see'n;spots:  I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say.  I was not referring to the tether laws, but the animal cruelty laws that have been on the books for years. I don't know for sure, but I believe there are allot of places that do not yet have tether laws, but animal cruelty laws are on the books pretty much everywhere.  So, before we pass any more laws (i.e., tether laws, spay/nueter laws or others) I would like to see the enforcement of the anti-cruelty laws with harsher penalties.  I believe that if you love animals you do the right thing by animals in how you care for them, whether you crate or tether or other.  So, my suggestion is we stop worrying about more laws, make the current animal cruelty law penalties harsher and go after the folks that treat their animals (not just dogs) horribly and put a stop to the neglect and mistreatment.

Now before everyone jumps on that, I know this is easier said than done.  However, like most every criminal act today from murder on down we have plenty of laws, we just need to do a better job of enforcing.

You know the sad part is that we can do right by our own human kids in many families and yet some of these same folks go out and get dogs and cats too. 

I for one am right there with you on better enforcement of existing laws, and along with that I'd like to have some kind of tracking system where if a person gets nailed with animal cruelty in one state, they can't just move to another state and start all over again. It seems like the really bad folks are often 'serial abusers'.

FWIW our VERY conservative rural county just passed a sales tax initiative specifically for getting more law enforcement on the street, including an animal control officer for the upper portion of our county. The dog situation up there has been very frustrating for a lot of people for a long time.... folks are FED.UP. with loose dogs, dogs not taken care of, etc. And horses will be right in there I'm sure, especially now that the economy is slowing down.

I agree there is no point raising fines.  It's more about how likely people are to get caught- like littering fines or speeding tickets.  Even though the fines for those offenses can be $1000 or $300, people rarely obey those laws, because they rarely get the fine.  And in our society, there will always be people who has enough money they just pay the fine, because to them $1000 is nothing, just another expense of having a dog.

I'm so glad to hear that you were able to take a dog from a poor situation and give it a good home.  I dont think the rescue folks are trying to make it difficult to adopt dogs, they've just ran into enough situations where they have to take the dog back.  It is a shame to think how many good homes who would take really good care of a GSP fail to pass their standards and therefore can't adopt a dog.  The most important part should be the family's responsibility towards the dog's best interests, not whether there is a fence or not.   Maybe they should have interested families pass a 'responsible dog ownership class' to get extra points before adoption.  

http://www.dogsdeservebetter.com/dognamictouralabama.html

See n spots quotes:  "I'm personally acquainted w/a woman involved in Rescue who makes a tidy sum doing this work."

I'd be interested to know what kinda responsible rescue this person runs to be able to "make money" doing this work?  Wanna know how many times I raided my personal savings account to keep my rescue afloat?  There maybe slimeballs out there, but you have to KNOW your rescue group!  I cannot even tell you how many times we survived the winter on less then thirty bucks!  This is no money making 'business'.  I take great offense to this statement.  We do it for the passionate reason to save our beautiful breed!  I say, walk in MY shoes for one week.  Let's see how long you last.  We have to begin somewhere; I choose here and now.

Being in rescue for a number of years, I've never heard of any rescuer making a tidy sum or any sum other than making up the negative difference?  How could we?  The numbers just aren't there since vetting alone (in our rescue program) averages out to several hundred dollars more that the adoption donation?  That's why there's a need to fundraise to make up the difference.

Deb Orpen

No rescue or AR group has the legal right to just take your dogs.  If they do, it's called theft/larceny.

Deb Orpen

See'n'spots

Please don't take this the wrong way as I'm not one to get involved in arguments or call someone out for their beliefs or opinions, but, all I hear in almost everyone of your posts is how great an experience you could offer a dog and how you own a doggy heaven and how you were cheated by not being allowed to adopt.  Well how bout in your post "too much exercise?" where you stated "Poor Chip got bit by 2 cottonmouths while on the 50' & came nose to nose w/gator out in the woods that was bigger than he was!  Old Auzzie got nailed by a copperhead back in CT!"  I don't know about you but doesn't exactly sound like a doggy heaven I would want to be a part of.  I am neither a supporter or critic of tether laws I believe anything when used properly can be a good thing.  I am just sick of every post I read stating how you were cheated even though you can offer doggy pangea on your 17 acres yet 2 of your dogs experienced extremely unfortunate events.  Coincidence maybe the first time.  Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.  Rescues use their better judgement and previous experiences to determine good homes if in a rescuers experience they have more returned/neglected dogs from homes that tether than homes that fence then that is their experinece and that is how they make judgement.  I agree there should be a way to appeal and prove you can give a great home and experience without a fence but everyone learns from their experiences and rescuers are no different.  As a good friend of mine once said I would rather turn away 50 good forever homes than put one rescue dog in a bad situation.

Please accept my apology if it was an assumption or misinterpretation of your post but it sounded like chip got both his snake attacks and his encounter with a gator on your land.  I am sorry your dogs experienced the events they did.  I lived not so far south but in the panhadle of FL or a few years.  I understand the risk associated with dogs being run anywhere especially in the wild whether it be hunting or otherwise and was not stating that it was your fault that it happened but merely that a rescue may have taken the place you live as a risk because of the potential for those types of accidents to happen.  There is potential for injury in all parts of the US, it doesn't matter if the dog is tethered, fenced or running free but again it is up to the interpretation of the person with the dog on who to allow placement of the dog with.  "I am just sick of" was pertaining to anyone that reads your posts should already understand your stand on rescues and the humane society there is no need to bring it up in almost every post.  I agree with you and I would rather see a dog in a rural area with land to run than in a 20'x30' urban fenced yard but that is not our choice it is ultimatley the person selling or placeing the dog (the breeder or rescuers) choice.  I believe that anyone "COULD" offer a great place for a dog to live it just comes down to how responsible they are and not the method used to contain the dog.  As was stated earlier you rescued a neglected dog that came from a fenced yard situation and I have witnessed neglected dogs on tethers and in fenced yards.  I do understand your disappointment at being turned away because of a stupid stipulation, but it is not only rescuers who turn people away breeders do it also.  I was turned away because I am only a weekend hunter and I do not test/trial/show as of yet.  It all comes down to what the individual wants for their dogs.  I believe we should concentrate more on analyzing the people who are adopting/purchasing rather than the housing/containment/hunting/competition situations.