Cleveland Considers Tethering Ban

Life With Dogs is reader-supported. We may earn a small commission through products purchased using links on this page.

The city of Cleveland is considering an ordinance proposed by Councilmen Terrell Pruitt and Matt Zone that would outlaw long-term outdoor tethering.

Madoline was confiscated from a Cleveland back yard after spending her life outdoors with a collar embedded in her neck. Local animal rescue groups are applauding the proposal, and say this is a change that can’t come soon enough.

“The No. 1 dog-related reason for calls to our humane investigations hot line is to report owners who are not providing their dogs with adequate food, water or shelter,” said Cleveland Animal Protective League director Sharon Harvey. “In the vast majority of these cases, we find the dogs living on chains. And, dogs who are constantly tethered are more likely to be aggressive and become nuisance barkers as a result of boredom.”

If passed, the bill would prohibit the tethering of animals between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m.,  and would make it illegal to tie a pet out for more than three hours in a 24-hour period.

A minimum length of 20 feet is specified for ropes or chains, and pet owners are expected to consider the elements when tying a pet out, even for brief periods: tethering would also be banned if heat or tornado warnings have been issued. Access to shade and water at all times would be required, and prong, choke, or otherwise ill-fitting collars would be outlawed.

First time violators would face animal neglect charges, a first-degree misdemeanor. Sharon Harvey says this is a big step in the right direction for the city and its pet population.

“Based on what we see in the field every day, Cleveland is in desperate need of a law that will restrict tethering and allow these social, companion animals to live indoors as members of their families,” Harvey said.

5 thoughts on “Cleveland Considers Tethering Ban”

  1. I don’t like chains. Dogs should have one of those chain link kennels if they have to be outside and the owner can’t find time to put up even a little fence. I hope this tethering ban will help many dogs. Why have a pet if all you are going to do is chain it up outside. Just don’t get a pet. If the person can’t be better to the animal then they should not have one.

    Reply
  2. If your dogs loves to be outside, & he probably loves to be with u.. problem solved. enjoy your dog outside together. thats what my dog loves…. To be with me outside. If u work, after work is fine. bet your dog will be 100% happier and balanced. alittle walk never hurt anyone….Instead of being tethered, alone and bored.

    Reply
  3. My apologies to the faint of heart, but can we talk here?

    The tethered dog is the unwanted dog. Kept for God only knows what reasons, usually its a puppy a kid played with for 2 weeks, or something. Or just kept to be tortured by a sadist who can’t take it out on humans, maybe, I just don’t know.

    The tethered dog is often found with his head nearly severed off trying to get off the wrapped chain around his neck to get to some food or water. As the tethered neglected dog screams and bark out to people like me and others who would run to come help them, the owner walks out and beats them. After enough beatings, it’s better to stay hungry and thirsty. Then they die at the end of the chain and as EVERY animal cop show documents, the owners say its not my dog, or something equally bizarre.

    Worse yet, found with both his neck and torso almost severed , such as the dog in Detroit put into a thin wire harnass of sorts and left to just saw himself up trying to get to food and water. (aniimal cops documented it.)

    In areas of such ignorance and cruelty as a community mentality, where it is accepted and has been going on for decades, I believe a number of cities across the U.S. should impose a ban on owning dogs, period. Absolutely ban pit bulls. At this moment they are a breed set aside for particular census groups to enjoy as objects of torture and illegal entertainment.

    California visionaries in SF have already seen the future of dogs in America and were working on banning general dog ownership, making it much harder to keep a four legged animal if you were just going to starve, dehydrate, freeze or roast it to death. Ownership would come by permit only to people who intended to have a real pet.

    This may be the only answer for this tragic species of animal, the only one that is born to adore humans (kittens too.) . The rest of the animals seem smart enough to be afraid of us from the start.

    If you love dogs, start to join other, complain and work to avoid the current suffering beyond our imagination. And call and email Cleveland councilmen above with your support of their excellent solutions.

    Reply
    • I don’t think dogs should ever be banned. They should, however, requite a license, each dog should HAVE to be registered (micro chipped), and a separate more expensive license for any breeding. Puppies should come with a heavy fee of being unfixed that can be refunded by the state once they are.

      Reply
  4. I’m all for the ban and wish more places had it, like my State. All my dogs and indoor-outdoor and come inside to sleep at night. I only tether when I’m out front and my little dog wants to be around me where I have no fence. I usually tie the dog to my belt but he does have a ground tether while I’m bringing in groceries or he just really wants to see what is going on in the front of the house, the front door is always left open and accessible to him. I can’t STAND seeing dogs out for long periods on tethers, house or no house. It’s worse if it’s ANYTHING on the neck as it has to be so tight and they can choke them selves. I’d like them to add that tethered dogs MUST be hooked on a harness and MUST have all their vaccines and flea meds to ensure they are safe outside.

    Reply

Leave a Comment