Case Study: Tethering

Tethering or chaining under most laws means that a person ties an animal (typically a dog) with a rope or line to a stationary object.

Typical anti-cruelty laws do not effectively address cruelty issues with tethering. While Washington State is one of only twenty three US states with laws that limit or otherwise control how owners can tether their dogs, the law is not enforceable.

A law that makes tethering illegal would allow officers to quickly respond and take action. However, tethering is a complex issue that intersects with cruelty and neglect, animal aggression, and social equity.

---

Our Findings

Ineffective Laws, Reports Increasing

Concerned citizens can call the Seattle Animal Shelter to report tethered dogs. Officers may investigate the situation but they are often unable to do anything as they don’t have the resources to monitor a single house for 24 hours straight to determine length of tethering and whether the animal is being given fresh food and water. ​

Confinement calls into Seattle Animal Shelter have steadily increased since 2016*.

* Except for 2020, where we observed a 24% decrease in all animal cruelty complaints and investigations due to the COVID-19 lockdowns.

Tethering & Aggression in Dogs

Dogs are pack animals. Those frequently tethered are undersocialized and more likely to develop behavioral problems, resulting in attacks. Research has found:

• Tethered dogs are 2-3 times more likely to attack.

• 28% of dogs involved in fatal animal attacks were tethered at the time of attack.

• An average 25 Americans are injured or killed every year by tethered dogs, 75% of which are children.

• Tethered dogs are more likely to be stolen for medical research or to be used as bait in dog fights.

​ Frequent tethering of animals is cruel and dangerous.

Issue Intersectionality

Tethering is a complex social issue, ripe for equity impacts:

• Residents may not be able to implement adequate fencing/kenneling, and tethers are required to prevent an animal from being “at large."

• Demographic data is not obtained for tethering cases, making equity evaluations around future laws difficult.

• The Sled Dog industry exists in Washington state and heavily opposes anti-tethering laws, as it is a common cultural practice.

Tethering, as controlled by Washington State law, may not be adequate for the City of Seattle.

---

Our Recommendations

Time Limitations are Vital

Washington State law requires animals only be tethered for a period of time that is “not reckless,” which is open to interpretation. More recent laws restrict the number of hours a dog can be tethered within a 24-hour period. For instance, in Oregon it is no longer than ten hours, and in Massachusetts that limit is no longer than five hours.

​Establishing a time limit can make the law enforceable.

Extreme Weather Needs Consideration

Washington State law makes no additional provisions in case of extreme weather or natural disasters. These provisions may be necessary in protecting animals adequately from extreme weather events that are increasingly impacting Seattle as climate change progresses: extreme heat, wildfires, and snow.

Massachusetts and Texas both have laws banning tethering when a weather advisory or warning has been issued.

Establishing an extreme weather clause will help protect animals as climate change worsens.

Vague Language Hurts

Washington State law does not require that food be provided to tethered animals. It also contains vague language, such as "adequate," which is open to interpretation and difficult to enforce.

There is nothing preventing city laws from being more strict than state law. Seattle's laws should reflect the views and realities of city residents, which may differ from other parts of the state.