I have been reading letters to the editor, pro and con, concerning the dog-tethering ordinance passed by the Las Vegas City Council. I also googled everything I could find on this subject and think I understand both sides of the issue.
It seems to me that those opposed to the non-tethering ordinance mostly object on a financial basis. Trust me, I get it. I cannot have a Mercedes for the exact same reason. Those against tethering dogs believe it is cruel and dangerous for the dog.
I am 66 years old and have had dogs all my life; I have always been poor and yet I have never tied a dog, only because it never occurred to me to do so. I had never even seen a dog tied until I moved to Las Vegas 16 years ago.
Poor as I am, I still fall into the second group. When I moved to New Mexico, I had two major complaints. One was the setting sun. It’s so bright that it makes it hard to see when driving. The other was the way people treat their animals. It hurt me to the bone to see a dog chained in the middle of a yard in the snow, with no food, no water, no shelter, nothing. Just a cold, lonely dog or in the summer, a hot and thirsty, lonely do. I have trained myself to look away as fast as I can if I even think I might see a chained dog while I’m driving.
There is not much to be done about the setting sun but I sure am glad someone suggested not tethering dogs because not only is it dangerous to drive into the setting sun with a hard squint, it is also unsafe safe to turn one’s head while driving past a poor, suffering dog. I do both and do not want my insurance rate to go up. So please, let’s find better ways to care for our dogs.