|
|
|
|
|
Can you believe some people still tether their dogs? If you're like me you don't have to suspend disbelief. The evidence is incontrovertible--you can see it as you pass through neighbrhoods with small yards and incomplete fencing.
Dogs there are tied to trees or staked to a makeshift doghouse. They bark non-stop at anyone who walks past, lunging against their collars, rattling their chains.
In Miami-Dade County the practice is legal. Here's my attempt to inject some awareness into the local mentality, as submitted to The Miami Herald for last Sunday's "Dr. Dolittler" column.
Break the chain! Don’t tether your dog!
Tethering pets has long been a hot button issue for animal welfare advocates across the United States. Several states and a myriad of municipalities have outlawed this practice in which dogs are chained to stakes or otherwise “tethered” to a fixed location out of doors.
Given that constant tethering has been shown to be physically and psychologically damaging to dogs (far more so than crating, penning or allowing to run while connected to an overhead line), the issue has finally come before the Miami-Dade’s Board of County Commissioners’ Public Health and Safety Committee via the County’s Animal Services department.
Chained dogs have never been a pretty sight for any pet lover. Dogs housed like this are physically at risk for a variety of reasons: They strain at their collars, often resulting in devastating neck wounds. They’re exposed to extremes of tropical heat, which is especially debilitating when owners fail to provide adequate shade and water. They’re also subject to the risk of attack by other dogs and a prime target for neighbors’ ire should their barking become problematic.
I’d bark, too! These pets are literally starved for attention. Dogs are social animals for whom the isolation inherent to constant tethering is psychologically damaging. Indeed, dogs thus abused have been shown to be 2.8 times more likely to bite than the average dog. This demonstration of unsociability is only one of the many ways these dogs may express their serious deprivation of normal socialization.
In 1996, The United States Department of Agriculture said, “Our experience in enforcing the Animal Welfare Act has led us to conclude that continuous confinement of dogs by a tether is inhumane.”
In 2003, The American Veterinary Medical Association said, “Never tether or chain your dog because this can contribute to aggressive behavior.”
I could not agree more. South Florida doesn’t need more biting, barking, socially unstable, physically and psychologically abused animals.
Already adopted in Ft. Lauderdale, this anti-tethering ordinance will soon be submitted to Miami-Dade’s Board of County Commissioners’ Public Health and Safety Committee for their consideration. Dr. Sara Pizano, the director of Miami-Dade Animal Services, is hot on the trail of a victory on this issue.
A petition is currently being circulated by a variety of animal welfare groups in the area to help promote this item’s implementation. If you have an interest in signing one or otherwise contributing your voice to this cause, please contact Protect Children & Dogs in Miami-Dade online at pcmiamidade@bellsouth.net or by phone at 305-282-3527.
Like it? Here's one more for you, a position statement I'm hoping our South Florida Veterinary Medical Association will soon ratify:
Miami-Dade Board of County Commissioners’ Public Health and Safety Committee:
Tethering, the act of confining an animal to a fixed location with a collar and line, is an inappropriate method of confinement for dogs.
As representatives of the South Florida Veterinary Medical Association, we disavow this practice on the grounds that it is inhumane.
Tethering is not only unsafe for dogs due to collar injuries and exposure-related illness but has also been shown to increase aggression in pets maintained under these conditions.
In 1996, The United States Department of Agriculture said, “Our experience in enforcing the Animal Welfare Act has led us to conclude that continuous confinement of dogs by a tether is inhumane.”
In 2003, The American Veterinary Medical Association said, “Never tether or chain your dog because this can contribute to aggressive behavior.”
Miami-Dade should enact legislation to reflect the prevailing wisdom on this issue and the values of its local veterinary community.
I'm fairly certain that some version of my language will be accepted by the SFVMA's board members so that we can contribute meaningfully to the local discourse. Stay tuned for my position statement on HB 101, the bill that mkes it easier to enact more breed bans throughout Florida.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
And yes, it's also true that this law would affect lower income people disproportionately. They're the ones whose tethered dogs are most visible.
There are several people in my neighborhood who use tethers to give their well-cared-for, well-socialized dogs who live in the house with the family, as they should, some outside time when they can't walk them. These are all bigger dogs; some of them are Big Scary Dogs(tm). They're cared for, they're loved, and they're on tethers some of the time.
I would never, ever leave my little dog outside unattended for even a moment, but I do use a tether to have her outside with me when I'm shoveling snow or mowing the lawn.
An outside dog is at increased risk, and a greater risk to become aggressive, regardless of the method of confinement. I'd much, much rather see a good, solid, secure fence than a tether; I'd much rather _have_ a back yard I could fence securely and play fetch with Addy there, rather than in the living room (at least in good weather!) But the mere fact of a tether, by itself, does not mean that the dog is neglected or abused.
My dogs are sometimes tethered while we train -- one is tethered while the other is being worked. And yes, they're also tethered while I work in the front yard. I used to also tether them in the campsite while camping. These are all ways for your dog to be WITH you, and they're also NOT the point or the target of anti-chaining laws.
Dogs who are isolated on a short chain for life are miserable. They also often become dangerous, especially to any child who wanders into the chained dog's area.
Using a tether now and then to keep your pet safe in a potentially unsafe situation is just fine. Parking a dog on a chain for life is cruel and I would be happy to see this practice banned, for the good of the dogs and the safety of people.
I happen to live in one of those neighborhoods. I grew up with a dog who lived indoors and had ready access to a large back yard. And I realize, looking back, that he is one of the most poorly-socialized dogs I have ever known. Not that a backyard dog is necessarily poorly socalized, but people like my mother don't have a need to get their pet out among other dogs, and the result is a poorly socialized dog.
In my no-fences community, I have met most of my neighbors who have dogs, and have met their dogs, too. I think that, to generalize based on my observations, neighborhoods without fences encourage people to get out and about with their dogs, resulting in better socialized animals.
I have also had a tethered-during-the-day collie and under many of the statutes that would still be allowed, under others... well, sign o the times. I am actually okay with a few appropriate uses going out or needing exemption to give leverage to agencies who need to make changes for the dogs going insane form isolation. I am clearly not much of a libertarian on this issue.
My dog was next door to someone who tethered her two pitties out back 24/7 and I would give up my dogs option or find a way to work around it in order to have saved those poor animals. They were tethered nearer my house than hers and barked all the time and were absolutely hysterical and dangerous when approached, clearly not doing well. But they were feed and had basica shelter so no law broken.
Of course there is nothing stopping the people who inappropriately tether their dogs from putting them in a crate the garage 24/7 if tethering is banned. Not illegal, but probably even more inhumane.
I think the problem with most anti-tethering legislation is that it's impossible to legislate common (har har) sense. Instead of anti-tethering ordinances I would prefer to see laws against cruelty and neglect strengthened. That is the problem, and we're not going to make it go away by addressing the symptoms.
uh, no, it hasn't.
There is a correlation between tethered dogs, and biting dogs... but there is no evidence that tethering "causes" aggression. Except of course when a kid is harassing a dog and the dog has no means to escape.
It's equally possible that aggressive dogs are put on tethers, as that tethering causes aggression.
As others have said: it's social isolation that can be damaging to dogs. It's perfectly possible to have a safe tethering set up that causes no damage (physical or social).
But the bigger issue here is: how much control over your stewardship of your pets to you want to cede to the state... or to individuals like Tammy Grimes who think it's ok to steal pets whose care they don't agree with?
All I was saying was that a run line doesn't work any better than a rope tether, and both need to go. Both conditions and isolated kennells damage the behaviour and psyche of the dog.
Good luck Dr. K.
You're a scientist, as are all doctors.
I thought scientists believed in, you know, science.
If there are no facts.. but only assumptions.. behind the notion that tethering causes aggression.. then how can you argue for laws against it?
Of course none of us wants dogs abused.
But why isn't the solution better enforcement of EXISTING laws?
Do you really want some agent of law enforcement arresting people (or seizing animals) for perfectly safe tethering set ups?
I sure don't.
The problem IS NOT THE TETHERS.
The problems are dogs left in situations where they can hurt themselves (getting tangled/hung on the tether); dogs without water/food/shelter; dogs permanently isolated from a family.
At least the first 2 are surely covered by existing laws.. so arrest people for leaving a dog without water or shelter, or having a BAD tethering set up.
Arrest them for leaving a dog alone in a yard 24/7 for days on end? Well.. if you can find some way to efficiently monitor/prove it.
The solution to people ignoring laws is NOT to pass more laws.
p.s. I've always posted here as "EmilyS", so I'm not the same as "emily"
Lol, I agree 100% with this!
As for chains, overhead lines or just sticking a dog outside 24/7 in a fenced yard I think it is inhumane whether or not they have food, water and shelter. I have a huge yard with a 6ft. privacy fence but I don't leave my dogs outside alone its just not safe, imo.
You can't always legislate stupidity or laziness. There are many people who have no business getting a dog. They don't do research, they don't consider their lifestyle, they don't know how to train, or don't want to learn how. So their solution to their "bad dog" problem, is to stick it outside.
Yes a chain would be worse then a pen, but the underlying problem, a failure of people, remains.
And of course this just scratches at the surface of why people tether, etc
EmilyS said, "You're a scientist, as are all doctors."
Well, while some doctors (or vets) are "scientists", not all doctors are scientists. The training is different, although doctors and vets (and engineers for the matter) have to take many basic science classes as part of their introductory training. That's why they get an MD or DVM without ever actually making a hypothesis and testing it.
It's only within the last 10-15 years that the concept of "evidence based medicine" has made any inroads in medical education.(I don't know about vet schools, I've only worked in medical school research departments or at schools with research engineering departments as well as production engineering departments.) At a basic level, evidence based medicine asks the question "Does this procedure, drug, surgery, etc., etc., result in a positive outcome for an identifiable number of patients?"
My experience is that vets are better at this than MDs, perhaps because Vet Med is still more "personal" than human medicine has become, if only because there are fewer people and institutions involved. Most vets I've dealt with answer my questions without much hesitation (I've learned how to ask the questions without claiming some authority, I guess.) I also have more choice of vets than MDs.
Tethers, crates,indoor, outdoor. Dogs are "meant" to roam in groups, so all these are simply variations on the theme of modern human-dog interactions.Children can't run free in the streets any more. Are there any negative conseuences? Ask a teacher.
Heather
Believe it or not, the Town of Southwest Ranches, where Nikki and Tony both reside, has a resident who freely admits that she is on the Animal Advisory Board of Broward County and OPPOSES the "Break the Chain" campaign. She even tries to dissuade cities that are considering the passing of the tough anti-chaining law and has openly campaigned against anti-tethering laws within Southwest Ranches. As residents of Southwest Ranches we are mortified...and worse yet...it appears as if the Town of Southwest Ranches town council is actually listening to her. With the exception of Southwest Ranches Town Councilman Steve Breitkreuz, the mayor and council just can't seem to grasp the concept of the "Break the Chain" message.
Articles such as yours will hopefully help a great deal to educate them.
On behalf of (I'll bet) 99% of the residents of Broward County...Thank you. Thank you for caring and speaking out for those who can't speak for themselves.
In Broward County alone the following cities have already passed tough anti-chaining ordinances: Fort Lauderdale, Hollywood, Pembroke Park, Deerfield Beach, Coconut Creek, Parkland, Oakland Park, Pompano Beach, Dania Beach, Hallandale Beach and Wilton Manors.
I personally thank these compassionate and caring city officials who have gone above and beyond the call of duty and have taken the initiative to consider passing laws that will forever ban the cruel chaining of dogs. What's wrong with the county (Broward) as a whole? Don't they get it? Why must each city pass its own laws?
Stop listening to that dog breeder who's on the Broward County Animal Care Advisory Board who opposes the concept of "Break the Chain" and do the right things for our dogs!
I beg everyone involved to keep this momentum up!! Keep speaking out especially to our lawmakers. We can make a difference.
Marianne
The words "never" and "always" are pretty clear field marks that an imperative is going to be unsupported and possibly unsupportable.
I'm not in favor of 24/7/365 chaining, and I don't know anyone who is. I'm also opposed to constant crating, constant confinement in a garage, life in a kennel run. What I'm *not* is naive enough to think that new laws are an effective or just way to improve the lives of dogs.
Like state-forced sterilization, a blanket tethering ban will cause an increase in dogs dumped at the pounds and shelters, in pretty much direct proportion to the zealotry of the enforcement.
While I agree that there are too many "pet" dogs who are kept chained up for too much of their lives, I've also seen tremendous cultural progress in the past 30 years -- there are many fewer animals who live chained lives, and it is not considered "normal" by middle-class people anymore. It has been social pressure that has accomplished this, not legislation that just begs for petulantly selective enforcement and the escalation of neighbor-dispute witch hunts.
Last summer, I'd often give my elderly, disabled, dying German shepherd a break from the semi-bedlam of the puppies and young dogs by leaving her out in my unfenced front yard, where she could recline in the shade and be entertained by the neighborhood activity, and walk around a bit without being knocked over by some young critters' game or tumble down the slope in our fenced back yard. She positively *beamed* while watching kids, dogs, skateboarders, and the whole summer parade -- it was especially good for her because she didn't get out and about much anymore due to her mobility impairment and incontinence. I soon learned that I needed to tether her to an apple tree, to prevent her from either absently wandering to the neighbors' or falling into the ditch. She'd be out there for quite a while each day, and she looked thin and very wobbly. I'm sure there are many fanatics out there who would have identified her as abused. Fortunately, my neighbors are not quite so dim-witted. I certainly broke that "never" injunction. In the same circumstances, I'll do it again.
Oddly, the clothesline clipped to her collar failed to make my sweet old girl vicious.
Only responsible, law-abiding citizens obey laws and those people are not a problem in the first place.
I agree with commenters above. Since nuance is not a legislative option and when it is misguidedly codified it merely encourages selective, subjective and interpretative enforcement by the actual enforcers, which is unconstitutional, a better option is to enforce existing laws on a zero-tolerance basis to see how that goes.
If it is considered necessary to modernize existing cruelty/abuse/neglect laws, then that would be a far safer option and one less fraught with pitfalls, some of which have been pointed out here.
1. A smart burglar will find a way to enter the home or steal whatever he is after by using a path that avoids the dog. What kind of a security system is kept on a short rope, usually away from the house so that the owner is not in proximity of the urine and feces?
2. A tethered dog is a sitting duck for an intruder...the intruder can shoot, stab, stone or even poison the dog.
3. MOST IMPORTANTLY.....I THINK THAT THE PERSON THAT WROTE THIS COMMENT HAS NEVER HAD A DOG AS A MEMBER OF HIS FAMILY. HE/SHE OBVIOUSLY SEES A DOG AS A TOOL, A MEANS TO AN END.
I SAY THIS: IF YOU WANT A DOG FOR PROTECTION, KEEP HIM/HER IN YOUR HOME WITH YOUR FAMILY AS A MEMBER OF YOUR FAMILY. DOGS ARE PACK ANIMALS AND VIEW US AS MEMBERS OF THEIR FAMILY OR PACK.
EXPECTATIONS: WHAT EXACTLY DO YOU EXPECT YOUR TETHERED DOG TO DO WHEN CONFRONTED BY AN INTRUDER? HOW DO YOU EXPECT YOUR DOG TO DISTINGUISH A NEIGHBOR'S CHILD OR THE FPL METER READER OR MAIL CARRIER FROM A BURGLAR?
LASTLY, I LIVE ON A 5 ACRE RANCH ON THE EDGE OF THE EVERGLADES. I HAVE NO NEIGHBORS. I HAVE 15 DOGS THAT CAME TO ME AFTER THEIR OWNERS DUMPED THEM. I HAVE NEVER TETHERED A DOG. MY DOGS ARE A TREMENDOUS SECURITY SYSTEM AND THEY HAVE IMPLEMENTED THEIR OWN STRATEGY....SOME COVER THE FRONT, SIDE, BACK OF THE PROPERTY WHILE OTHERS PROTECT THE ACTUAL DOORS AND WINDOWS. WHEN MY DOGS BARK, AS A PACK, THEY ARE THE BEST SECURITY SYSTEM. THEY ARE ALERTING ME TO BEWARE....i MUST OBSERVE THEM AND NOTICE IN WHAT DIRECTION THEY ARE BARKING......IT IS THEN UP TO ME TO DEPLOY MY FAMILY PROTECTION STRATEGY WHICH INCLUDES VARIOUS STEPS, INCLUDING ALERTING LAW ENFORCEMENT.
SORRY FOR BEING LONG-WINDED HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THAT, FOR THE SAKE OF THE DOGS......IT IS OUR OBLIGATION NOT TO CRITICIZE, BUT TO EDUCATE AND SHOW THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY TO FOLKS THAT TOOK THE TIME TO WRITE, AS OPPOSED TO DEGRADING OR INSULTING FOLKS.