The problem with anti-chaining legislation

[Miakoda]

The fact is that chains are nothing more than inanimate objects. They are unable to jump up and inflict pain upon a dog. They are unable to feed and water, or neglect to feed and water dogs. They can't do anything by themselves. Same goes for kennels (indoor & outdoor), fences, leashes, walls, doors, etc. None of these objects of containment are capable of abusing or neglecting dogs.

I doesn't bother me if the dog's primary housing is on a chain. So long as the HUMAN owner feeds & waters the dog, gives the dog appropriate attention and exercise, etc.

Only humans are capable of abusing dogs and neglecting dogs and there are already laws on the books to address these issues. However, just like in any political race to see who is better, people want to make up new laws to make themselves actually sound "intelligent" and "caring" and look like they are doing something. But the fact remains that if the current laws were addressed and enforced, abuse and neglect of dogs on the ends of chains would be taken care of as goes for dogs that are abused and neglected inside the home, inside kennels, and so on.

[Renee750il]

I have to wonder how many of those who believe chains are the cause of abuse are also convinced that guns cause crime . . .

Or that Elvis is alive and living in the basement of a gun collector tethered on a chain

[drmom777]

Originally Posted by Renee750il

I have to wonder how many of those who believe chains are the cause of abuse are also convinced that guns cause crime . . .

Or that Elvis is alive and living in the basement of a gun collector tethered on a chain

As long as the gun collectore is giving Elvis enough attention, and adequate housing...... Though I do think it would be a lot better for Elvis to be tied outside where he could lay in the sin and watch the world go by.

*oops, sorry for injecting levity. Seriously, I also tether my dogs when I am out in the yard with them. My yard has a deep slope and is unfenceable. If I couldn't tether them, they would be stuck in the house. You can look at my siggie to see how flabby and out of shape the poor things are. They get tons of exercize at other times. One is currently asleep on my bed, further demonstrating how abused and unloved he is.*

[ufimych]

Chaining or tethering it does not matter. Both is better, then crating, because the dog can move more and see more around. What matters is how much active or quiet time do you spend with your dog, when it is free of restrains. This is what makes your dog really happy. My dogs prefer being chained or tethered, then being penned away from the house and out of my presence. Tethering with a cable is not good for every dog, some of them try to chew on deceptive plastic coating and damage their teeth. Chain is all metal and the dog does not chew on it. If my dog is chained for a few hours and runs free every day for a few hours, it is not a problem at all; it accepts it easily. I know many dog owners, whose dogs are barking many long hours in a crummy crate, when their owners are working. This is a cruel and unusual punishment. All this fuss about chaining does not make sense and serves only animal rightist sympathizers.

[SadiesMom2]

I think the real bottom line is ~ we need to stop ALL invasive laws and emphasize teaching responsible dog ownership (or responsible anything else). More laws is NOT what this nation needs ~ at least not this kind. More loss of freedoms.
http://rewrittenprincess.blogspot.com

[noludoru]

Originally Posted by noludoru

Holy ****. Gemp, where did you find that, Summit's recent thread? That really, really scares me. How are they going to judge that you are an able bodied person? Do you need a doctor's note to walk your dog? (I have some health problems, and if that bill is passed and I lived in Georgia I probably wouldn't even be allowed to walk my dog if Animal Control knew about them.) Is there an age cut off to being "able bodied?" How about a height cut off - if you are less than five feet tall, are you able-bodied enough to walk a large dog? Are children considered "able-bodied?" What if you are out of shape? Are you still an able-bodied person who is allowed to walk your dog? How about if your dog is exceedingly well-mannered on-leash, and as far as you know, you don't have to be "able-bodied" to walk your dog? Are you automatically considered unfit to walk your dog if you have dropped a leash before?

Is it legal to do training by standing on one end of the leash so you can have your hands free - since the wording is that the leas must be "held?" What about if you must stop for a moment and tie your shoe, can you attach the leash to something?

Re-reading my old post here.. I just see all sorts of possibilities for this to be abused and used in an age-ist, size-ist, discriminating-against-people-with-disabilities-or-health-problems nightmare. How would people with disabilities walk their service dogs? How would they be able to get around? Could it be twisted as a way to get peoples' medical records? (Ex - "Well, we will be fining you xxxx amount if you cannot PROVE that you are able-bodied, and we will need your records to prove it.")

[vomdominus]

Sadly, this is another case of irresponsible people messing it up for everyone else.

The vast majority of people who tether their dogs doubtlessly do it responsibly, but it's always that 1%....

[dogluver8906]

I was completely in favor of the anti-tethering law when it passed in California. But that was because I knew of many dogs in my neighborhood alone where dogs lived their lives at the end of a chain. I would call my local SPCA, but they couldn't do anything for such dogs. There was no law against keeping your dog on a chain. No matter how short it was, so long as the dog had access to shelter and food and water. Which for many dogs, it only took about 4-6 feet to allow them this access. Can you imagine? Spending your life on a short chain? Naturally, once the law passed I began trying to report the dogs that knew were kept on short chains. The sad thing however, is that my local SPCA doesn't enforce local laws very well. I called several times on a few people, and yet still nothing was ever done. They were given warning after warning and that was it. No fines or any kind of punishment to enforce the law. Sometimes the SPCA wouldn't even come out when I called. They would just keep the call on record. It's frustrating. However, I also feel for those who do tether their dogs responsibly. Those who tether their dogs with long tethers and excercise their dogs properly should not be punished. Although I think in my area someone who kept their dog thethered responsibly wouldn't have to worry at all since even those that chain their dogs with heavy short chains aren't punished for it. It is my personal belief that the law should be more clear. There should be a defined minimum length for a dog's tether. Also, each case should be based on the dog owner's situation and if the dog can be left untethered.

[Zoom]

I'll repeat again, it's not the tethers that cause neglect. In college, I lived across the alley from a GSD kept in a 6x4 pen. I never saw anyone interacting with this dog, but the dog was kept fed and watered. However, the dog was clearly underexercised and understimulated. But because he was 'loose' (not on a tether) Animal Control didn't care.

Neglect is not the product of a single tool, be it tether, chain, leash or pen. Neglect is the singular property of the OWNER and the lack of character within that person. And that is what should be judged when determining the extent of abuse on an animal.

We've all seen cases of horrific abuse against horses left out to pasture (at least if you watch Animal Cops.) Is there abuse less because they were left to roam free in a grass-less pasture and not chained/tethered? To outlaw tethering or chaining is to remove a very valuable tool for those who take great measures to provide responsible ownership for their pets.

[ACooper]

Very well said Zoom. I agree with every word.

Take away their ability to chain the dog, it will be left in a pen or crate. There are people in this world that will abuse any/every type of tool you can think of, and you know what? It isn't really even about abusing the "tool"...........it's about certain people not being fit for pet ownership. Take away one option, they WILL find another. What will be on the chopping block after taking away chaining doesn't work?

They need to enforce the laws already in place. Just by doing THAT puppy mills would be easier to shut down as well individual abuse cases. Shutting down puppy mills would probably zap a large number of these irresponsible owners in the long run. At least IMO, but that's another thread for another day.

Why spend more time/money in more legislation that won't be enforced before we enforce what's already law?