Unchain the dogs of New York State!

I have a question for the people who talk about how their dogs can get out of fencing. If you take your dog outside, play some rousing games, and then bring them back in, do they have the time or inclination to get out? If a dog doesn't have a chance to get bored, they probably wouldn't have a chance to get out, would they?

Of course, I have heard of dogs that want to get out as soon as you let them outside, but they were rescue dogs who didn't yet know that they were "home".

J.D. did it while living on a ranch If they want to get out they will. He had plenty of stimulation wasnt cooped up inside at all he was always outside unless he was inside with us but he saw something he wanted and he went after it a yound Russian Razorback hog he didnt even notice he ran through a fence.

Well then, I'll send you my dogs.


Which costs more money and time, and some dogs will still escape, as has been posted in this thread.

What about property that is not easy to fence ~ too rocky or uneven?

Or those who live in a community where fencing is not allowed or you are limited to a 4 foot fence?

What happens when someone forgets to close the gate?

Tethers are mobile. You can move the tether, and the dog with it, while you are working in the yard or for cleaning.

If you're visiting friends or family who don't have a fenced yard, tethering can provide a temporary means of containment.

Tethering often is used as a primary means of containment when camping.

A dog on a 15 foot tether has 716 square feet of usable space to move about in as opposed to a typical 10 X 6 foot kennel run which has only 60 square feet of which the corners are not used. Even a 5 foot tether provides approximately 80 square feet of space.

All states already have animal welfare and anti-cruelty laws that can and should be used to handle cases of abusive tethering.

http://www.workingpitbull.com/tethering.html

I love Diane Jessups site good posting corgi power. Shes also a highly respected working APBT source.

I would also like to point out the fact that she also says to use screw snaps for some dogs too.

In my case, it has nothing to do with boredom or a desire to run away. Voodoo is happy to stay in the yard---usually. I'd say that 99.9% of the time, he never even attempts to leave the yard.

It's that 0.1% that causes problems. Voodoo will not hesitate to leave the yard for something he deems very important. For example, we first discovered he could get out of the yard when he thought I was taking Zeus somewhere fun without him---so then-puppy Voodoo went over the 5' stucco wall after us.

We heightened the wall to about 7 feet with a stout wooden trellis addition (and added a 7' gate), and thought the problem was solved. He never again attemped to go over it. We found out we were wrong when, several months later, he literally cannonballed straight through the wooden trellis in pursuit of two stray dogs who were fence-fighting with him.

We put up rod-iron bars instead. Problem solved. Then again, several months later, he proved he could jump the gate in his pursuit of some more strays who had entered the yard.

There was also the time when we discovered he had figured out how to open the gate latch (we had to replace it), but I'm sure you get the idea.

Voodoo only tries to leave the yard when he has his drive on and nobody is there to stop him verbally. And that's the most crucial time to keep him contained. Could we try to improve the fence again? Yes, we could. But the problem is, we have no way knowing if it'll be enough. Voodoo will not try to leave the yard at all; he won't test it. The only way we'll know is when the "big moment" comes, and the fence either works or fails.

That's why he's now on a tie-out whenever he's outside alone. I don't want to trust a fence again. Especially since he's become more protective---I can't imagine what would happen if some uninvited stranger was poking around our yard and Voodoo was unrestrained and alone.

once J.D. went through the stock fence we werent trying anything else LOL. It woulda had to have been a brick wall and then knowing him he woulda tried to jump it

Hmmm... and banning chaining will eliminate neglect how?

People who neglect dogs on chains will neglect dogs in fences, crates and anywhere else.
Which is better... people leaving a dog on a chain with no food/water/shelter or loose in a yard with no food/water/shelter.

I also don't see how eliminating a tether is going to eliminate dog fighting either... I thought you'd have to actually elminate dog fighting to eliminate dog fighting. Putting dogs in kennels side by side you'd be able to get the same effect as that's also apparently a popular way to create agression... although we should probably eliminate crates next...

Oh. Yah. Great thinking. More laws. Let's declare a War on Tethering. Surely it will be every bit as effective as the Wars on Poverty, Drugs, Terrorism, etc.

Thanks Gempress and Darkchild for your answers, I see your point(s). Tether + good owner = fine. Tether + bad owner = bad. Right?

Summitview:

Summitview, I am appalled. I must question if you have even actually read the posts in this thread, because you have skimmed over many legitimate points by stating that we are "making excuses" for animal abuse.

Tethering is a perfectly acceptable way of containing a dog. If everyone who responsibly tethers their dogs was not a dog owner, there would be many more little green bags with dead animal's bodies in them, and so many people who are great dog owners without their beloved pets. Do you know how expensive a fence is? We have one of the cheapest options possible, and it still cost us over $500 to buy materials and install, and it's not that much fence.

All this petition has brought from Chazzers is opposition. Not sure how you missed that. We have raised valid points against it and several of us have stated that we will not sign it. I simply do not understand how you think ridding New York of chains will rid NY of animal abuse? Do you really believe it was the chain that left Khuno to starve? Do you believe if he had been left in a kennel, a crate, or behind a fence he wouldn't have been starved and left to die? That if the person who put him on a chain in the first place hadn't been allowed to he or she magically would have been a great dog owner and Khuno would have found his forever home elsewhere?

And the last thing I have to say here.. is that I rescued a dog off a chain. So please don't think that I am someone who doesn't know what they are talking about. He wasn't emaciated, but all the wounds that were inflicted on my dog were mental. I do, however, discriminate between people who have happy, well-cared for dogs who spend part of their day on a tether and the true animal abusers.

Agreed....

Do you really think that limiting dog ownership only to the wealthy will improve the conditions for dogs overall? Since having to move out of a place where I built an expensive fence and kennel, our rentals since then have either had partial fence or crappy chain link that my dogs could undermine in about 5 seconds. The house we're buying has NO fence whatsoever. With 5 dogs hanging around, we need to use what we can to make sure they get their outside time. That's life. You adapt.

If we lose the right to use whatever means necessary to contain our dogs, how many dogs do you think are going to be running the streets? But I'm sure they're much better off running loose than in the home of a low-income owner. Pffft.

I am ok with tethering responsibly, but I am against 24/7. I have and will continue to tether on occasion depending on the circumstance, however 24/7 tethering disgusts me. Do I prefer a fence, absolutley. Do I believe that some dogs cannot be contained with a fence, no. I have a 190 lb dog who requires secure fencing. I have a husky cross who I believe is half cat, she can scale unbelievable walls and fences. I have a beagle who will follow his nose at all costs. But we still have a fence that can contain them.

Although I do not think a law against tethering in general is a good law, I do beleive that something has to be done to protect the dogs who are tethered 24/7, who live on a dirt patch because they have worn away all of the grass, who rarely get any attention, suffer from neglect etc, etc, etc. I do not believe that being tied to one spot indefinatley is a good life for any dog. However, I don't believe that the problem lies with the actual tethering, the problem lies with neglect, abuse, and general irresponsible pet ownership. To generalize that all tethering is bad is not a solution to the problem. Those who are neglecting and abusing their dogs are only going to find another way to do it. Maybe now they will build a tiny run allowing for even less movement than an actual tether.

I can understand wanting to create a law that prevents the abuse that some tethered dogs endure, but I don't beleive that this will solve the problem. Those who leave their dogs out in the conditions that we can all agree to find wrong, are not going to all of a sudden decide, "Hey, tethering is illegal, well now Sparky can live in the house and get the proper amount of attention, etc...." Instead a law like this will only stop tethering (if it would even be enforced) for both the responsible and irresponsible owners- and the abuse will still continue...

For those that are interested in reading an unbiased study on the effects of chaining vs kenneling....

http://www.nopitbullbans.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/cornell_study_on_tethering.pdf

To add something to this, while watching the Animal Cops shows, most of the time the calls brought the officers to the poorer neighborhoods. However, on the Animal Cops Miami (when I used to watch it before the pit bull myths being spouted made me turn it off in disgust) they also went to some pretty rich neighborhoods. On the Miami show, they pulled an emaciated, neglected Doberman from the fenced backyard of a sprawling mansion. And you know if someone lives in a mansion in Miami, they can dam* well afford to buy dog food.

Neglect happens everywhere.

People who chain dogs irresponsibly will not suddenly become responsible owners if they have a fence. A fence does not make a person a better person. If they keep the dog in filth on a chain they will do it in a fence.
Anti chaining laws only punish the responsible. They don't work any better than anti-breed laws or limit laws.

Instead of pushing for ridiculous laws, we need to be pushing for funding to pay for law enforcment to fund the man power to enforce care laws that are already on the books.

The thing is, how is anyone going to know who is tethering 24/7 and if tethering 24/7 is so bad what about fencing 24/7? In the end, what's the difference?

A new law was passed here .....no tethering after 10 PM...until 5 AM , I hope it's being enforced .

The chain is heavy. I'll give you that. But that's one sturdy dog, and he's got his head up. I'll take his owner's word that he broke other chains.

That chain clearly has a latch, its a screw latch. Are you visually impared?

What dark wear marks? I see the shadow between his chest muscles. Sarama has a shadow just like that, when she's standing in good light, and she's never been chained.

If there is one thing that makes me lose it around AR people, more than ANYTHING else, it is that they see what they want to see. And what they want to see is suffering animals. If they can look at a picture, a movie, or real life and construe any way an animal might be not having the best day of its life, its cruelty. If they can reinterpret something benign (a screw latch) as something horrible (no latch) they will, even if any one with eyes can see what is there. I think they really do see no latch . . . because they believe so strongly that there isn't one . . . and they want there not to be one, because it proves how horrible the rest of us are.

That picture you posted of the dog left to starve on a chain? That's horrible! But lets see . . .is the problem that the dog was on a chain . . . or that the dog was left to starve? He could have starved in a pen, in a yard, locked in a house, in a crate, or lost in the woods just as well. Just so long as he he could not get to food, he could starve. The chain is not the problem, the abandonment is.

Permanent chaining? Yep, that's definately bad. So would permanent crating. Or permanent kenneling, with no walks or excercise. So would keeping your dog locked in the same room of your house all day.

No shelter? Well . . you can have shelter with a chain . . just like you can have a big, beautifully fenced yard . . . with no food water or shelter.

Generally, for a number of reasons, I don't approve of chaining dogs. It is often abused. But there are situations in which it is the best solution. Would a ban help stop cruelty? Maybe for the ignorant. Maybe, in a few cases. More likely the dogs would be dumped, or treated cruelly in some other way.

With large strong dogs, using those eye hooks with a spring latch is like using a peice of yarn to tow your boat. The spring latches are not meant to take any kind of stress, with a scew-bolt C-clamp, the dog cannot exert pressure on the weak part of the latch. Latches are fine for securing dog kennel doors, but I don't even like them on the end of leashes because they can be pulled, just the right way, and give. Then you have a dog in traffic and a tragedy.