Well, Streakn, like I said, it is not against the law nor cruelty to animals unless the animal is being inflicted with suffering or harm. The idea of doing it might seem cruel because you wouldn't want to be tied to a fence or because the dog doesn't like it, but not liking something is not the same as suffering or being harmed. Hurt feelings of the dog or the owner doesn't qualify as harm or suffering.
Obviously, abandoning the animal without food or water while being tied to a fence would be inflicting harm and suffering. But a few hours tied to a fence under the watchful eye of a security guard would not be abandoning it, nor would it inflict harm or suffering.
Leaving an animal tied to a fence in 115 degree Arizona heat with no shade would be inflicting harm and suffering if no water was left for it, depending on how long it was there. A few minutes or even a few hours might not result in harm or suffering. Failing to provide shelter from the elements for short periods of time (like hours) is not cruelty to animals, unless doing to results in harm or suffering. Animals should never be tethered even for a matter of minutes during natural disasters or severe weather such as floods, fires, tornadoes, hurricanes, or blizzards, but under normal circumstances it's fine for short periods.
The scenario of having to wait an extended time to get loaded or unloaded in 115 Arizona heat and at the same time also having to tie up or crate your animal is what known as being "an exception to the norm", an extreme or extraordinary situation, and is not likely to be encountered very often by most expediters. Most expediters never go to Arizona, and while there are certainly shippers and consignees in Arizona who do not allow pets, and there are certainly times when the heat in Arizona is 115° or higher, the chances of an expediter encountering simultaneously all three of the conditions of Arizona, 115° heat and no pets are extraordinarily remote. Using an abnormal situation and then trying to broadly apply the same thing to a normality is nothing more than reductio ad absurdum (or probably more accurately reductio ad incommodum) where a logical proposition is taken to the extreme and then used to support or discredit non-extreme situations. There are other places with extreme heat, like Laredo, where the same argument can be made, but just like in Arizona, there are few places in Laredo who would restrict pets in such situations.
Look, I'm not saying that people should be expected to tie or crate their animals and leave them someplace else while they load or unload. If you don't want to do it, don't. But let's not get carried away and say that it's against the law, because it's not. And even if i were it wouldn't matter, since they can let you on their property or not, it's up to them. When you are at a shipper or a consignee you are a guest on their property and should follow their rules. If their rules say 'no pets (or no cell phones or cameras or laptops) and you don't want to tie up or crate your dog (or surrender your camera or cell phone or laptop) in order to get on their property, then don't. But don't expect to get on their property or expect them to change their policies simply because you tell them they should.
] Dingle.
