their dog.

I'm just so sick of MORE invasive, very scary laws being made when so many places don't seem to properly enforce the ones they do have that can help.

I feel like people who let their dogs roam probably aren't going to be too inclined to pay for altering the animal. Even with super cheap spay programs a lot of people just don't want to pay.

And good dogs with responsible owners do get loose. An invisible fence stops working, a dog charges an owner walking their dog, they trip, drop the Leash, dog bolts for legit reasons, blah, blah, blah.

What if some busy body gets it in their had that feeding raw is neglectful, dangers of raw pork, etc. AC drops by and low and behold, now you have to spay and neuter your dog even though you are a totes responsible owner.

I want to see the year end report.

Very well said!! Couldn't have said this better myself, and I feel exactly the same way.

These sorts of over-reaching laws drive me batty. How about enforcing the rules already on the books about at large animals, in heat females at large, care standards, vicious dogs, and the like?!

Please refer to this link for reasons (and actual numbers and sources) why mandatory spay/neuter legislation DOES. NOT. WORK.

http://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/mandatory_spayneuter/


As for the tethering part, I do think banning a tool is stupid. But I also don't think it's a terrible thing not being able to leave your dogs outside. I live in a townhouse and I don't have a fence. The house I own, but the land outside is all property of the condo management company. So I can't tie my dog outside, not allowed. So he only goes outside when I walk him. Sometimes I wish I had a fenced yard just so I could sit outside with my dog and not have to have him tied to me all the time. But otherwise being indoors all the time except for walks and trips to the dog park isn't a horrible existence for my dog.

I just can't agree with that. Of course your dog being inside all times except for walks and dog park trips isn't a horrible existence for your dog. Your dog doesn't live an awful life anymore so than mine do because of the fact that every time I let my dogs outside to pee they are tethered.

That law is crazy. Lets start making it so any dog caught roaming is altered and then at the same time put in a law that takes away their ability to safely contain their dog unless they build a fence or stay out there with them leashed. Yes, I'm SURE that's going to make it so there are less dogs roaming.

That part doesn't just target people who have their dogs live outside on a line. It doesn't target neglect. It just broadly takes out an entire way of keeping your dog contained and makes it illegal.

I think they probably used the picture Oko found for the basis of this law.

It says with a nationally recognized dog or cat club...would the continental kennel club be nationally recognized? Because you will register pretty much anything.

I don't mean to delve this back up, but I was just thinking about a few things.

I got Soldier from an acquaintance. The woman had both the parents and they had a litter every season. The litters were not "wanted". At some point I was working with a rescue and I was discussing this with my contact person. I went to the lady, and offered to pick the mother dog up, have her spayed, and bring her back-free of charge. The woman refused and I **** you not, said she just brings the puppies to animal control, hey they take them all! I tried a few different angles (offering to let her recover elsewhere) and just got met with apathetic responses, but no I couldn't take the dog, why bother, etc. I know this is just one person, but in this case, cost/time of the spay was not in the picture. The woman just did not care.

I wonder a lot what the difference truly is between New England and the southern states, if it's education, or weather (more outside dogs down south), standard of living, wealth/poverty etc. There are more ethnic groups in Florida, people from Mexico and Puerto Rico and Cuba where it is expected to have stray dogs wandering and reproducing. Probably it is a combination of these factors.
But I wonder about the municipal sheltering down south, versus "town by town" animal control up here. Honestly, if I wanted to a dump a dog in a shelter up here, I wouldn't know where to go. The private town animal control officers do not take surrenders. They take strays and then offer them for adoption or place in rescue as needed. The city nearest me there is a larger animal control facility that does not take surrenders. In the same city there is a 'humane society' type deal that takes most, I think, but by appointment only and I believe they require a donation of $200/dog. The other city a little farther, their shelter only takes surrenders when they have space, and require a $100-150 donation as well. Boston has the same policies (appointment and surrender fee). There are NO stray problems here (other than loose "owned" dogs).
In Florida, animal control is handled by the county. ONE shelter per county (which encompasses many, many towns). A handful of ACOs and shelter staff. When I lived in Tampa you could drop an animal off at will. There would be a line waiting to drop animals off. Surrendered cats were immediately brought to the kill room, put in these blue crates and stacked up until someone was ready to euthanize (I was involved here and yes, saw it with my own eyes). They had to save space for stray holds. 100-150 animals a day euthanized there. But, if these animals were spread out over many towns..and you could not surrender your animals...and people were forced to find homes for the animal themselves...I do wonder if that would help. Sure you would get animals dumped, no doubt. And animals put in bad situations. But there already were animals getting dumped. And animals are put in bad situations everyday. opcorn: But what if Soldier's "breeder" couldn't just dump those puppies without a second thought? What if it cost her money, or if there was no shelter to give them to...or a shelter that only took pups if mom got spayed? Maybe she would have taken me up on my offer. Just a thought I have had for a long time...

The problem with putting up barriers to surrendering puppies is that it ends up with stuff like bags of puppies thrown in the river. I've heard some stories that would make your toes curl from people working at rural vet clinics up here, which often serve as AC/impound facilities for some of the rural counties. People who don't give a crap will take the path of least resistance.

and too many strays of cats or dogs leads to trapping, poisoning, shooting etc, in addition to the tossing of the puppies tied in a bad into a river. People will do lots of nasty things.

I hate laws that will do very little to the worst offenders and greatly impact those that don't do anything wrong to begin with. That's what this does.

I like to think that if you had your dog on a tether in your front yard with you that they would talk to you and see if it was a permanent thing, or so etching one did occasionally because you are not allowed a fence there...I like to think.

Unfortunately the current laws basically suck. As long as there is food water and shelter there is not mud they can do. The tethering law gives them more recourse for those animals who are bing mistreated to be removed. Of the animal control officers I have met very few would take your dog for having it tied in your front yard hanging out with you. Of course there are always a--holes but they, from my experience, are few and far between. Most just want to be able to get those dogs who're getting the very basic care and nothing else, into better situations.

better situations? like a shelter where there's a good chance they'll end up Euth'd eventually anyway? Even no kills, kill a lot every year.

I'm sorry, but anything besides blatant abuse is and should not be grounds for gov't intervention. Should be no different for dogs as human kids. This notion that unless dogs are inside with AC and can't be in 80 degree temps and can't be alone, etc, etc, etc is kind of silly. If that's how you choose to keep your dogs fine. I'll keep mine the way I see fit and if it doesn't line up with your thinking, tough **** really As long as they aren't being beaten, starved, etc it shouldn't be anybody's business

How about a dog that recently learnt to bolt through screens? I own one of those. No air conditioning and we rent. The only way we can get cool air is with a window open.

Now we are moving and I have some ideas for the future. But while we were trying to thwart her she got out twice. She is not altered and not a ckc /akc breed and not yet registered as jrt clubs don't confer breed status by birth.

I agree this will likely lead to more abandoned dogs. Which means more dead dogs. Those people who didn't care will just go get another cute puppy and the cycle continues.

JMO but a dog that lives it's life on a five foot chain with little to no human interaction, and a bowl of food and water and a dog house is better off dead. And if people would rather abandon then fence or alter, then yes they are better off dead, if that's what it comes too. If there is no one who gives a s..t enough to prevent them from running loose at will then they are better off dead, rather then running free, and breeding at will, and perpetuating the problem.

Now since I doubt anyone on this forum does this little with their dogs, and would allow their dogs to free roam, unaltered, I doubt it's a problem for them. Like I said fee AC officers would give anyone flak for having their dog tied up whole hanging out with them in an up fenced area of their yard.

If your dog goes through screens in your rented place I'm sure you would try and solve the problem if you were not moving, you wouldn't just say oh well and just let them do it...that's what sets you apart from those other people, the ones who this law was really put into effect for, the ones who would just say oh well, Fido doesn't like to be fenced in, or those that say, well she always comes home. Or like the one person said those who say, why bother because animal control will take he pups.

I have a dog that likes to escape, he pulls fence boards down, he squeezes through impossible seeming places, he opens gates, so I go outside with him, I know he will try to get loose so I go outside with him, every.single.time he needs out. Yes it sucks, I would love to be able to put them all out while I vacuum, but I know I can't because he will find a way out. And in all his escapes he has never been picked up by animal control, they are not left in the yard for hours on end so if he got loose it was noticed quickly and I went and found him.

And maybe there shouldn't have to be laws put in place to stop this, but if the problem is that bad, 100-150 animals euthed DAILY there is clearly a huge problem, then yes there needs to be stronger laws put in place.

But if the loose dogs are ending up dead, or altered before they are returned the sources for those cute puppies will dry up, quick, because you know they are not paying big money for said cute puppies.

The other thing with containing your animals is that you are allowed only 1 slip IF you even have a dog that meets certain requirements.

Dogs average a 15 year lifespan.... accidents can happen... Especially in a 15 year time frame and only certain dogs are allowed even 1. I have had escape artists, they're very crafty.

Also, Keeda was a fence jumper. I rented a place once because *finally a fenced in yard! Yay!!!!* that lasted all of 15 min and then she was tethered again whenever outside (yes even with me out there).

what about dogs that spend time in crates? Some people think they're better off dead 2. How much interaction per day? Before a dog's better off dead? What if you work 10 hours a day is a dog better off dead? How big does your yard have to be before a dog's better off dead? What kind of food should they eat? I happen to think some of those store bought brands amount to little more than calories and toxins. Do I get a say in what people feed their dogs 2?

Does any of this pertain to the existing law?