February 11th / 13th, 2011
"New Pet Abuse Laws are Needed"
Last year Susie's law went into effect, making animal cruelty a class H
felony. But the law didn't go far enough. Abusers can only be sentenced to a
maximum 10 months in jail, and a non animal loving judge could reduce that
significantly. It also did not criminalize unintentional abuse, such as
neglect. And, it did not address the issue of tethering dogs as a form of
abuse.
Greensboro Senator Don Vaughan is proposing a new law that would make it a
crime for someone to recklessly neglect a pet, such as leaving a dog
without food and water. If passed, Vaughan's bill would also allow judges to
remove a neglected pet from the home. Unfortunately, Vaughan is a democrat is
a GOP controlled senate. The man who decides if Vaughan's bill gets a
hearing is Sen. Austin Allran of Hickory who told the Greensboro News & Record,
"Animal bills tend to be extremely controversial", referring to opposition
from hunters and dog breeders. Hey Austin, man up ! Who cares what abusive
dog breeders and macho hunting groups have to say? You are a lawmaker, not
a contestant in a popularity contest. The Chairman of the judiciary
committee should put principal over provincial politics, and do what he can to
stamp out a universal evil without fear of local backlash from a few
loudmouths. Still, Vaughan faces an uphill battle in Raleigh, similar to the
obstacles faced by Lori Sears, chairman of the Forsyth County Animal Control
Advisory Board.
Sears's board has recommended to County Commissioners a ban on tethering.
Sears and others contend that leaving a dog tied is unsafe for the animal
and for humans who come in contact with the animal. Tethering is also often
associated with other problems of abuse and neglect, such as lack of food,
water, adequate shelter, and proper vet care.
The ban would prohibit tethering as the primary method of confinement,
but, like Susie's law, it comes up short. As written, the ban would still
allow dogs to be "temporarily" restrained for up to seven days during hunting,
hiking, or camping trips, and it would be phased in over a two year period.
Tethering should only be used for a few hours at a time when training a
dog to respect boundaries, but that shouldn't be necessary if dog owners were
required to erect fences. As for the proposed phase in period, that just
gives abusive owners two more years to let the animal suffer. So while the
proposed ban doesn't go far enough, it is a step in the right direction. It
is now up to the board of Commissioners to decide the issue. But if they
listen to folks like Albert Jacobs, the county may not take that right step.
Jacobs is a member of the advisory board who voted against the ban, but his
reason for opposition is almost as disturbing as the abuse itself.
According to his statement to the Winston Salem Journal, Jacobs tethers seven dogs
on his property. That begs the question, how in hell does someone like
that get on the animal control advisory board?
According to Dave Plyer, the county commissioners appoint advisory members
after a screening process which involves a review of a written bio,
contact with the applicant, and input from the community. But apparently, the
appointment process itself needs review. Having someone on the animal control
board who tethers his own dogs, is like having a sex offender work for child
protective services.
Forsyth needs to loosen the tethers and tighten its standards for board
appointments. Meanwhile, republicans in Raleigh need to stop living in fear
of hunters and breeders, and pass Sen. Vaughan's neglect law. Politicians
who continually fail to recognize the horrors of animal abuse should
themselves be neglected come time for re-election.
|
