Dear Council Member, Humane Society, etc., [Fill in as you need]
As a dog lover, I am quite concerned about the recent attempts by a few radical "humaniacs" to portray the practice of tethering dogs, per se, as cruel. These individuals are providing a one-sided opinion which presents all tethering of dogs as horrific and makes no attempt at providing a balanced viewpoint. They carefully ignore the fact that neglect of an animal is already against the law - tethered or not - and that they are asking the jurisdiction to take the untenable position of legislating how a dog owner can best contain their specific dog. It is not unreasonable to assume that the jurisdiction could, would (and should) be held liable for the actions of, or injury/death to, any dog which escapes its owner's property due to that owner being prohibited from safetly containing their dog. It should be clearly understood that the safety and welfare of our pets is actually put at risk by anti-tethering legislation.
The goal of the anti-tethering lobby is to use their misinformation to lead those unacquainted with the facts to the conclusion that anyone who tethers a dog in anyway is inhumane and should be cited for animal cruelty. Of course, the act of tethering itself is not cruel and is a long standing and accepted means of safely securing many kinds of animals. The ultimate goal of these anti-tethering groups (such as PETA) is to impede the management practicies of professional and hobby dog owners whose activities such as hunting, sled dog racing, weight pull contests, and other dogsports are under constant attack by these groups. One large group has even been honest enough to state publicly that they consider "breed bans" and anti-tethering laws as "the first step" toward the total banning of all pet ownership - because they consider pet ownership cruel to the animals.
Certainly no one wants to see neglected dogs - none more than I - but for an organization to equate absolutely the tethering of dogs with neglect is untenable. Anti-tethering information, without exception, presents tethering of companion animals in the worst possible light but makes no mention of the truly cruel practice of "crating" dogs. "Crating" is the practice of using an airline shipping crates as a dog's "primary enclosure". Sadly, many modern dogs spend the majority of their life in these conditions when their owners fail to provide them with an appropriate kennel or tether. By the way, "crating" should be banned, as the living space provided for a dog who is "day crated" (spends the day in a crate while owners are at work) does not meet the USDA minimum standards for the space required for a dog in a research laboratory - now that's cruel! A tethered dog can stand, walk about, get away from its own urine and feces - all things a crated dog cannot do. If the "anti-tethering" folks were truly concerned about the welfare of the animal they would be working to stop this practice; instead, they often condone it.
Today most people understand that the statement "chaining makes a dog mean," is a myth in its purest form. This is easily disproved by the untold number of loving, friendly and tethered dogs. Are all the huskies that run the Iditarod sled race vicious? Of course not, and everyone of them is tethered on a short chain when not racing. Are coonhounds dangerous to people? Of course not, and the standard practice with hound owners is to tether them. Hunting beagles, bird dogs, and competitive weight pull dogs - all are routinely tethered as a means of management, and all invalidate the "chaining makes a dog mean" theory. It is often quoted that 25% of all human fatalities from dog bites occur because the dog involved was tethered. But what of the 75% of dogs which killed a human while NOT tethered? Personally, if someone has an aggressive dog, I'd just as soon they keep the dog securely tethered.
Sadly, there will always be dog owners who get a dog and then neglect it. This can occur with the dog on a tether, in a kennel, in a crate in the garage, or even in the house. I wish to point out that like anything, tethering of dogs can be done well, or it can be turned into a means of neglect. Done well, it is one of the finest ways to safely confine a dog, allowing them room to move about, even play, letting them enjoy warm sunshine, fresh air and rolling in the grass during the day. Tethering, done correctly, is a humane, appropriate form of confinement for companion dogs. For any of you who have questions concerning appropriate tethering, I would like to direct you to a web site with information on the issue. The direct web site address to the page on tethering is: WorkingPitBull.com/housing2.htm
Thank you for your time and interest in this issue,
Sincerely,
[Sign here, copy and paste onto your e-mail]
|
