Suki
09-24-2006, 12:25 AM
Unfit to be tied?
Lawmakers, advocates disagree on regulations for tethering of canines
By Jessica VanderKolk, jvanderkolk@altoonamirror.com (jvanderkolk@altoonamirror.com)
http://www.altoonamirror.com/storyphotos/a1doogie.jpg
To tether or not to tether — and for how long — is the question dog lovers around the nation are asking in light of the local case of a chained dog taken from his yard.
Lawmakers across the state and animal advocates across the country agree they don’t want dogs to suffer, but they differ on whether state laws should regulate tying up animals.
Local laws regulating dog tethering are most common, but Pennsylvania could become the second to enforce such a law statewide.
A bill on the issue has sat in the House Judiciary Committee since August 2005. It would prohibit tethering or penning a dog for longer than 16 hours in a 24-hour period — more lenient than other pending state laws.
The measure includes provisions for dog shelters and what owners must do for dogs chained outside at certain temperatures.
Main sponsor Rep. Mario Scavello hopes to schedule a hearing on the bill before the Nov. 7 election.
“If I have to amend it down a little, I will, but I want to see something happen,” said Scavello, R-Monroe. “What happened in your area is exactly what we want to try to avoid.”
Scavello referred to the case of Tammy Sneath Grimes, who will stand trial in Blair County in connection with the Sept. 11 theft of the 19-year-old German shepherd/lab mix, Jake, from a Freedom Township home. Grimes faces charges of theft and receiving stolen property.
According to unchainyourdog.org, an advocacy Web site run by a Little Rock, Ark. couple, Connecticut currently is the only state with a tethering law. That law states anyone who “confines or tethers such animal for an unreasonable period of time,” among other offenses, could face fines up to $1,000 and/or up to one year in jail.
A law in Washington, D.C. prohibits the “cruel chaining” of dogs, which it defines as attaching a dog to a stationary object or pulley using a chain, rope, cable or similar restraint.
In other states, California’s governor received from the legislature Sept. 13 a bill limiting dog chaining to three hours in a 24-hour period and prohibiting tying a dog to a house, tree or other stationary object.
In New York, the legislature hasn’t yet voted on a bill introduced in January to prohibit tethering dogs to a fixed point or pulley system for more than six hours per day.
John Iorio, Altoona’s animal control officer, said the city ordinance requires owners tie up or cage their dogs and not allow them to run loose. Logan, Blair and Antis townships only prohibit dogs from “running at large” without their owners or other guardian present.
Freedom Township has no ordinance related to tethering dogs, but animals must stay in their owners’ yards.
The stumbling block in passing the Pennsylvania bill is farmers whose dogs protect their livestock and crop fields, Scavello said.
“They might be able to move, but it’s the fact that they’re tethered,” he said. “We’ll negotiate that — we have to find a way to satisfy them. I think it’s necessary being that these things are happening across the commonwealth.”
Two dogs tied up in Monroe County during a snowstorm inspired the bill. Scavello said one of the dogs died.
“Without shelter, the two dogs were tied up in the snow — it’s common sense here,” he said. “I would hope we wouldn’t have to create these laws, but we need to realize unless we legislate we’re going to continue to have these issues.”
Cherie Graves of Newport Wash., chair of Responsible Dog Owners of the Western States, said her group’s position is the dog owner knows the most about her animal and would rather not see a bill regulating dog tethering.
“When we start regulating hours of being tethered, the government is getting into a position of taking away an owner’s rights and abilities to make judgments for his or her own animal,” Graves said. “Some do well with tethering — one size does not fit all.”
On the Grimes/Jake case, Graves said the animal rights movement makes a “huge deal out of very obscure instances.”
“How many dogs live to be 19 years old?” she said. “That’s the equivilant of a 119-year-old human being. The biggest cruelty was to come in and snatch that ancient animal from his home. The trauma alone of taking him out of his stable environment would probably kill him.
“It had to be a fruitful life to live that long.”
Graves called the government measures another animals rights movement to take away a person’s right to her animal.
“If a person cannot afford $5,000 worth of fencing and can’t tether it either, they’re forced to relinquish the animal and that’s just cruel,” she said.
Gail Whipple of Jacksonville, N.C. said she hopes the Grimes case is the one to help write the law. Whipple heads the Carolina Animal Protection Society of Onslow County Inc., a nonsheltered humane society.
“I live next door to people who chain their dogs up and it’s pathetic,” she said. “It really is worse in rural counties.”
Whipple said people have to remember dogs are intelligent, feeling, reasoning beings and aren’t “just” dogs.
“Would you treat your child that way?” she said of tethering. “I hope this will be a catalyst to change the laws. It’s up to the community to band together.”
As part of the CAPS animal adoption policy, potential owners must have fenced-in yards, so dogs can run loose. Whipple said her organization investigates animal cruelty and has changed laws in her county.
“In the early ’80s we stopped roadside zoos,” she said. “It’s been rewritten what a shelter should be and that dogs that are outside must be provided with daily sustenance and a covered shelter. “I wish we had stronger laws in many ways. We continue to fight.”
Local lawmakers have received only a few phone calls each from constituents concerned about the Grimes situation.
Both Reps. Rick Geist, R-Altoona and Jerry Stern, R-Martinsburg, said they would wait to see what the bill looks like if it leaves committee before taking a position. Neither are co-sponsors on the bill.
“I don’t believe anyone tolerates the abuse of any animals and there are provisions in place to deal with animals that are abused or not taken care of properly,” Stern said. “If you’re not doing that, you’re violating the crime codes.”
Geist said he doesn’t want to see animals or people suffer.
“We want to ensure animals remain private property, but are not in danger,” he said. “You would think people would take care of their pets.”
Mirror Staff Writer Jessica VanderKolk is at 946-7465.
************************************************** ***
“When we start regulating hours of being tethered, the government is getting into a position of taking away an owner’s rights and abilities to make judgments for his or her own animal,” Graves said. “Some do well with tethering — one size does not fit all.” = yeah, Cherie!http://www.game-dog.com/forums/images/icons/icon14.gif
and IMO, this Whipple lady really needs to get a clue! Dogs are not children!
Lawmakers, advocates disagree on regulations for tethering of canines
By Jessica VanderKolk, jvanderkolk@altoonamirror.com (jvanderkolk@altoonamirror.com)
http://www.altoonamirror.com/storyphotos/a1doogie.jpg
To tether or not to tether — and for how long — is the question dog lovers around the nation are asking in light of the local case of a chained dog taken from his yard.
Lawmakers across the state and animal advocates across the country agree they don’t want dogs to suffer, but they differ on whether state laws should regulate tying up animals.
Local laws regulating dog tethering are most common, but Pennsylvania could become the second to enforce such a law statewide.
A bill on the issue has sat in the House Judiciary Committee since August 2005. It would prohibit tethering or penning a dog for longer than 16 hours in a 24-hour period — more lenient than other pending state laws.
The measure includes provisions for dog shelters and what owners must do for dogs chained outside at certain temperatures.
Main sponsor Rep. Mario Scavello hopes to schedule a hearing on the bill before the Nov. 7 election.
“If I have to amend it down a little, I will, but I want to see something happen,” said Scavello, R-Monroe. “What happened in your area is exactly what we want to try to avoid.”
Scavello referred to the case of Tammy Sneath Grimes, who will stand trial in Blair County in connection with the Sept. 11 theft of the 19-year-old German shepherd/lab mix, Jake, from a Freedom Township home. Grimes faces charges of theft and receiving stolen property.
According to unchainyourdog.org, an advocacy Web site run by a Little Rock, Ark. couple, Connecticut currently is the only state with a tethering law. That law states anyone who “confines or tethers such animal for an unreasonable period of time,” among other offenses, could face fines up to $1,000 and/or up to one year in jail.
A law in Washington, D.C. prohibits the “cruel chaining” of dogs, which it defines as attaching a dog to a stationary object or pulley using a chain, rope, cable or similar restraint.
In other states, California’s governor received from the legislature Sept. 13 a bill limiting dog chaining to three hours in a 24-hour period and prohibiting tying a dog to a house, tree or other stationary object.
In New York, the legislature hasn’t yet voted on a bill introduced in January to prohibit tethering dogs to a fixed point or pulley system for more than six hours per day.
John Iorio, Altoona’s animal control officer, said the city ordinance requires owners tie up or cage their dogs and not allow them to run loose. Logan, Blair and Antis townships only prohibit dogs from “running at large” without their owners or other guardian present.
Freedom Township has no ordinance related to tethering dogs, but animals must stay in their owners’ yards.
The stumbling block in passing the Pennsylvania bill is farmers whose dogs protect their livestock and crop fields, Scavello said.
“They might be able to move, but it’s the fact that they’re tethered,” he said. “We’ll negotiate that — we have to find a way to satisfy them. I think it’s necessary being that these things are happening across the commonwealth.”
Two dogs tied up in Monroe County during a snowstorm inspired the bill. Scavello said one of the dogs died.
“Without shelter, the two dogs were tied up in the snow — it’s common sense here,” he said. “I would hope we wouldn’t have to create these laws, but we need to realize unless we legislate we’re going to continue to have these issues.”
Cherie Graves of Newport Wash., chair of Responsible Dog Owners of the Western States, said her group’s position is the dog owner knows the most about her animal and would rather not see a bill regulating dog tethering.
“When we start regulating hours of being tethered, the government is getting into a position of taking away an owner’s rights and abilities to make judgments for his or her own animal,” Graves said. “Some do well with tethering — one size does not fit all.”
On the Grimes/Jake case, Graves said the animal rights movement makes a “huge deal out of very obscure instances.”
“How many dogs live to be 19 years old?” she said. “That’s the equivilant of a 119-year-old human being. The biggest cruelty was to come in and snatch that ancient animal from his home. The trauma alone of taking him out of his stable environment would probably kill him.
“It had to be a fruitful life to live that long.”
Graves called the government measures another animals rights movement to take away a person’s right to her animal.
“If a person cannot afford $5,000 worth of fencing and can’t tether it either, they’re forced to relinquish the animal and that’s just cruel,” she said.
Gail Whipple of Jacksonville, N.C. said she hopes the Grimes case is the one to help write the law. Whipple heads the Carolina Animal Protection Society of Onslow County Inc., a nonsheltered humane society.
“I live next door to people who chain their dogs up and it’s pathetic,” she said. “It really is worse in rural counties.”
Whipple said people have to remember dogs are intelligent, feeling, reasoning beings and aren’t “just” dogs.
“Would you treat your child that way?” she said of tethering. “I hope this will be a catalyst to change the laws. It’s up to the community to band together.”
As part of the CAPS animal adoption policy, potential owners must have fenced-in yards, so dogs can run loose. Whipple said her organization investigates animal cruelty and has changed laws in her county.
“In the early ’80s we stopped roadside zoos,” she said. “It’s been rewritten what a shelter should be and that dogs that are outside must be provided with daily sustenance and a covered shelter. “I wish we had stronger laws in many ways. We continue to fight.”
Local lawmakers have received only a few phone calls each from constituents concerned about the Grimes situation.
Both Reps. Rick Geist, R-Altoona and Jerry Stern, R-Martinsburg, said they would wait to see what the bill looks like if it leaves committee before taking a position. Neither are co-sponsors on the bill.
“I don’t believe anyone tolerates the abuse of any animals and there are provisions in place to deal with animals that are abused or not taken care of properly,” Stern said. “If you’re not doing that, you’re violating the crime codes.”
Geist said he doesn’t want to see animals or people suffer.
“We want to ensure animals remain private property, but are not in danger,” he said. “You would think people would take care of their pets.”
Mirror Staff Writer Jessica VanderKolk is at 946-7465.
************************************************** ***
“When we start regulating hours of being tethered, the government is getting into a position of taking away an owner’s rights and abilities to make judgments for his or her own animal,” Graves said. “Some do well with tethering — one size does not fit all.” = yeah, Cherie!http://www.game-dog.com/forums/images/icons/icon14.gif
and IMO, this Whipple lady really needs to get a clue! Dogs are not children!