|
By Ambuja Rosen
February 5, 2008
This data was collected in the fall of 2007. "Tethering complaints" means complaints that mainly involved violations of the tethering limit. In most cases, the sources were estimating, rather than reporting exact statistics. Please feel free to call the sources at the phone numbers below to verify information.
I've listed the communities in order of population, from the smallest to the largest:
CARTHAGE, MISSOURI Population: 15,000 or 16,000
Sources: (1) Christine Vandegevel, who was an animal control officer at the time that the law passed. She is now a police officer in Carthage. (417)237-7200 (2) David Butler, who is currently an animal control officer. (417)358-6402
Tethering law: Ban on dog tethering. (A person has to hold the leash.)
DOGS AT LARGE: After the law passed in 1993, the number stayed about the same, according to Ms. Vandegevel.
DOG BITES: They decreased--by 25 percent, Ms. Vandegevel estimated. She said this is because:
(1) Dogs who are tied are usually more neglected and get more aggressive. After the ban passed, fewer dogs were tied; and
(2) Children were no longer walking by tied-up dogs and getting bitten.
DOGS GIVEN UP: Ms. Vandegevel estimated that 25 or 30 were relinquished because of the tethering limit, and only within the first six months after the law passed. The dogs were given up partly because the city offered to take dogs.
Mr. Butler estimated that for six to nine weeks after the ordinance passed, dog relinquishments to the shelter--for all reasons combined, not just tethering--increased by 12 percent. He estimates that two or three dogs a week were relinquished, for all reasons combined, in the weeks just before the law passed. And he estimated that during the month and a half after the law passed, the shelter impounded 20 percent more dogs for all reasons combined: five or six weekly instead of the usual four or five.
DOGS KILLED AT A SHELTER: Mr. Butler said that shelter killing of dogs, for all reasons combined, probably increased by eight to ten percent for six weeks after the law passed. After the six weeks, it went back to what it was before.
Comments: "A few people were letting the dogs loose," Mr. Butler said.
LAURINBURG, NORTH CAROLINA Population 16,000
Source: Elaine Modlin, Animal Control Officer, (910)291-1706
Tethering law: In 1997, Laurinburg allowed up to eight hours a day of unattended tethering for dogs. This was too hard to enforce, so in July 2000, it reduced the eight-hour maximum to one hour.
DOGS AT LARGE: Ms. Modlin said that no dogs ran at large due to the tethering ordinance, except for a couple of isolated cases. Once those people found out that it was a violation for dogs to run loose, they restrained the animals, complying with the law.
She said that after the tethering limit passed, fewer dogs were found running loose. Dogs couldn't get out of their pens or fences as easily as they had broken loose from their chains.
DOG BITES: They decreased dramatically--from 12 the year before the law passed, to 3 the year after it passed. Two years after it passed, the number dropped to one bite a year.
DOGS GIVEN UP: Fewer dogs came into the shelter, partly because of the tethering ordinance. "We've had less of a problem with unwanted litters," Ms. Modlin said. She said that penned dogs have a harder time getting pregnant than chained dogs do. "People call us more often about stray male dogs hanging around a penned female (trying to dig their way into the pen), than about stray males hanging around a chained female," she added.
After the law passed, about 30 percent of people caught in violation either gave their dogs away, let the shelter impound them, or didn't reclaim the dogs once they found out they were at the shelter. This was two or three people a month at first. The number leveled off to one or two every three months.
[Note from Ambuja: I'd expect far fewer dogs to be given up in Ashland than in Laurinburg. Ms. Modlin said that the vast majority of the relinquished dogs were Pit Bulls "owned" mostly by young boys that Modlin said had "no intention of taking care of the dogs." This Pit Bull culture doesn't appear to exist in Ashland. So I believe that far fewer dogs will be relinquished here.]
DOGS KILLED AT A SHELTER: The number killed for all reasons, not just tethering, increased because most of the Pit Bulls (mentioned above) "weren't adoptable."
BIG SPRING, TEXAS Population 25,000
Source: Marie Wilson, records technician. She keeps all police and animal control records. (432)264-2372
Tethering law: Ban for dogs.
DOGS AT LARGE: The law went into effect on October 1, 2004. The next year, the number of dogs at large increased--from 912 in 2004 to 938 in 2005. In 2006, it dropped down lower than before the law passed--to 876.
DOG BITES: Big Spring records animal bites, the vast majority of which are dog bites. Animal bites increased after the law passed: From 38 in 2004, to 56 in 2005, to 58 in 2006.
DOGS GIVEN UP: Increased--for all reasons combined, not just tethering --after the law passed. In 2004, 154 dogs were surrendered by their "owners." In 2005, 313 were. In 2006, 235 were.
DOGS KILLED AT A SHELTER: Increased, for all reasons combined, after the law passed: from 774 in 2004 to 999 in 2005. In 2006, there were 852.
DODGE CITY, KANSAS Population 30,000
Source: Glenna Walker, animal shelter director, (620)225-8180. Before becoming shelter director, she was a Dodge City police officer for ten years.
Tethering law: 3 hours maximum a day for dogs. No more than 1 hour at a time, with at least a three-hour break between each hour of chaining.
DOGS AT LARGE: The shelter keeps records of the number of animals running loose (the vast majority of whom are dogs). Since the tethering limit passed, this number has steadily decreased. In June 2004, before the law passed, there were 173. The law passed in June 2005. That month, the number was 172. In July 2005, 159. August 2005, 144. June 2006, 112.
DOG BITES: Dodge City keeps records of dogs who bite people or attack another domestic animal. After the law passed, this number decreased. Before the law passed, it had been 60 in 2002, 56 in 2003, and 62 in 2004. The tethering limit passed in June 2005, and that year the number decreased to 43. The next year, 2006, it was 37.
Dodge City banned Pit Bulls during this time, which may have contributed to the decrease in bites. But Ms. Walker still thinks the reduction in dog bites and attacks is largely because of the tethering limit.
DOGS GIVEN UP: Stayed about the same. For all reasons combined, not just tethering: In April 2005, it was 29; May 2005, 26; June 2005, 33; July 2005, 24; and August 2005, 23.
DOGS KILLED AT A SHELTER: Ms. Walker estimated that for all reasons combined, five or six more dogs per month were killed at a shelter than before the ordinance passed, but this increase only lasted for three or four months. She added that the Pit Bull ban was partly why more dogs were killed at a shelter during that time.
SCOTLAND COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA Population 36,000
Source: Larry Herring, Animal Control Officer, (910)277-2470, ext. 4432
Tethering law: one-hour maximum for dogs
DOGS AT LARGE: Decreased. Mr. Herring said, "I think we had a lot fewer dogs running loose--at least a 50 to 70 percent decrease." He said this based on statistics from the Department of Transportation. "The number of dogs hit by automobiles has gone down," he added.
DOG BITES: Decreased. In Fiscal Year 2002/2003, there were 33. In Fiscal Year 2003/2004, 50. In Fiscal Year 2004/2005, 48. The law went into effect in January 2006, and in Fiscal Year 2005/2006 the number of dog bites was 33. In Fiscal Year 2006/2007, it was 28.
DOGS GIVEN UP: The number of dogs relinquished for all reasons (not just the tethering ordinance) increased right before the tethering law went into effect.
To Mr. Herring's recollection, in the approximately two years that the tethering limit has been in effect, probably 50 people have given up dogs due to the tethering law. Now he gets one or two a month.
Mr. Herring said that some people who would have gotten a dog before, won't now because of the tethering limit.
DOGS KILLED AT A SHELTER: The number stayed about the same--for all reasons combined, not just tethering.
CITY OF BATTLE CREEK, AND BEDFORD TOWNSHIP, MICHIGAN Population: 55,000
Source: Sergeant Edwina Keyser, Animal Control Officer, (269)966-3322, ext. 1007
Tethering law: 3 hours maximum a day for dogs. No more than 1 hour at a time, with at least three hours break between each hour of chaining.
DOGS AT LARGE: Stayed the same.
DOG BITES: Stayed about the same.
DOGS GIVEN UP: To Sergeant Keyser's knowledge, no one has given up a dog as a result of the tethering law, in the approxinmately three years that the law has been in effect.
DOGS KILLED AT A SHELTER: The number killed for all reasons combined, not just tethering, did not increase after the tethering law went into effect.
Comments: "We get one tethering complaint a month, if that."
[Ambuja's comment: Battle Creek/Bedford does not allow anonymous complaints, so it probably gets fewer complaints than the Ashland police would.]
LAWTON, OKLAHOMA Population 100,000
Source: Rose Wilson, Superintendent of Animal Welfare Division, (580)581-3219 or (580)581-3443
Tethering law: Ban for dogs
DOGS AT LARGE: Stayed the same.
DOG BITES: Decreased. The law passed in 1990 or 1991. Ms. Wilson can only provide statistics back to 2004. In 2004, there were 252 bites; in 2005, 204; and in 2006, 194.
Ms. Wilson said the steady decrease in dog bites is partly because of the tethering limit. She explained, "It is a proven fact that the act of chaining a dog for long periods of time causes the dog to become hyper, agitated, destructive and aggressive. Also, eliminating chaining, tying, tethering, promotes pet owners to have some interaction with the pet other than just bringing a bowl of food or water to it. ... I believe that improving the quality of life for an animal in any form, reduces the negative."
DOGS GIVEN UP: Probably none. She can't remember anyone relinquishing a dog to the shelter because of the tethering ordinance. And she can't remember going back to check whether violators complied, and finding the dogs gone.
DOGS KILLED AT A SHELTER: Killing for all reasons combined, not just tethering, stayed the same. In 1991, 5,071; in 1992, 5,055; in 1993, 4,643.
Comments: "Most tethered animals are not visible from the street."
TOPEKA, KANSAS Population 122,000
Source: Linda Halford, animal control supervisor, (785)368-9484
Tethering law: 3 hours maximum a day for dogs. No more than 1 hour at a time, with at least three hours break between each hour of chaining.
DOGS AT LARGE: Stayed the same after the law passed.
DOG BITES: Stayed the same. The number of bites occurring because dogs were tethered did go down.
DOGS GIVEN UP: She estimated that 20 to 25 dogs have been relinquished due to the tethering law, in the two and a half years that it has been in effect. She said that probably an additional 20 or 30 people gave their dogs away because of the law, without telling her. So at most, an estimated 55 people gave up their dogs in two and a half years because of the law, in this city which is six times the size of Ashland.
Fewer dogs are being relinquished because of the law as time goes on, because complaints continue to decrease. Right after the law passed, Ms. Halford got, on average, several tethering complaints a day. Now she only gets two a week.
DOGS KILLED AT A SHELTER: The number for all reasons, not just the tethering limit, stayed the same. Ms. Halford said that this is because the dogs relinquished due to the tethering law made up "such a small number of the many thousands of dogs relinquished."
BURNABY, BRITISH COLUMBIA Population 230,000
Source: Mark Takhar, Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) director, (604)841-6079
Tethering law: 1 hour maximum of unattended tethering for dogs
DOGS AT LARGE: Stayed the same after the law passed.
DOG BITES: Stayed the same.
DOGS GIVEN UP: Three people let Mr. Takhar take their dogs, and he heard of two other people who gave their dogs to a farm. Mr. Takhar said that these people expressed relief, because they couldn't take care of the dogs for other reasons besides the tethering law--for example, they couldn't afford veterinary care.
DOGS KILLED AT A SHELTER: No dogs have been killed at a shelter as a result of the law.
Comments: "There have been 44 tethering complaints since the law went into effect [in March 2006]."
WICHITA, KANSAS Population 400,000
Source: Gretchen (won't give her last name). She's taken animal complaint calls in Wichita for the past ten years. Before that, she was an animal control officer in the field for 11 years. (316)268-8378
Tethering law: 3 hours maximum a day for dogs. No more than 1 hour at a time, with at least three hours break between each hour of chaining.
DOGS AT LARGE: Stayed the same after the law passed in 2002.
DOG BITES: Stayed about the same.
DOGS GIVEN UP: One percent more dogs were relinquished to the shelter--for all reasons combined, not just tethering--for an estimated one or two months after the law passed. After a month or two, the number went back to what it was before.
There were more dogs relinquished because of un-chained dogs running loose and people not paying the fee, than because of the tethering law.
DOGS KILLED AT A SHELTER: The number for all reasons combined, not just tethering, stayed about the same.
Comments: "The majority of chained animals aren't visible from the street." "The problem is rampant. That's why we passed [the law]."
**********
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
Click here to view summary data charts
DOGS RUNNING LOOSE
Three communities had fewer reports of dogs running loose after the law passed. Six communities said their numbers stayed the same. Only one community out of ten had more reports of dogs running loose after the law passed. So it appears highly unlikely that Ashland's ordinance will cause more dogs to run loose.
If Ashland, like three of the communities, has fewer reported dogs running loose, then drivers and bicyclists will probably be less likely to get into accidents caused by dodging or colliding with dogs.
DOGS BITING
Five communities said that after the tethering limit passed, dog bites went down. Four communities said the number stayed the same. Only one community had more reports of dog bites after the law passed. So it appears highly unlikely that Ashland's ordinance will cause more dogs to bite.
DOGS GIVEN UP
Were more dogs given up after the tethering laws passed? One community said that relinquishment for all reasons, not just tethering, actually decreased. One community said it stayed the same.
Four communities said that more dogs were given up (for all reasons, not just tethering) after the laws passed. But two of these four communities reported that after a few weeks or months, the numbers dropped back down to where they had been before the laws passed.
The tethering law wasn't necessarily what caused more people to give up dogs after the laws passed. People give up dogs for many reasons--for example, moving, a new baby, allergies, finances. Relinquishment may have increased due to these reasons rather than due to the tethering laws. Also, after the laws passed, populations probably continued to grow, so that there were more dogs to be given up; per capita there may not have been an increase.
Four communities did not tell me whether their overall number of relinquishments increased. But they estimated or recalled how many dogs had been given up specifically because of the tethering limit. I think these numbers are low, especially in relation to how many people give up dogs for all reasons combined:
Battle Creek/Bedford Township (pop. 55,000) 0 in 3 years
Topeka (pop. 122,000) 55, at most, in 2 1/2 years
Lawton (pop. 100,000) 0 in 16 years
Burnaby (population 230,000) 5 in 1 1/2 years
DOGS KILLED AT SHELTERS
After the tethering laws passed, were more dogs killed at shelters? Five of the ten communities said that the number of dogs killed at shelters for all reasons, not just tethering, did not go up. A sixth community, Burnaby, did not report whether killing decreased or increased, but said that no dogs had been killed by a shelter because of the tethering laws.
Four of the ten communities said that after the tethering laws passed, shelter killing of dogs--for all reasons, not just tethering--increased.
Two of these communities said, though, that the numbers dropped back down to normal a few weeks or months after the laws passed. In most of the ten communities, there was a flurry of complaints right after the laws passed, probably because people could finally report the animals that they'd wanted to report before there was a law. This flurry of complaints may be why relinquishment and shelter killing increased in some communities, then quickly dropped back down to normal.
One community said that overall shelter killing increased mainly because of people (mostly young boys) relinquishing "unadoptable" Pit Bulls--a phenomenon that doesn't appear to exist in Ashland.
The tethering law wasn't necessarily what caused more dogs to be killed at shelters after the law passed. As I said before, dogs are given up for many reasons, and some of these dogs may be killed at shelters. And again, because populations probably continued to grow, there were increasing numbers of dogs to be given up; per capita there may not have been an increase.
But it's possible that some dogs impounded or relinquished because of the tethering law may end up killed, particularly if they have become vicious and "unadoptable" from excessive tethering.
Still, I don't know of one national animal protection organization that doesn't want tethering limits. These animal protectionists must know that some dogs may be killed at shelters. But like me, I think they understand that over the long haul these laws will do the greatest good to the greatest number of animals. For example, over time, tethering laws may reduce relinquishment and shelter killing. Some reasons for this are:
1. Fewer chained females may get pregnant, so fewer unwanted litters may end up at shelters.
2. Tethering laws tend to weed out many of the more negligent dog "owners" who probably would have given up their dogs one day anyways. And tethering laws tend to prevent such people from getting dogs. Therefore, fewer dogs will be given up by such people.
3. Fewer dogs will become vicious or "unsocialized" because of living on a tether. Therefore, fewer dogs will be killed at shelters because they're "unadoptable."
There are probably other reasons that I can't think of, for why Ashland's tethering law may lead to fewer dogs being given up or killed at shelters.
It will be sad if any Ashland dogs are killed at shelters due to the tethering ordinance. But many people feel that for some dogs, death will be a welcome relief from the misery of living in solitary confinement on a chain.
Tethering violations tend to diminish over time. So if any Ashland dogs are given up, or killed at shelters, because of the tethering law, I would expect that number to go down, maybe even to zero, as the months or years go by.
This report was compiled by Ambuja Rosen, a resident of Ashland, Oregon.
The charts in this report were prepared with the help of Professor Daniel Kim at Southern Oregon University.
February 7, 2008
A REPORT ON TEN COMMUNITIES
ADDENDUM: FLURRIES OF COMPLAINTS
Of the ten communities, six reported to me that they had a flurry of tethering complaints after the laws passed. This is understandable: Many people finally had a legal way to relieve their neighbors' dogs of the misery of living on a chain. Three of the ten communities had no flurry of complaints. One told me it didn't know whether it had a flurry.
In November 2006, I gave you a report on ten communities. I included the number of tethering complaints that each one got at that time. You can add the flurry complaints in this current report to the numbers in the 2006 report, to get a fuller picture of how many complaints the communities have received.
CARTHAGE, MISSOURI
It did not have a flurry of tethering complaints after the law passed.
LAURINBURG, NORTH CAROLINA
It had an eight-hour tethering maximum, which was too hard to enforce. So it reduced the maximum to one hour. Elaine Modlin, the animal control officer, told me that after the one-hour law passed in 2000, she got probably seven or eight tethering complaints a month. In November 2006, she estimated that she got one or two complaints a month.
BIG SPRING, TEXAS
It has received 50 or fewer tethering complaints since the law passed in July 2004. Marie Wilson, records technician, told me that the vast majority of these complaints came within the first month after the law passed.
DODGE CITY, KANSAS
In the first few months after the law passed, Dodge City got an estimated 10 to 20 tethering complaints a month. In 2006, it was gettng an average of 10 complaints a month.
SCOTLAND COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
Larry Herring, the animal control officer, estimated that after the law went into effect in January 2006, he got 20 to 25 tethering complaints a month. In October 2007, he got 20. In November 2007, 14. In December 2007, 18.
BATTLE CREEK/BEDFORD TOWNSHIP, MICHIGAN
It did not receive a flurry of tethering complaints after the law passed.
LAWTON, OKLAHOMA
Rose Wilson told me she wasn't working in Lawton animal control at the time that the law passed, so she doesn't know whether there was a flurry.
TOPEKA, KANSAS
Linda Halford, animal control supervisor, told me she got several complaints a day during the initial flurry in 2005. In 2007, she told me that she got, on average, two complaints a week.
BURNABY, BRITISH COLUMBIA
It did not have a flurry of tethering complaints after the law passed.
WICHITA, KANSAS
Gretchen, animal complaint dispatcher, told me that Wichita got a flurry of an estimated 50 complaints a month; this leveled off in three months.
|
