Monday, August 5, 2013


This post is in relation to a couple past posts - and also is an obligatory post because of a complaint put in against me to the RCMP by a dog owner about a dog that I wrote about and that was also in the news in the last few weeks.

Vigilantism is bad. Nothing good ever comes of it. Taking the law into your own hands only hurts the animals you're trying to help, and escalates any violence that perhaps might be simmering. It causes fear and paranoia and makes people make bad decisions.

If a person has been chaining their dog for the wrong reasons and they think someone is going to come and steal it - it might cause that person to just kill the dog. And that's not a good thing.

Vigilantism also gives rescue a bad name - I have a rescue called "all love NO CHAINS" - and we will not steal dogs or accept dogs that have been stolen - because there is no way that we can accept that kind of liability, and dogs are property - and it would be accepting stolen property.

Anti-chaining organizations are notorious for building reputations for stealing dogs - and that is not a good thing - there has to be a better way to do things.

We have to effect change by showing a better way - by showing that 24/7 tethering of dogs really is just a bad idea, that companion animals belong inside the home - no matter what breed of dog they are - even if they are a northern breed - and that we don't have to reinvent the wheel - legislation has been passed elsewhere that can work here.

We are not saying that you can't tie your dog out so that he can have a pee, or you can work on your car or do your gardening, or he can chew on a bone for an hour - but unsupervised tethering is unacceptable.

Dogs die when they are unsupervised.

Children die when dogs are unsupervised.

We should not need to go onto people's property to steal dogs in order to save them - vigilantism shouldn't be necessary.

Hopefully the government will listen and will ban the unsupervised tethering of dogs in the coming months with the upcoming election. Or will work it into their regulations.

The best way we can effect change is to let the Minister of Agriculture know what we want in the regulations that will go along with the Animal Cruelty Act - you can find out more about it - here

And oh yeah - vigilantism is bad.


  1. These are important issues. I don't know how helpful angry, inflamitory words, blaming and shaming are. I do believe that education and understanding is the key.

  2. Joan, you got flack coz of your post about the huskies that were chained on the deck ?

    I'm sorry.

    I'm not sure what the right thing to do is. If I saw a dog locked in a hot car, and knew it was there for too long, and the owner could not be found, would that be vigilantism if I broke the window to save it ?

  3. Anonymous10:52 AM

    Carol Haughton's case is finally over! After 4 years she won on appeal.
    What does this have to do with changes in NS? The answer is plenty. Making harsh sentences for convicted abusers is a political whim. Reality is that there are very few convictions. Animal control officers need to be TRAINED, not just a 3-5 day course rather a 2 year diploma in law studies or animal related diploma. What ever happened to education rather than punishment? I had prepared a lengthy response to the Minister in hopes that he would read it but I did not send as I saw it being pointless just like the Animal Review Board...