Dog crates to be illegal in SC

[Eric Johnson]

FYI

Eric
=========

Permission to cross post.

The South Carolina legislature, undoubtedly taking information from AR,
has slipped a section into the anti-tether bill S 833 they have been
trying to formulate for the last two years. This bill has been in the SC
Senate judiciary committee being amended for the last two years. Noone
knows when it will be over.

The bill will allow AR to go after any dog in a crate, cage, pen, or on
a tether. It has the usual clauses about access to sustenance but
includes a sentence saying anyone who should "know better" is
punishable. The standards are not definable the way this bill is
written. It is a blanket statement.

The bill had an exclusion for hunters. It has also been removed with
this amendment.

The current version of the bill:

http://tinyurl.com/yv63fp

See section 1 B. It's brand new as of yesterday.

We worry about PETA coming to dog shows and releasing dogs. With this
new law, they'll be able to come to shows with measuring sticks instead.

SC has become an AR target. Please help by contacting our senate
judiciary committee opposing this bill. All emails from everywhere
needed and welcome. Below is text to send to senators with the senators
on the judiciary committee's information. We could really use some help!
Thanks very much.

Dean Lake
Legislative Liason
Sandlapper Golden Retriever Club

=========

Draft letter and addresses omitted

[HuntinDawg]

Dude, your link isn't working for me.

[Eric Johnson]

I changed the line spacing and then tested it.

Thanks for pointing this out.

Eric

[JeffLusk]

So what about dog pros with dog trucks? Is that part of this? Pretty rediculous if you ask me. I understand some may over use the crate, but my dogs are in a crate every night for way more than 3 hours!

[2tall]

As a South Carolinian, I was not aware of this legislation on a state level. I do know that the tethering restrictions have been put in place in Beaufort County. Though I oppose government interference as much as anyone, and do not put any tricks past the AR people, nothing I read in the bill posted here concerns me for the way hunters, testers, trialers, show etc handle their dogs. I only see that if someone is fool enough to put his dog in an enclosed crate in 90* weather and cook him, or the fighting dog guys that leave their pitts chained to a rusted automobile out in the sun with no water for days/weeks at a time then he can now be prosecuted. Read it again. I saw no reference to a specific time period. If the AR people are truly targeting SC, how come we have such a healthy hunting population and most private arms rights are vigilantly protected? Just wondering, how could my sport, guns and lifestyle be under such threat if everyone I know enjoys the same? Never seen an anti. Maybe just lucky.

[BBnumber1]

Carol, first line on the bill calls out the time limit:

TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION 47-1-45 SO AS TO PROHIBIT THE TETHERING, FASTENING, CHAINING, TYING, OR RESTRAINING A DOG TO A STATIONARY OBJECT FOR MORE THAN THREE HOURS A DAY OR FOR MORE THAN SIX HOURS A DAY ON A TROLLEY SYSTEM; TO PROVIDE CLASS I MISDEMEANOR CRIMINAL PENALTIES; AND TO AUTHORIZE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BY ORDINANCE TO VARY THESE REGULATIONS


Not sure if that becomespart of the official law or not.

[2tall]

Thanks I did not see that. But I still don't see this bill as hampering normal activities. I certainly did not come out FOR it by any means, but it is not as damaging as a law that "made crates illegal" as stated in the thread title.

[Eric Johnson]

The trick is to remember that the AR folks won't tell the legislators their true intent just they won't tell the public.

The proposed legislation has no specifics. The language is "'cruel confinement of an animal' includes, but is not limited to,...."

Once the law is passed, they can then make it be what they want it to be or, amend it again to make it even more restrictive. Confinement for an unreasonable time could be a dog truck. Confinement in a truck doesn't allow a dog to sit up for instance.

As far as that goes, the anti-tethering laws are bad on their face. A dog tethered on a 10' line has access to more space than a dog in a 10'x10' pen. All the language favoring anti-tethering is poppycock. A dog should or should not be tethered on a case by case basis, not a universal and blanket law.

Eric

[Dale]

The way I read it, it would be up to the discretion of the enforcement officer if said space was large enough. Thus meaning no matter haw big you go they will say "not big enough" you in violation.

[cgoeson]

If you're not into politics and you love this dog game, you better think about paying attention. One thing I know about state legislators is that they don't get a lot of feedback from constituents. Call them and be very respectful, but be clear that you think this bill is a problem and be specific as to why. Emails are ok, but don't carry near as much weight as a phone call. "Seminar" emails are completely disregarded. Call and speak with them, they respect that.

Chris