Do local laws prohibit wandering pets?
Fines could be too costly resulting in owner giving pet away or ending up at RSPCA, which the problem of escaping becomes habitual. Owner or Council may have pet euthanized. • Does the owner have the financial means of properly containing their pet? If not, inadequate fencing may be installed, possibly hazardous or unsightly to neighbours. If not, Pet may continue to run loose or be given away. If not, pet may be chained or kennelled, possibly euthanized (although rare). • Is the critical risk of harm greater than the e-stimulus? This is ultimately a question of “do the ends justify the means”? Are we going to have a pet that is alive and unharmed versus a scared lost pet, dead, injured, stolen or viciously abused for psychotic thrills, being attacked by domestic pets or wildlife, catching disease, starvation or dehydration, poisoned or baited? Countless research has be done through many publications regarding e-stimulus not causing physical damage, permanent or temporary, to the anima
