So no one can use a tie-out either? What about people who rent and have no control over fencing their yard? They would have to move?

I absolutely hate to see dogs chained outside, if that is all their life consists of. But if a dog is tied out just to enjoy some time in the backyard, I don't see anything wrong with it. We did it with our two big dogs back when we didn't have a fence.

I know the purpose of the law is to help neglected outside dogs, but I wonder if it really does? What is to keep someone from putting up a privacy fence and still chaining their dog in the yard?

I will be interested to read what others say who have these laws already. I truly do hope it helps people stop and think long and hard before getting a dog if their only intention is to keep it outside.

"What about people who rent and have no control over fencing their yard? They would have to move?"

Noooo.... of course not. The only inconvenience is that they would either have to construct a kennel, use invisible fence (must have a sign posted) or let their dogs remain indoors at all times that they aren't accompanied by and under the control of an owner or handler. Can you imagine... having to let your dogs live inside your house? Oh the humanity!!!

"But if a dog is tied out just to enjoy some time in the backyard, I don't see anything wrong with it. "

Obviously the intent is not to go after people using dog exercisers and things like that. Now that you mention it my vets office uses that while letting out the boarding dogs.

It's really for the people that want to have the dog live out in the farthest extreme of the yard and not have him or her be an eyesore or a bother then the least they can do go to the expense of constructing a safe fenced area or a kennel.

"What is to keep someone from putting up a privacy fence and still chaining their dog in the yard?"
Well if you can't see it happening then you're not going to complain about it but the people that are violating this ordinance don't have fences. If they had fences they wouldn't need the chains etc.

Lets also not forget this is not just for safety of the public and safety of the dogs but loose dogs + chained dogs = unwanted litters of puppies.

Dont worry about those extra litters QQ, us people in the north will come down and take them all to our rescues.. lol *sorry*
Seriously, I like the "idea" of the law but it is too black and white. There are the exceptions that will get caught in the crossfire. I think the law is too broad and will cause more complications then fixing the problem. Of course you have to consider the law is only as strong as the law enforcers. Does your area have enough by-law enforcement officers to take care of what they already have on their plates or is this another un enforcible law? I will be curious as to how this works out.
Lorie

They are considering a similar here in Durham. But they are thinking along the lines of limiting the time outside on a chain as opposed to an outright ban. Which is nice, because I tether my own dogs outside sometimes when I am out gardening. I can't leave them alone even on a chain because the Rotties have all broken every chain I have used at some point, and Tatya gets herself all tangled up in my bamboo.

Renters would be screwed. You can't just put a kennel or invisible fence up in a place you don't own.

I don't see it working too well here though. Just walking through my neighborhood there are at least 8 dogs off the top of my head that are chained 24/7. I doubt the people have the money to afford a fence, invisble or not, or a kennel. And quite frankly the outdoor kenneled dogs have less freedom than the chained dogs, so I'm not even sure that is a great solution. Durham has enough trouble keeping up with the loose, vicious, barking, fighting, and otherwise more pressing animal control problems.

"I doubt the people have the money to afford a fence, invisble or not, or a kennel."

Then they sure don't have money for a monetary fine of up to 1,000 $ either.

Dogs are not supposed to be chained up or kenneled up 24/7. But if they are then *I*, as a pedestrian, would rather have the unsocialized, possibly dangerous, and undoubtedly unvaccinated dog behind a fence. I'd love to save the world but I also look out for my safety and my beloved furry'ns.

It's interesting that the ordinances specifically allow for dog to be off leash on private property as long as they are under control of the owner or handler and are obedient.
AND
They can be chained up as long as they are chained to the owner/handler's hand....
BUT
They can't be chained up while the owner is there either. That's is strange.
I wish they would have mentioned something about supervision since it's being unsupervised that is a problem. When I work in the garage with the door open I sometimes let the furkids hang out but I keep them on long cable tied to a shelf just in case. I don't want them to run out as a car is passing by.
So I could be in compliance as long as they were tethered to me instead of the shelf.

Down here in the south, (The stray puppy distribution hub for the north) we have these roadside stands that sell dog kennels and car ports and usually garden sheds. And the kennels have these signs attached to them with the price... $149-$199 for these big chain link kennels.
If you can't afford $200 for an adequate shelter (and it still must have a roof and be a certain size to be legal) then you shouldn't own a dog in the first place but you'll have to tough it out and let the dog live indoors.

I kind of have mixed feelings about anti-chaining laws. I really don't like a dog chained up in the yard all the time. However I dislike a dog running loose even more. and somehow I doubt that the people that are keeping dogs chained are going to pay much attention to those laws any way. Honestly what are the odds of them being caught. you see people driving around with tags on their cars that expired two or three years ago , with a cop right behind them. You can get a pretty nice kennel at Home Depot or Tractor Supply for a couple hundred bucks, but they don't even see fit to do that for the dogs. I think it's really peoples attitudes toward their dogs that have to change.

Lisa

There are always loopholes in laws like this. We tie our dogs out with us all the time. They love it. I have about 300 rose bushes in maybe 30 or 40 beds. We have a large garden wagon that we place near the bed where we are working, and the dogs are our lookout. They often sit and watch the rabbits, squirrel, birds, and probably many critters we are not aware of. Nobody around here would tell us that we are breaking a law. We never leave them out alone, and truly almost have them on a leash since we are so close.

What I don't get are invisible fences. They do nothing for stray dogs or cats. The owners dog is terribly vulnerable to whatever would walk into the yard. Yet if the dog becomes excited and starts to chase an animal and go through the thing, it can injure the dog. I don't know whether it is the sound or shock, but dogs do get hurt - especially if there is noise like with a mower or weed eater.

We have rather strict leash laws, and it isn't cheap to get the animals back.

As strict as the laws are, you only need one stray or one loose dog to hurt you or your dogs. Do any of you carry a spray in case a dog begins to attack? I wonder if the Bitter Apple Spray would deter an attacking dog.

Sammy

I can't imagine ever having that kind of law here (metro Detroit). Our home owners association will not allow us to put up a fence unless we have a pool (fences here are considered an eye-sore). When we had a large dog, he would be chained, go off the deck to do his business and then be let back in. I had no idea that this was "cruel". We couldn't really take him on walks to do his business because he would go nuts if he saw another dog and was hard to control (other than that he was extremely obedient).

Livvysmom, they are not talking about dogs who go out on a chain for a few moments, but the dogs in Pontiac, chained out in the furthest corner of the yard and ignored. That is what is cruel.

If a city passes an ordinance, do communities with HOAs in that city have to follow the new ordinance? I would think they would have to do so, therefore, the HOA rules would have to be changed. Any other ideas how this would work?

Has any good or bad come of the chain laws?
Congratulations for your county, QQ!
I am sure the intent of the particular law in your country is to prevent people from tying out their dogs 24/7 as you said. That is admirable.

Often called "tethering" or "tethering laws".

However, tethering is useful and better than kenneling in very limited circumstances. We occasionally tether our dogs if we will be right there observing them. Mushing kennels tether many dogs so they cannot fight with one another, and fencing many determined, digging, climbing Huskies gets to be overwhelmingly expensive. These dogs are interacted with frequently every day, so it is not like tethering them and ignoring them in a suburban situation. Kennel owners on Husky lists have noted that dogs can go more feral in very large dogyards. This is with yards holding many dogs, so it is not applicable to our urban/suburban situations. Mushing kennels are a special case, and even the USDA recognized this when they recommend against tethering, allowing it for working mushing kennels

Our town recently passed a limited anti-tethering ordinance, allowing you to tether a dog up to 4 hours unattended. That prevents tying out overnight or all day. I think it is a very reasonable compromise.