AKC's SHAME AND FAILURE TO HELP DOGS

   An Article on the AKC's Stance - the AKC Website  Introduction of Tethering Bills in Multiple States Print This Article [Tuesday, April 03, 2007] The Canine Legislation Department is currently monitoring numerous state bills proposing laws that would ban, restrict, or limit the practice of tethering dogs. AKC recognizes that under certain circumstances, responsible tethering is an appropriate method of containing a dog. As many of these bills severely restrict a dog owner’s right to responsibly tether an animal, many constituents have contacted AKC regarding how best to respond to and oppose these proposals.The American Kennel Club believes that dog owners bear a special responsibility to their canine companions to provide proper care and humane treatment at all times.  This includes an adequate and nutritious diet, clean water, clean living conditions, regular veterinary care, kind and responsive human companionship, and training in appropriate behavior.  The American Kennel Club also believes that dogs should not be kept in circumstances or numbers where these needs can not be adequately fulfilled.  Additionally, anyone convicted of animal cruelty involving a dog will have all AKC privileges suspended.  With substantive animal cruelty statutes already in place, states and local governments need to enforce existing law in cruel tethering cases. Irresponsible owners who are not providing humane treatment for their animals can and should be prosecuted under current law.  The already-existing cruelty laws make these proposed tethering bans or restrictions unnecessary.  For example, North Carolina Senate Bill 1172, introduced by Senator Cowell, proposes to make most instances of tethering dogs a criminal act.  However, North Carolina’s existing animal cruelty statute—N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-360 (1999)—already properly addresses all instances of animal cruelty, including cruel tethering, by providing that if any person shall intentionally overdrive, overload, wound, injure, kill, or deprive of necessary sustenance, or cause such damage to be inflicted upon any animal, such offender shall for every such offense be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.  This law applies to any act, omission, or case of neglect causing or permitting unjustifiable pain, suffering or death to an animal.  Enforcement of this law effectively negates any need for the proposed legislation.  North Carolina is not alone in its attempt to intervene unnecessarily with tethering as a useful tool for confining dogs.  Bills similar to North Carolina’s have been introduced in Maine, Maryland, New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia.  (The proposals in Rhode Island and Virginia have been effectively quashed in committee.)  AKC encourages concerned fanciers and dog owners to work with their legislators to ensure that laws make appropriate allowances for responsible tethering.  For more information regarding specific bills and bill status in any of the above mentioned states, contact AKC’s Canine Legislation Department at (919) 816-3720, or e-mail doglaw@akc.org.

   An Article on the AKC's Stance - the AKC Website  Introduction of Tethering Bills in Multiple States Print This Article [Tuesday, April 03, 2007] The Canine Legislation Department is currently monitoring numerous state bills proposing laws that would ban, restrict, or limit the practice of tethering dogs. AKC recognizes that under certain circumstances, responsible tethering is an appropriate method of containing a dog. As many of these bills severely restrict a dog owner’s right to responsibly tether an animal, many constituents have contacted AKC regarding how best to respond to and oppose these proposals.The American Kennel Club believes that dog owners bear a special responsibility to their canine companions to provide proper care and humane treatment at all times.  This includes an adequate and nutritious diet, clean water, clean living conditions, regular veterinary care, kind and responsive human companionship, and training in appropriate behavior.  The American Kennel Club also believes that dogs should not be kept in circumstances or numbers where these needs can not be adequately fulfilled.  Additionally, anyone convicted of animal cruelty involving a dog will have all AKC privileges suspended.  With substantive animal cruelty statutes already in place, states and local governments need to enforce existing law in cruel tethering cases. Irresponsible owners who are not providing humane treatment for their animals can and should be prosecuted under current law.  The already-existing cruelty laws make these proposed tethering bans or restrictions unnecessary.  For example, North Carolina Senate Bill 1172, introduced by Senator Cowell, proposes to make most instances of tethering dogs a criminal act.  However, North Carolina’s existing animal cruelty statute—N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-360 (1999)—already properly addresses all instances of animal cruelty, including cruel tethering, by providing that if any person shall intentionally overdrive, overload, wound, injure, kill, or deprive of necessary sustenance, or cause such damage to be inflicted upon any animal, such offender shall for every such offense be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.  This law applies to any act, omission, or case of neglect causing or permitting unjustifiable pain, suffering or death to an animal.  Enforcement of this law effectively negates any need for the proposed legislation.  North Carolina is not alone in its attempt to intervene unnecessarily with tethering as a useful tool for confining dogs.  Bills similar to North Carolina’s have been introduced in Maine, Maryland, New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia.  (The proposals in Rhode Island and Virginia have been effectively quashed in committee.)  AKC encourages concerned fanciers and dog owners to work with their legislators to ensure that laws make appropriate allowances for responsible tethering.  For more information regarding specific bills and bill status in any of the above mentioned states, contact AKC’s Canine Legislation Department at (919) 816-3720, or e-mail doglaw@akc.org.

The dogs above were ALL AKC registered.The AKC has a golden opportunity to become involved in the health and welfare of dogs across America.  Anti-tethering laws or laws that restrict tethering are far more reaching than you can imagine.  First of all, a Class 1 misdemeanor for animal neglect and cruelty is an outdated punishment in the extreme.  When an owner's dog dies from neglect at the end of chain, where its spent its entire life receives a "Class 1 misdemeanor" for animal abuse, its nothing more than a joke.  An anti-tethering law which minimizes the amount of time a dog is forced to endure being chained or stuck in a pen will give law enforcement and prosecutors more leverage not in prosecuting animal abusers but in getting an animal out of an abusive situation.   Statistics show that most of the children that are bitten or die from dog attacks in the U.S., come from dogs that are tethered, usually by an intact male.  For the most part, people who tether their dogs outside, in all types of weather, day in and day out, twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, will not have their pet spayed/neutered or give it the most basic of veterinary care.  Your article states that Maine and Virginia's attempted anti-tethering legislation was quashed this year.  You are correct.  But here's the thing, I live in Virginia and I vote as well,  Because of the recent news regarding the dogfighting ring in Smithfield and at Vick's house, I have the public support of my fellow constituents in Virginia to not only get the anti-tethering bill passed but also the dogfighting bill.  These two components,. tethering and dog fighting, walk hand in hand.  We find it not only unfortunate but incomprehensible and irresponsible that the AKC would take the stance that it has.  We ask you, how many dogs have to die a miserable death before someone like the AKC who has some clout will stand up for the voiceless and say, "Enough?"  Not all of the AKC registered dogs end up in show rings or as someone's pampered pet.  Rescues pull countless AKC registered dogs from death row at shelters.  Don't you have to ask yourself, how many of our AKC registered pitt bulls are being used as bait dogs or dying at the end of a chain because they won't fight or are not aggressive?  How many of our AKC registered pitt bulls actually die in dogfights?  Trust me when we tell you that these dogs don't just come from "backyard breeders".  The owners of AKC registered fighting dogs make a ton more money.  Apparently, the parents of the next child to die of a chained AKC registered dog attack, should sue the AKC.  After all, you won't mind protecting the owners of the AKC registered dog will you?