Connecticut Senate Bill SB00274

Connecticut 2010 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/24/10
• Refer: 2/24/10
• Report Pass: 3/19/10
• Refer: 4/1/10
• Report Pass: 4/8/10
• Refer: 4/14/10
• Report Pass: 4/20/10
• Report Pass: 4/21/10
• Refer: 4/22/10
• Report Pass: 4/26/10
• Report Pass: 4/28/10
• Engrossed: 5/3/10
• Report Pass: 5/4/10
• Chaptered: 5/14/10
• Enrolled: 5/19/10
• Passed: 6/2/10

Caption

An Act Prohibiting The Unreasonable Confinement And Tethering Of Dogs.

Impact

This legislation represents a significant shift in the way animal confinement is regulated within the state. By amending existing statutes to impose clear restrictions on tethering practices, SB00274 aims to address concerns related to animal cruelty and promote better treatment of dogs. It sets forth fines for violations, thereby creating a legal obligation for dog owners to comply with the new requirements. Additionally, the bill improves regulations for pet shops that sell dogs, requiring them to provide provenance information to buyers to help ensure ethical breeding practices.

Summary

SB00274, known as the Act Prohibiting The Unreasonable Confinement And Tethering Of Dogs, aims to restrict the circumstances under which dogs can be tethered or confined. The bill specifies that a dog cannot be tethered to a stationary object or a mobile device using certain types of tethers that may cause harm or distress to the animal. The regulations include specific requirements, such as allowing the dog to have sufficient space to move and prohibiting the use of unsafe tethering devices. This law is intended to enhance animal welfare and ensure humane treatment of dogs.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB00274 appears to be predominantly positive, especially among animal rights advocates and pet owners who support improved welfare standards for animals. Many supporters believe the bill is a necessary step toward preventing abusive practices and recognizes the emotional and physical needs of dogs. However, there may also be some opposition from certain pet owners or breeders who feel that the restrictions could be overly burdensome or impractical in specific situations, highlighting the ongoing tension between animal welfare and personal freedoms in pet ownership.

Contention

Notable points of contention regarding SB00274 include the clarity of the definitions used around what constitutes 'unreasonable confinement' and what specific types of tethering equipment are allowed. Critics have raised concerns about potential enforcement challenges and the possibility that the bill could disproportionately affect dog owners who may not have access to adequate space for their pets. Furthermore, the amendments to the regulations regarding pet shop certifications may lead to increased compliance costs for small businesses, raising debate about the balance between animal welfare and economic impact.