Tethering ban gets approval; begins Nov. 1 in Texas

Tethering ban gets approval; begins Nov. 1
By THOMAS JENKINS Staff Writer

The Big Spring City Council voted 6-0 in favor of a ban on the chaining and tethering of dogs within the city limits Tuesday evening, putting its final approval on an ordinance that has drawn a great deal of fire from the community.

Councilwoman Stephanie Horton wasn't present during the meeting as the remaining council members adopted the new law.

Although approval is complete, the new law won't go into effect until Nov. 1 because of a 90-day grace period the council built in.

"One of the things the council wanted with this ordinance was an effective date 90 days from now," said Big Spring Police Chief Lonnie Smith. "That will put this ordinance in effect on Nov. 1. Between now and then we'll be getting with the media and trying to make the public aware of what the ordinance is and what the restrictions are. That way they'll have between now and Nov. 1 to come into compliance.

"If they want to maintain their dogs, they will have between now and then to get things ready. If they don't want to comply, then they will have between now and Nov. 1 to find a new home or owners for the dog."

While the ordinance is still approximately three months from being enforced, Smith said the police department and Animal Control are already doing the "footwork" in preparation for the deadline.

"We already have a pretty good idea where the more problematic and troublesome canines that are being chained are at," said Smith. "We'll be checking those areas and taking a strict enforcement on those. We'll also be receiving complaints that are called in. Neighbors are going to see it and with the education process, people are going to be aware of it. We'll be answering those calls and taking the same action."

Smith said once the ordinance goes into effect it will be strictly enforced.

"If they're not in compliance come Nov. 1, then they will be cited for violation of the city ordinance," Smith said sternly. "The dog won't be taken from the residence at that time, but every day after the citation that they are in violation of the ordinance will be a separate offense. Animal control will do follow up to make sure."

Municipal Judge Tim Green said they are still working out the finer points of the fine that will be enforced with the ordinance, but law-breakers can expect to pay up to $500 for each citation.

The danger of chained and tethered dogs was first brought before the council by Councilman Woody Jumper, who said he feels good about the ban and what it will do for the community.

"I feel good about it," said Jumper. "What we've done we've done for the citizens of this town because of safety first, and it's a humane thing to do for the animals. It's just part of a progressive road that Big Spring is going to be going down. This council cares about the people of this town and this is going to be a very progressive council doing some very positive things."

Animal Control Committee Chairperson Melanie Gambrell was also present for the meeting and said she couldn't be happier about the passage of the ordinance and what it will mean for man's best friend.

"I'm tickled to death," said Gambrell. "I have to give kudos to the council and kudos for Chief Smith, who brought it before our Animal Control Committee. It takes guts to do what they did and it's a very positive move for our community. My passion is animals and I really think it's wonderful."


The ordinance reads:

"No person shall, at any time, fasten, chain or tie any dog or cause such dog to be fastened, chained or tied while such dog is on the owner's property or on the property of the dog owners landlord. (Exception - A dog may be tethered to allow for the cleaning of the dog's enclosure or while the owner is outside with the dog and is in visual contact of the animal at all times to prevent injury to the dog.)

"Any dogs confined within a fenced yard must have adequate space for exercise based on a dimension of at least 100 square feet. Provided, further that where dogs are kept or housed on property without a fenced yard, the owner of such dogs or persons having custody of such dogs shall provide an enclosure for such dogs meeting the 100 square feet dimension. Such enclosure shall be constructed of chain link or similar type materials with all four sides enclosed. The enclosure shall be of sufficient height to prevent the dog from escaping from such enclosure. The top of the enclosure shall be covered with materials to provide the dog with shade and protection from the elements.

"Shelter to allow the animal to remain dry and protected from the elements. Such shelter shall be fully enclosed on three sides, roofed and have a solid floor. The entrance to the shelter shall be flexible to allow the animal's entry and exit, and sturdy enough to block entry of wind and rain. The shelter shall be small enough to retain the animal's body heat and large enough to allow the animal to stand and turn comfortably. The enclosure shall be structurally sound and in good repair."

Smith said he's been in touch with the city's code enforcement office, which reported more than a half-dozen city residents have already applied for permits to build fences and kennels for their pets, a detail Jumper said he finds very encouraging.

"I think it's a great sign," said Jumper. "People say they can't afford it. Well, I can't either, but I'm going to have to if I have a dog. We're going to give people three months to get ready, so if you can put a little bit aside each month I think it can be done."

 

where is big spring and what exactly does this mean

 

I think they passed this law for those idiots that chain their dogs outside and leave them in crappy conditions. The reason they do this is because they feel the dogs are not getting enough exercise. I mean think about it. Some people chain their dogs and thats the only life they live. How would a person like to be chained to a chain forever and thats all the action you get. I don't know, but if I had the room to have a kennel of dogs, I would not keep them on a chain. I believe in building enclosures for them to run around in. (thats just my opinioin) Hell I believe that all animals should have adequate amount of land to run around on.

 

and this is everywhere in tx.............i chain my dogs when im at work or out, but not a short chain......so they cant ever be on a chain

 

Well I'm not too sure where this will take effect in tx. I think that they are wanting owners to stop chaining their dogs period. The only time you can chain your dog is if you are cleaning its area or you are outside near it to keep an eye on it. The reason why they do this is because when they bust some of these kennels for dog fighting, they are finding too many dogs on short ass chaings and some dogs are also either found hung by their neck some how or starving to deat on a chain. To me I think that when a dog is chained it has some type of physcological effect on it in a negative way. (thats just my opinion). But then again, it does keep the dogs out of trouble, because I know they are curious as hell about damn near everything; well at least mine is. lol Well I guess we'll just have to see what is exactly going to happen.

 

I feel this law is definately a step in the wrong direction. Now honestly, does any one really believe a well bred bulldog should be allowed unsupervised access to a 4 or even 6 ft. fence? Not just bulldogs, but lots of individual breeds and personality types. And I personally believe dogs are better socialized on a chain, because a person is more likely to sit with, pet or play with a dog on a chain rather than enter an enclosure to visit. I stop and give each of mine at least a little pet or playful slap anytime I go anywhere near them. JMHO

 

I would rather keep a dog on a chain any day than in a kennel. One thing I cannot stand is a dog that will run up and down the fence line barking at everything that walks by. and yep.. unless you put a roof over your yard , that dog will climb right on out a 6 foot fence.

It seems that chained dogs (properly chained) know their limitations and are usually less likely to escape. To me it seems safe ..at least if someone opens your gate you know the dog cannot take off .. I had a dog that somehow kept geting off his chain but wouldnt leave his chain space ..I could call him and he'd act puzzled like hey..I cant go any farther dumby .. I would have to go over and pretend to unhook his chain ..then he'd follow me around.

and even if you give your dog all the room in the world doesnt mean they will exercise themselves.. they might for awhile but could very easily become bored. Human interaction is a must.


That law seems both good and bad ... good for the dogs who are owned by idiots but bad for the owners who take good care of tehri chained dogs.

Seems there are pros and cons to every situation. Hopefully people will make the best out of it.

But you can tell that law was made by people who dont own dogs...

 

But you can tell that law was made by people who dont own dogs. Aint that the truth

 

that shits scary

 

Wish it would work on some of these damn idiots.Lol

 

Lol
.......

 

I agree. This law is pretty retarded though. More than half the laws that pass are by people who don't even own animals. hell they may not even like animals. I know there are people who keep their dogs chained and thats cool. If you spend adequate amount of time with your dogs thats different. I personally don't like chains, BUT for their own safety(because these dogs get into shit when they are loose) its not a bad idea to have them chained up when a person is away. To me I think the law would make more sense if they said all the dogs should be chained when you are away. I personally think they should state that the area they are chained be in good condition. Don't you guys hate when you go to someone's kennel to look at what they have and their dogs living quarters are in real shitty conditions.(I hate that). But like Rocksteady said, there are pros and cons. This law is good for the idiots out there, but bad for the people who really do care for their dogs. Oh well hopefully something good will come out of this. Maybe the city should send us good people who care for our dogs well a monthly check. LOL. (that was a joke)

 

isnt that a law everywhere? They can take your dogs for "unsanitary conditions" or whatever.
Hell i was watching 'animal cops' or whatever on animal planet one time and they fined this guy because he didnt keep the dogs water cold...no joke....told him he should have put ice in it.

 

If my dogs stayed outside I would make sure they had fresh water at least twice a day. Hell i wouldn;t want to drink some warm ass nasty water either.

 

thats true but they was just looking to get this dude, they were called their cuz of complaints about a bird or somethin but it wasnt there so..."look, no ice in this dog's water?!, thats a fine"

 

you know whats really sad .. they spend all this time concentrating on dogs and stuff when there's children starving , neglected , homeless people ..
but they are more concerned about dogs (dont get me wrong..there is a need for it!) but really..

 

Another fine example of the Government stepping on the little guy. Isn't it funny that there are rapists and murderers getting off all the time , but they want to prosecute homeowners and tax payers.

 

i think its ridicoulous, and just hope they don't ban chains in any more states!