It's sad that this forum excuses neglect just because of who inflicted it.
This thread now has over 1,000 views, and I've received a number of e-mails over the days in support of unchaining dogs - some from members who dare not speak out on the forums. Let's keep spreading the word! And bless those dogs,
like Doogie, who are now freed from life on a chain and resting at peace.
Let me say up front: I do not chain my dog. I do not need to. I have a high fence and she makes no attempt to escape it. I do not approve of chaining dogs all day and all night. I do not approve of dogs left in yards on a chain without shelter or water or food. I rather think the laws saying you can't chain them after 10 or before 5 are not an especially bad idea. But banning chaining altogether? Or are we talking about tethering . . . same thing, different object? What's next, fences?
A chain does not equal neglect any more than it equals starvation. That's what we have been trying to tell you. You keep using that word, perhaps you are unclear on what it means:
ne·glect (n
-gl
kt
)
tr.v. ne·glect·ed,
ne·glect·ing,
ne·glects 1. To pay little or no attention to; fail to heed; disregard:
neglected their warnings.
2. To fail to care for or attend to properly:
neglects her appearance.
3. To fail to do or carry out, as through carelessness or oversight:
neglected to return the call.
n. 1. The act or an instance of neglecting something.
2. The state of being neglected.
3. Habitual lack of care
If you care properly for your dog, it doesn't matter if he or she wears a chain or tether for a few hours a day vs. stays in the yard for a few hours a day vs. stays in a crate for a few hours a day. Since we can't be with our dogs all the time (as much as we might like to) and not all of us have dogs that are totally trustworthy (alas) our dogs must be confined.
Not all of us have idea circumstances: we may work long hours, or not be able to afford a fence (they are expensive to build), or have local laws that won't let us build a fence. We may have an escape artist. Neither us, nor our dogs, are perfect. Sometimes we have to settle for solutions that are less than ideal. Those solutions are, if properly used, far better than our dogs ending up dead, whether from being struck by a car or euthanized at a shelter. A less than ideal situation (the dog with us all the time, loose in the house) does not equal neglect . .. and it is certainly better than being dead.
What matters is that they are are cared for. That they are not confined 24/7. That they are loved and petted and played with and excercised. Many chained dogs are neglected . . . but they are not neglected because they are chained . . . they are chained because they are neglected. The neglect came before the chain, and it is the problem, not the chain.
A chain is a tool. Like a collar, a leash, a fence or a crate. I have seen dogs abused with a collar and lead. I have seen dogs neglected with a fence. I am sure there are dogs neglected with a crate, but because that would be in someone else's house, I can't see it.
You are making a logical error . . . you are confusing an inanimate object with a human state of mind. The two may often go together, but they are not the same thing. By assuming they are, you are taking away a legitimate choice that dog owners have on how to confine their dog. That will land dogs in shelters, where they will die.
Try banning neglect. How about having animal control officers actually show up when concerned neighbors call and check the situation out. That would be nice. Then it can be determined if the dog is neglected . . . or if its out on a chain for the afternoon to enjoy the sun.
Is the dog always dirty? Skinny? Is there water? Is its collar embedded in its neck? Is its chain so heavy its can't lift its head? Is it chained without a shelter is a roaring blizard? That is what should matter, not a few links of metal.