Dogs have their day: No chaining law to go into effect in Kyle | The Hays Free Press

Dogs have their day: No chaining law to go into effect in Kyle

Posted by on Apr 20th, 2011 and filed under Featured, Hays County, Kyle.


New Kyle resident Vanessa Harris successfully petitioned councilmembers to ban the practice of leaving dogs chained up outdoors. She was inspired to act after seeing dogs such as this one on Burleson Road. (Photo by Vanessa Harris)

 

by JENNIFER BIUNDO

Dogs can no longer spend their days outside on the end of a chain, Kyle councilmembers ruled Tuesday night.

In a 4-3 split, councilmembers voted to ban the practice of tethering a dog outside. The new law would also prohibit pulley tethers, such as those attached to a clothesline, that allow dogs more room to run. Under the ordinance, dogs kept in outdoor pens must have 150 square feet per adult animal.

Violations would be a class C misdemeanor, with exceptions only for a lawful animal event, veterinary treatment, grooming, training or law enforcement activity.

Vanessa Harris, who runs a business opening day spas, moved to Kyle in November. She said she was appalled to see emaciated dogs chained up along Burlesson Street and approached the city council to make changes.

“We don’t tolerate child abuse,” Harris said. “Let’s not treat our pets this way.”

Most animal welfare groups say tethering animals outside for long periods constitutes animal cruelty, leaving dogs exposed to the elements, poorly socialized and even neurotic or aggressive.

The new Kyle ordinance is stricter than the Texas law passed in 2007 that prohibits dogs from being tethered overnight or for more than three hours in a row. The state law is nearly impossible to enforce, said Kyle Animal Control Officer Brianna Brecher, because it would require the understaffed office to stand watch waiting to see if the dog was let off the chain every three hours.

Brecher told councilmembers that she’s seen one dog who was injured by the tether and required an amputation. But overall, she said, the owners of most tethered dogs are not violating other animal cruelty laws.

“They’re not in a pile of trash, they’re regularly fed and watered,” Brecher said. “Overall, the dogs appear to be getting their basic necessities.”

She also said she was concerned that the new law could adversely impact residents who keep their dog tethered temporarily while fixing damage to a fence, or those who tether the dog temporarily when the animal is outside because of digging or fence-jumping behaviors.

“My concern is how these people are going to be able to afford these fences,” Brecher said. “The houses I know around town are areas where they don’t have a fence because they’ve never been able to afford to put up a fence.”

Kyle Mayor Lucy Johnson motioned to approve the ordinance.

“It seems like the people who would be affected by this law are also mostly in non-compliance with state law,” Johnson said. “My concern is those people are currently breaking state law and it is not within our means at this time to enforce that law.”

Councilmembers Jaime Sanchez, Russ Huebner and Brad Pickett voted against the ordinance.

“We could pass six more laws like this but nothing is going to change because our animal resource officer doesn’t have the time to get to these issues,” Huebner said. “The unintended consequences are these people are going to get rid of the dog or let the dog die. It’s not going to give us the results we’re looking for.”

He added, “I think we should consider the situations these people are in and look for ways to help them, rather than come to city hall, write a law we can’t enforce and go home and feel good about it.”

City leaders have not yet announced when the new ordinance will come into effect.

Harris said she would be willing to start a non-profit to raise funds for dog-owners impacted by the ordinance who need to build fences or buy kennels.

Related stories:

  • Donn Brooks

    Since my retirement from council I have intentionally stayed out of the minituae of council business. I would think this ordinance needs some fine tuning in order to make it something everyone can live with. I taught Becky Selbera and have watched her grow in the council position which she holds. She is far from being an unreasonable person and I am sure she could be approached and would be receptive to any modifications that might be in order. She might not be persuaded to change her position, but I do think she would listen attentively and act thoughtfully.

  • JohnA

    Actually Vanessa lets get it right before we *talk* to anybody
    A

  • JohnA

    apologize for the above post computer problem ( the hays free press page is very slow )
    the rest of the post reads like this
    at the april 19th council meeting where the first reading of this ordinance took place the voting was
    4 -3 for the motion
    Harvol johnson SELBERA and WILSON voted aye 4
    sanchez pickett and heubner voted nay 3

    at last nights meeting
    harvol and johnson voted aye 2
    sanchez SELBERA heabner and WILSON voted nay 4

    pickett was absent
    result motion failed 4-2

    SELBERA AND WILSON changed there vote for no apparant reason

    funny the infractions are in the seats both of these councillers hold,
    they are both up for election …could it be they dont want to incure the wrath of there constituents and lose votes ???

    just saying

  • Lila knight

    I thought the vote was 3-3. Motion failed because of a tie.
    Mayor, Wilson, Hervol voted for the ordinance

  • Lila Knight

    Sounds like someone needs to attend the meetings or watch the video that is on the city of kyle website. Facts do matter!!!!! I did notice that Wilson’s opponent got up to oppose the new ordinance in the citizen’s comments. He bashed Austin and dog lovers. What a true politician he is becoming!

  • Donn Brooks

    Readers should belay making conclusions. I am persuaded that David Wilson did not change his vote. If that is the case, JohnA is misrepresenting the facts. Let me do more checking. If I am wrong I will be the first to apologize to JohnA.

  • Ron Sherman

    Lila,
    You should not misrepresent the facts. I believe you are better then that. I did not bash dog lovers. I even made it a point to say that no one wants to abuse animals. I came from a dog loving family myself. It is interesting how many tout the value of diversity of opinions, to which I agree; yet when we dare to disagree they become confrontational and scornful. This happens in all political settings (RIGHT AND LEFT) and it is unfortunate. Trying to intimidate opposition does that does not make your point of view right. If we truely value diversity we must respect differing opinions. That is all I did. I spoke what I believed to be true. We can respectfully disagree on the outcome, but name calling accomplishes nothing. Respect of diversity is the vary triats that brought our founding fathers together. After much debate they found compromise. I never said I would not be willing to accept a compromise. I agree that chaining an animal up 24/7, 365 days a year is abuse. I do not condone that. I suggested an ordinance that was specific to defining animal abuse. without a blanket all or nother statement hurting dog lovers all around our community. Under the ordinance if you chain your dog for any given amount of time while unattended, the owner could be fined. I do not believe that leaving a dog on a chain for an hour is abuse. The studies cited at the council meeting were referring to prolonged, excessive tethering. Even Wilson and other members of council said that they did not consider chaining a dog for short periods of time abuse. This is not a black or white issue. I would be willing to look for a compromise that did not force a blanket all or nothing ordinance. Certainly you can see the value in that. If you want to call me names because I took a stand on what I believe then sobeit. At least I can look at myself squarely in the mirror at night. I wish you the best. Take Care, Ron

  • Mike Fulton

    Well said Ron.

    And, Wilson voted for the ordinance last night.

  • JohnA

    I was wrong mis understood the vote tally
    sorry

  • Donn Brooks

    Memo to JohnA: You used great big capital letters to announce that David Wilson changed his vote. But when you said you were wrong you assumed everyone had read the remainder of the thread. Please show a little class and say in plain language what it is that you were wrong about. This is a serious matter. Please do this immediately. Thank you in advance.

  • JohnA

    donn brooks
    Surly you understand i was following on Mikes thread where he stated david wilson voted for the motion
    YES
    i made a mistake ive said i am sorry i mistook the vote tally
    a honest mistake as soon as i realized my mistake I posted a apology . WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT??? its DAVID i should be apologizing to

    like many of us (perhaps your the exception )we make honest mistakes there was no intention to deceive

    be as classy as you want me to be except my apology and let the matter be
    do so as soon as you read this thanking you in advance

  • William Harris

    Mr. Wilson and two other members recognized that this would be the best way given budget restrictions to end this type of animal abuse in Kyle. The bill was never intended to ban restraint of your dog. The bill was meant to end a handful of extreme chaining cases in Kyle. If those that spoke against the bill would have bothered to educate themselves they would of known of proposed exceptions to the law and understood the intent of the law.
    A city council candidate, Ron Sherman, uses the slogan “a real conservative”. Ron didn’t know there were conservatives in California, welcome! Let me say I was a conservative before it was cool. I think I can also say true Conservatives aren’t really that concerned with animal control officer taking away their dog tethering rights. True conservatives are compassionate and caring people even compassionate to a speechless and starving Sheppard on Burleson Street. I pray that a local child is never mauled by a full time chained dog. If it happened could you look at yourself in that mirror?

  • Donn Brooks

    JohnA: Thanks for the clarification. We tend to get peevish around election time and for that I apologize. It is hard to keep track of votes and I understand. I was more strident than was called for under the circumstances. I wish you well. Thanki you for the clarification. I do wish you well. No, I am far from being perfect. I usuallyh make enough mistakes before dinner to last anyone else a week. Good and great things for you.

  • JohnA

    Good wishes to you as well DON
    YES we are all very active and interested in the future welfare of kyle and its citizen and i hope that trend continues
    thanks for being one who cares may you have a good day sir

  • duwbsduwbs

    Greetings from San Marcos. I like what William Harris says about being Conservative before it was cool. Kyle has many other issues to deal with besides this dog tethering debate. I think Mr. Ron Sherman got pretty lucky with this whole big government takeover policy by the Kyle City Council regarding animal control -getting all of this fabulous (in BLOG form) press over a topic that is important but not imperative. We in San Marcos have a population close to Kyle’s (when you remove a large number of the college folk) and we have ordinances that do come with the territory of being a larger city. 30,000 (Kyle approx.) people constitutes yourselves as being a lot bigger than Driftwood, Mountain City, Uhland, Lockhart, Luling. Kyle does not have the 7k pop. that it used to. I look forward to Kyle’s responsible growth. Ya’ll are our neighbors when it comes to water and many other resources (example: large mutli-city transportation improvements). After viewing both Councilman Wilson and Candidate Sherman’s websites I can only see one candidate with the experience, understanding and knowledge of the issues integral to Kyle’s responsible growth (yes Experience, Knowledge… are tag lines on the Wilson site but his issues section proves it). It seems to me that you all are rather fortunate to have someone as capable as a Mr. David Wilson serving Kyle, Tx. Oh and the fact that he fought and bled for the ‘ole U. S. of A. doesn’t hurt either. Good luck to all of those running though and like your rifle -keep it clean

  • duwbsduwbs

    apologies for chiming in though, I have no say in Kyle. It is just that we in San Marcos no longer have council races in spring so i’ve kind of been poking around in your business a little. boredom ’tis all

  • Vanessa Harris

    Mr. Sherman…Mr. Sherman,
    Well I must say you are the Pot Calling the Kettle Black. I do not recall myself or any of the ladies that came from not just Austin, but Buda & Wimberley to help bring donations, aid and spay and neuter program help to our city attack or threaten anyone. These ladies all came out to help as concerned citizens whom are our neighbors city to city. Also what you don’t know was that respectful calls where made to our mayor asking for permission to attend the meeting to give Kyle help and education on the possible law.
    You sir are the one who has now made this personal.
    Let me see exactly what you said above…
    You stated above….
    “Trying to intimidate opposition does not make your point of view right.”
    The only one trying to do any INTIMIDATING on Tuesday was you sir! You came storming up during citizens comments, out of breath, unprepared, and as you said your heart was pounding out of your chest due to how upset you were. Pointing your finger at ladies who came to help us then accused them of coming to Kyle to manipulate our vote. How childish. Well, if I am the only citizen in Kyle who will say this out loud to you than sobeit…as you say.

    Take it from a TRUE conservative that you know nothing about being a conservative or how to run anything the size of a city. Just because you put a sign up on the corner that says “A True Conservative” means nothing to those of us in the community whom have seen you in action.

    No one should be a seated city council member with your temper.
    You slapped Kyle in the face at City Hall when you spoke out against charity, donations, aid, assistance, training help, fencing help and spay and neuter donations. You basically let Mr. Sherman’s wants & personal agenda get in the way of what could have been an amazing partnership between several cities and a tremendous help for our citizens, not to mention the PERPETUALLY chained dogs we were trying to help.

    Why does this come down to a few men in town that are upset that they can’t chain their dogs down??? AGAIN, let me remind everyone that TEXAS, our great state has a law that mandates to us all that no human can chain their dog for more than 3 hours in any given 24 hour period, and NEVER overnight from 10pm-6am. If anyone in our city is doing this currently including our Councilmen Sanchez who was more than happy to announce to all that he breaks the law of TEXAS every day because he chains his dogs 24/7 they are in violation. Sanchez voted No to the ordinance because he has a personal agenda which is to not have to un-chain his dogs. He even went as far as to condescendingly asking us for our number in case the law passed so he could get rid of his dogs. Don’t accept charity for your district just you Mr. Sanchez!!! Way to go! Just like a good councilmen should do, not truly represent his district or their points of view, only his own. And I hope for all who read this that they understand Mr. Sherman will be NO different than Sanchez. There will be no Bi-Partisan conversations, no speaking for the majority, only what their personal agenda is. Sanchez is breaking the TEXAS law and the city should hold him accountable. Just because the ACO officer does not have time to check on all chained dogs does not mean people are not breaking the law. It has been made very clear that the law is the law & the city spokesman even stated they wanted to educate, wait to ticket and give people time to get into compliance. The city knows it must do something to get into compliance with the TEXAS law; however it does not have the resources. That is why I brought this alternative to the table, because it can be done. No ACO officer in a city of 30,000 people could check every 3 hours to see if a dog was still tied down. NO one wanted to hear that on the other side. What happened to that “all points of view thing” Mr. Sherman?

    Sherman claims to know the constitution…….I would love to see him take a history test.
    When is the last time you managed more than 100 people, balanced multi million dollar budgets, understood what a P&L means, what about EBITDA??? Do you have existing solid relationships with neighboring cities to help us with LCRA???

    As a citizen I have the right to say that you sir are no councilmen and you should stick to your current profession and let the people with REAL experience in the community, dedication to our citizens, knowledge and passion for the people who have done all the leg work keep doing just that. Party lines aside, proven track records are all that matter. No more persoanl agendas at City Hall!

    As citizens who support this I suggest we all copy and paste to our friends in Kyle before the election! Get out and vote!!!! Kyle can’t afford another personal agenda.

  • Mike Fulton

    Vanessa-
    There were quite a few citizens in that meeting the other night who were upset to see and hear the non-residents come in and try to sway our laws, and to completely ignore the 3 minute time request too. It was not just Mr. Sherman.

    I believe Jaime was asking for assistance with his fence, and I am pretty sure he was just making a joke. But, I imagine you knew that already.

    All of our council members and mayors (current and past) get elected for the first time with absolutely no experience at all. Some of them do wonderful things, some do horrible things, but most just do mediocre things. Remember, the candidate you attack today may be the council member you need support from next month. We have a history of pretty friendly politics in our little town, there is no need for the attacking that is going on.

    My support is with David Wilson. He made me mad with his vote the other night, but he is a friend of mine and now he will have to listen to me bitching at him over it. He is going to get an earful… =)

  • Candy Sherman

    Hi Vanessa,
    I am Ron Sherman’s wife. We are currently separated, but I am still a big supporter of him.
    I personally think it’s awesome that you have the courage of your convictions and are out there trying to make a difference. It is very important to make sure animals are not abused and are protected.
    I do however want to correct a few things that you have said above so that Ron is not misrepresented. I am doing this on my own. Ron did not ask me to do this for him.

    *First of all I know for a fact Ron is not against protecting animals of any kind. If you would read his post above he said he would be willing to work towards a compromise of some kind to help define abuse, and make sure the animals are protected. He, myself, and pretty much everyone we’ve talked has said it is important to protect animals but they believe this law just goes a little too far.

    *Secondly it was my understanding that he wasn’t uspet about the Austin people being there so much as he wanted to make sure that Austin did not have influence on our Kyle politics. This matter should be left up to people of Kyle. You have said that pretty much everyone supports this law. If that is the case why is this not put it on a ballot at the next election to let everyone decide for themselves (providing there would be some kind of neutral pamphlet showing strictly facts sent to everyone so that people can educate themselves on all points of the law), and they could make a decision based on the facts.

    *Thirdly, you asked when has Ron managed groups of over 100 people. By profression he has been a manager for well over 14 years. He has managed anywhere from a group of 33 to a group well over 300 employees.
    You also asked about him managing multi million dollar budgets, and as a matter of fact he has done that for many years as well, and has managed to make his numbers all but one or two times, and those were only because some changes were made that he had no control over.
    How many of the current city council members and Mayor have done that before they were elected? I didn’t recall that was a requirement.

    *Fourth, you said that he would not listen to anyone that disagrees with him. I happen to know for a fact that he has listened to others with opposing views in the community and saw the value in what they were saying, and was willing to work towards something that would be of benefit towards everyone. He also stated that in his post above. If you would contact him. (His information should be on his website) I know that he would be more than willing to sit down with you and talk about this.

  • Donn Brooks

    Having observed municipal politics for more years than I care to admit, this election has reinforced my belief that there is a great deal of misunderstanding regarding the nature of being a member of the city council. Councilpersons rarely get to do things as they want. They are restricted by the law, by finances, and by political reality. Add to that the fact that the city buries its best efforts (water and wastewater systems) and it is understandable that council candidates are frequently misinformed and overly critical of current operations.

    Council service is rarely boiled down to political ideology. More often it comes down to choosing the lesser of two evils once the financial, political and legal issues are all contemplated.

    The rhetoric of being a “true conservative” would carry more meaning if we had candidates claiming to be liberals. That, however, is not the case. Whichever candidates are elected will find that their personal policital ideology will take a back seat to following the advice of doctors which is: “first do no harm.”

    In municipal government, as in most things, nothing is as simple as it seems.

    This dog ordinance would seem to prove my point.

  • Donn Brooks

    Going further: It is interesting that one of the chief criticisms of public officials is that they refuse to listen to their constituents. Then, when a public official switches a vote due to concerns of constituents the cry goes out that the official is only interested in protecting their political viability.

    Some issues are beyond the scope of the political. Constituents cannot/should not be able to encourage the breaking of law. They cannot/should not be able to order the defiance of the law of gravity. But, in the case of this snake-bit dog leash ordinance I would not see anything wrong with changing a vote if it appeared that a majority of the concerned citizens had difficulty with it.

    And I do not think there is anything wrong with Becky Selbera changing her vote. She listened to her constituents. Sounds like she acted appropriately.

  • Donn Brooks

    There is no fool like an old fool. That said, please indulge me once more. There would be no point in calling for three votes on issues if there was not some contemplation that, from time to time, votes would change. We would hope those vote changes were a result of either presentation of new facts or a realization that the issue ran counter to the wishes of the constituency. This is not the equivalent of changing a vote that favors a developer or something of that nature. This is just a controversial ordinance that needs another look and changing the vote is exactly what was contemplated when the charter was written and voted on by the people of the good city.

  • http://www.joanfordogs.com Joan Miller

    Politics aside, I went to this meeting as a dog lover and professional dog trainer with over 40 years experience in canine behavior.
    I think politics is clouding the judgement of what is happening here.
    I don’t live in Kyle, however, I shop in Kyle and contribute to the economy in numerous ways. (banking, gas, petco, groceries, lowes, dentist, veterinarian, shopping at different retails stores) I also have clients who live in Kyle in which I have helped with their dog’s problems which keep their dog in the home not surrendered to a shelter.
    When I hear the arguments why this ban should not be passed, it makes no sense.
    The fact is – chained dogs become aggressive.
    With Kyle growing, the dog population grows as well, if there are no guidelines, ordinances or laws to keep dogs in check, I guarantee you will see an increase of bites, injury and possible death from these chained dogs. I briefly went into the dynamics of why this happens to a dog, it is not my opinion, it is science based research. Again, chained dogs become aggressive. The fact that Sanchez is so proud of his chained dogs is pathetic. It is only a matter of time before his dogs bite one of his daughters, friends or neighbors,and then that dog becomes somebody elses problem, either he finds a new home for the dog with an unwanted learned behavior (yes, dog behavior good or bad is learned) or a shelter gets the dog. Some how I think he may take the dog out back and put a bullet through its head. Bad dog? No, bad ownership.
    The fact that a dog jumps or digs out of a fence isn’t a reason to chain. There are training techniques when implemented properly can teach the dog not to do these behaviors. Give the dog a little credit for being an intelligent animal.
    I have had dogs my whole life and made a living in the dog industry for over 40 years. This isn’t an opinion from a woman that dresses her dogs and treats them like babies or children, in fact I discourage people from anthropomorphism on a regular basis. It isn’t a healthy practice and is a disservice to the dog, it is the opposite end of the spectrum from chaining a dog for unreasonable “fixable” reasons.
    Before any more comments are made, I have research to back all the facts I have mentioned.
    I am concerned on two levels, one being the treatment of the dog, you may see your dog as healthy and happy, I see the psychological damage and a ticking time bomb of aggression waiting to explode. The dog’s language is body language, I have studied for years to learn. I can see the damage done to a dog by watching the behavior/body language.
    Secondly, the safety of the community. I read the papers and watch the news. It sickens me when I read about a child injured or killed by a chained dog. It is unnecessary and preventable.
    I don’t have anything against the mayor or council members, I don’t know them, or know their politics, I am simply trying to help the canine population and the people directly related to them. I have no agenda, in fact I do more pro bono training than I care to mention. Simply, because I want to see people enjoy dogs as much as I have my whole life and continue too. (I have 8 dogs, all house dogs with excellent manners) I have two therapy dogs which go into hospitals, nursing homes etc., to help ailing/dying patients experience a little happiness with all the illness they are going through. Science has proven dogs can aleviate pain, lower blood pressure,boost the immune system, detect cancer, panic attacks, seizures, post traumatic stress syndrome (God Bless our troops), so to treat these wonderful creatures with such a lack of respect?! What are you thinking?
    By the way, I spoke to the company that did fencing on my property, they are willing and happy to donate fencing for some of the enclosures needed. God I love dog people!!
    Oh, the third reason I mentioned in the meeting was, if dogs had less aggressive tendencies would equal less bites, injuries and death…. less litigation, time and resources would be spent by the Kyle government. Seems with the savings just from that alone would justify hiring a couple more animal control officers. I realize my comments are logical and from what I saw and heard at this meeting, probably not something that would be conducive to politics.
    Legislation is heading to the Senate, regarding people who own dogs that kill a person of certain ages, (children under 18, adults over 65,) can get life in prison for their dog’s preventable aggression. Seems only fair to me, giving a dog life in prison on the end of a chain, and it mauls a child to death, the owner can rightfully so, be sentenced to life in prison. Eye for an eye.

  • http://StandUpPatriots.com Patriot

    Leash laws for dogs is one way to solve the problem of roaming dogs and possibly chaining up a dog is necessary as well. However, I do not believe passing a “NO CHAIN” law is a good idea for ALL cases.

    Let me give an example for the need to chain up a dog and for not chaining.
    We used to live in the mountains where dogs sometimes ran in packs. One of the ranchers had a cow killed by a pack of dogs so he laced the dead animal with poison to catch the guilty dogs. Apparently, when a few dogs get together they form a pack. I had three 6 month old puppies that were not chained for running and were poisoned by the dead cow.

    On the other hand, I also had a dog that we put on a chain whenever she ran. So, if she ran off the property, she knew her punishment was to be put on a chain for two days and then taken off. After awhile, when she ran, she would come home and put herself in the doghouse and wait for me to chain her up. One time I noticed that she had put herself in the doghouse for punishment and so I wondered what she had done wrong. I went around the house and yard trying to figure out her crime. Then I found it, she had pulled off the meat from the counter that I had put out to thaw and ate most of it–I just found the wrapper. That dog was so good at knowing the boundary lines that, when we moved to the city, she would stand right on the property line and watch us as we talked to the neighbor. She would not go past the line. We never showed it to her but somehow she already knew.

    I think a chain should be used in a specific way for a specific problem and for a specific amount of time. If you can’t train your dog, if you don’t want to spend the time to train your dog, or if you don’t know how to train your dog then learn or don’t get one. Dogs are wonderful pets but they have to understand the rules and obey. There is a right way and a wrong way to teach them and just chaining them up because you don’t want to be bothered with them is the wrong way. Perhaps learning from the “Dog Whisperer” or the British lady on cable (“It’s me or the dog”) will help teach people how to train their dogs to behave.

    Passing a law that forbids chaining for any reason is taking the law too far. If a person abuses the animal by chaining it up inhumanely, then it’s a subject that needs to be addressed in another way.

  • http://www.joanfordogs.com Joan Miller

    @Patriot- I think you are missing the point. We have leash laws which work most of the time, however, not all people are responsible dog owners.
    Case in point, your example of the dogs running in a pack. This rancher’s livelihood was compromised by a pack of dogs that should have been in a fenced yard. I DO NOT agree with poisoning any animal, however, this rancher did what he thought was best to solve the problem. What did you expect? Three puppies running loose? This was an example of irresponsible dog ownership. If left to their own devices dogs will run in packs and can cause damage, again, not the dog’s fault, irresponsible ownership. Why weren’t the dogs in a yard? I lived in the mountains for 10 years, responsible dog owners have yards and treat their dogs with respect. Its not a geographical thing.
    If dogs are left untrained, even the most basic training, this is what happens. Dog’s behavior, good and bad is learned. If a dog exhibits an unwanted behavior and isn’t taught what we expect as a ‘good’ behavior we can’t expect the dog to inherently know what is good or bad.
    By chaining a dog for bad behavior is ridiculous. By the time you chain a dog the ‘bad’ behavior it is so far out of their mind….really, if dogs thought like that they would be driving themselves to dog shows.
    I can explain why your dog did what she did regarding the ‘doghouse’ behavior, however, this isn’t what this post is about. Call me, or email me, I will explain.
    So, a chain should be used for a specific way, problem and time, interesting, what is your proposal? Laws are blanket solutions, each detail cannot be tweaked for specific circumstances and times or people.
    Common sense dictates, chaining a dog 24/7 is not only cruel to the dog but a real safety concern for the community. A CHAINED DOG WILL BECOME AGGRESSIVE. This is not my opinion, it is science based research, after years of studying canine behavior, scientists have come to this conclusion. I have seen it time and time again.
    Dogs only understand what we teach them, so the only way they will understand rules and obey is to train them what we expect.
    I have attended numerous seminars and workshops with Victoria Stilwell as a speaker (Its Me or The Dog), and I guarantee she doesn’t agree with chaining a dog under any circumstances. She subscribes to the same methodology I do regarding training animals, especially dogs. Positive reinforcement techniques. So inflicting pain for punishment isn’t an option at all in training. This method is what trainers at Sea World use with marine animals, television and movie animals are trained this way as well. Police and military use positive reinforcement, can you imagine a cop on a serious call and his dog (partner) doesn’t trust him because he was dominated through training? The navy seals who killed B.Laden had a military dog with them. I guarantee that dog was trained with R+, if they had used dominance methods the trust wouldn’t be there in life and death situations…. It wouldn’t work. The idea is to reward the behavior we want, dogs learn very quickly and it creates a bond between human and dog.
    Other dominance methods such as Dog Whisperer (Cesar Millan) are outdated and can backfire. That is also a scientific fact. I know first hand. When I first started training dogs in the late 60′s, thats all we knew. We made our dogs submit to dominance and trained. I saw my dog ‘shut down’ and it broke my heart, the bond between us was broken, she didn’t trust me, and training wasn’t fun for her or me. A few years later I discovered a relatively new technique, positive reinforcement. I owned a grooming shop and I used this methodology in my business. I had dogs scratching the door to get IN my shop! It works, I have trained dogs for numerous tasks, for over 40 years.
    With that said, what solution do you propose? It isn’t practical to put time limits on chaining, who would monitor this? And who decides what is humane? My opinion of humane treatment is obviously different than the council people in Kyle, which is disturbing because they are molding the future for Kyle. What are we teaching the children about kindness and humane treatment of animals? And what other way would you address this? Please enlighten me, the dog in the picture above this article needs help immediately, but obviously the authorities voted in office don’t agree. Because I have studied dog behavior for years, I can read their language, which is is body language, they only learn our speech because most people can’t learn theirs. The dog in the photo is so stressed and unhappy, it is a crime, perhaps not yet a judicial crime, but a moral crime. Animals should never be treated with such disrespect. I would rather see this dog put down than live another day like this. There are worse things in life than death….

  • http://StandUpPatriots.com Patriot

    @Joan Miller,
    I completely agree with you on most of what you said. I was a city kid that moved to the mountains and didn’t know much about country living. We had small dogs before that mainly lived in the house with us and our backyards were always fenced so getting a big lab was different for us. We lived on 7 acres of forest (with wild government land all around us) so can’t very well fence in the yard. It was a new experience for us for sure, but we were teaching AJ to stay in her own property. On the other hand, puppies were a different matter. I think our experience proves that people shouldn’t have more dogs than they can control, which obviously we did. So yes, we were not being responsible dog owners, because we didn’t know better, and they paid for it with their lives.

    That was back in the 1980′s and now we have learned how to train dogs from Cesar Millan (the Dog Whisperer). People who get dogs probably ought to be trained on how to care for them if they have not had training before–even if they have been raised around dogs. Proper training makes better dogs and better pet owners. I love Victoria Stilwell also, because she is bold in telling people when they are being a lazy and poor dog owner. Your example of positive reinforcement is good and does work very well. I love your attitude.

    It’s been thirty years since we’ve had a dog and I’ve learned a lot about being a better dog owner. If, or when, we get another dog, I will know better how to care for him/her. However, even though I agree with you on many aspects about chaining, I do think there are times when it is appropriate to do so and it not be abusive. I think treating all situations and all chaining the same can be a mistake because not all situations are the same. With you being a dog trainer, you know what works but not everyone can have someone like you around to teach them–wish they could though. It’s good that you are sharing your knowledge with people though and that’s good, I applaud you. Perhaps you can make an impact on people about this topic but now is not the time to enact a NO CHAINING in my opinion that goes a bit too far. It probably needs to be done in steps by starting with guidelines for chaining and discipline. It might help to require an abusive person to take training classes. It is probably too drastic of a measure to take right now to say NO CHAINS at all until people learn a better way to control their dogs…just as I have learned.

    I applaud your convictions in helping the abused animals in your community and in sharing your knowledge with people through training workshops. That seems to me to be a better way of approaching this problem. Education is always the solution don’t you think?

    Anyway, my examples were to show what happens when people don’t control their animals and why it is important to learn how to handle dogs better. Also, I am an example of how people can be a better owner through better education. Thanks for your response. It was helpful. And by the way, I probably will give you a call. Thanks for the offer. Judy

  • http://StandUpPatriots.com Patriot

    @Vanessa, Oh my Vanessa. You don’t need to be so combative about this. It’s just an election so calm down, it’s not the end of the world. People get their dander up during election time and that needs to settle down. Sounds to me like both of you are having a problem here. Look, just discuss the points without getting emotion into the picture. Emotions cloud good judgment and prevents compromise. Do you think you two can shake this off and try to work together better? The man has good points and he is committed, as I am sure you are as well.

    I know Mr. Sherman is generally not hot headed and good natured. I’ve known him a long time and I know he is a good man with ethics…which I think can benefit the city. He is qualified, maybe not as well as someone who has served before and knows the ropes, but everyone has to start out as a rookie so please cool your jets and take a look at his qualities instead of his shortcomings, you have shortcomings too you know. Wouldn’t you want people to judge you by your good works than by perfect standards people set for you.

    I ask that you calm down and take a look at what he is trying to accomplish and see if you can find something good there? That’s what I ask of any voter. People all come as a package of good and bad sides to them because they are human. That’s all I have to say, since I wasn’t there at the meeting so I cannot speak to what you mentioned. Thanks

  • Annie Carlson

    I have been trying to improve the tethering law in Michigan, which is outdated and inhumane. Unfortunately, our legislators do not have time to sponsor a bill to change the current law. The dog mushers are also trying to bully the issue and stop our efforts. I applaud Vanessa for her efforts!

  • http://www.joanfordogs.com Joan Miller

    @Patriot- Be careful using CM training techniques, there is a reason for the disclaimer at the beginning of his shows. United States Humane Society receive thousands of calls regarding people being bitten by using his techniques. As I stated above, dominance methods are outdated and don’t work long term. What you see on the show has been edited so we don’t know what happens when the dog retaliates for being forced into unnatural positions. Alpha roll is one, nowhere do dogs actually do this. Wolves don’t do it, the dog will roll over on its own to show submission, not by another dog rolling them. Science based training works, this old fashioned method is on its way out. Notice how Petco is phasing out his products? They are onboard with R+ training.
    Regarding the mountains, didn’t make sense. I lived in the mountains surrounded on one side by National Forest Service Land, the other side was Apache Indian Reservation. If you own private land you can fence….You obviously don’t know much about dogs so your NO CHAINING comments are invalid. If you thought the community was unsafe because there wasn’t a crosswalk by a school, wouldn’t you want a crosswalk installed for the safety of school children? Well as I stated, its NOT my opinion it has been scientifically proven that chained dogs are aggressive. It blows my mind nobody gets that! Smoking cigarettes causes cancer. No brainer, science has proven that. Same with chained dogs….they will become aggressive in time, scientifically proven through years of research. You haven’t come up with a solution, what do you propose ? We are offering to help people put up fencing, I have a company that will donate fencing. This is the most annoying thing ever, people are so ignorant to the facts…I guess Kyle will wait til a kid gets killed by a chained dog before anything will get done. I have seen it first hand! I have also testified in a case where a pack of dogs killed a young girl. They wanted to ban a specific breed from the town I lived in. It didn’t pass. It isn’t the breed its the idiots that own them.

  • http://StandUpPatriots.com Patriot

    @Joan Miller,
    I would really like to talk with you in private as you suggested. Would you send me a phone number via email at comments@standuppatriots.com. It appears that we have a lot to talk about. If you don’t mind me calling you, I would really appreciate it.
    Judy

  • http://StandUpPatriots.com Patriot

    @Joan Miller,
    I would really like to talk with you in private as you suggested. Would you send me a phone number via email at comments@standuppatriots.com. It appears that we have a lot to talk about. If you don’t mind me calling you, I would really appreciate it.
    Patriot

  • http://StandUpPatriots.com Patriot

    @Joan Miller
    I am not saying that NO Chaining is bad, I’m saying it goes too far for people who are used to chaining. I am also saying that there would probably be less resistance if done in steps, by starting with education and laws that would have people take a class on caring for animals. Perhaps a video people have to watch before they adopt an animal. There are many things that can be done as a first step for those who are ignorant as you say. I agree that people are not familiar with all the research being done and it appears that people can benefit from your training. My point is that this law is too drastic for some people, because they don’t know any better way. That’s why giving options to educate people would be better that leads to less and less animals being chained up. If I got it, so can others. Once I watched the TV shows, I saw other ways to train a dog. I think the same thing is true for people who are bent on chaining. The resistance is that people are being FORCED to go from one extreme to the other, which is what it appears to be to them. EDUCATION makes more sense to me as a first step. What do you think?

  • Lila Knight

    Patriot (aka Judy): Are you Ron Sherman’s mother? Or otherwise related to him?
    Just curious.

  • Joan Miller

    @Patriot-regarding your second sentence – personally I don’t care if it goes too far for people who are use to chaining. It isn’t about the people, it is about the dogs. Yes, I agree education is the beginning. Do you really think any of these people would attend a class?
    When people have to follow a law that is an education. You haven’t mentioned the dogs welfare once, nor addressed the safety issue for children who are mauled everyday by chained dogs. We are educating children regarding dog safety, however people will always be resistant to change.
    I don’t know what we have to talk about, we are on not only a different page but evidently different books. I offered to explain why your idea of how your dog thought of putting herself in the dog house was not how dogs think. I advertise in all the local papers in the dog classified ads. And have been for 5 years. Please reread my three posts, I have addressed all your comments. If you look at that dog in the picture and still think chaining is okay on any level….oh we are moving too fast for the poor people who own the dog, please…..give me a break.

    Please reread my last three posts carefully. I address most of your comments

  • Vanessa Harris

    Well it is a very sad day for me…I was informed today by a reporter that a dog has died as a result of being chained in Kyle this week. JUST ONE WEEK AFTER THE VOTE…A DOG DIED on the end of a chain.

    So what is it going to take for people to understand that chaining a dog for any length of time is ABUSE? They can hang themselves in a matter of minutes if unattended.

    Is Kyle going to have to see a child mauled or killed in order to understand?

    A law is a law is a law and it is our TEXAS law. A dog died today that could have been rescued, how many more will die in this heat?

    I pray for everyone who has closed their minds to this that no human being will be hurt or killed next due to the harm a human has inflicted on a dog that has caused it to become aggressive due to chaining.

    Perhaps people won’t care that a dog died in our city on the end of a chain this week, but I guarantee they will if an abused dog hurts or kills a child or any person. Sad thing is the dog will be killed and blamed for what happens when it is only the owner to blame.

    I hope the owners of this dog are held accountable to the full extent of the Texas law.

  • Lila Knight

    Its a very sad day. And this is from a cat person. But nonetheless. I care about life. And even if the City Council had passed this ordinance, sadly – it would not have been swiftly enough to save this life.
    But in the future – how many?

    So – Ron Sherman – where do you – and – the Constitution – stand on this? You think it is acceptable for men to command the lives of their animals as though they were slaves?
    Are you truly pro-life?

Advertisement

Recent Comments

Latest Headlines

The Hays Free Press on Facebook

Photo Gallery

120x600 ad code [Inner pages]
Log in

The forecast for 78640 by WP Wunderground

| Congratulations, you read all the way to the bottom.