HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 09-22-2008 - 2ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: September 22, 2008
Action Agenda
Item No. ~_
SUBJECT: Proposed Animal Ordinance Amendment on the Tethering of Dogs
DEPARTMENT: Animal Services
PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S):
Proposed Ordinance Amendment
Staff Summary of Concerns Expressed at
Previous BOCC Meetings
• Main Themes and Views, For and
Against
• Summary of Minutes, For and Against
• Excerpts From BOCC Meeting Minutes
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bob Marotto, Director, Animal Services
968-2287
PURPOSE: For the Board of County Commissioners to discuss the proposed ordinance
amendment to the Orange County Animal Ordinance restricting the tethering of dogs and, as
needed, outline any additional steps required for decision making.
BACKGROUND: The BOCC has received considerable information about the tethering
amendment proposed by the Animal Services Advisory Board (ASAB) based upon the research
and report of the Tethering Committee. However, Commissioners have not had an opportunity
to discuss critical elements of the proposed tethering amendment among themselves given the
considerable input received at the public hearing on tethering and a subsequent meeting at
which additional input was received.
At its November 13, 2007 work session, the BOCC reviewed the Final Report and
Recommendations of the Tethering Committee, and requested a proposed ordinance
amendment be drafted by the County Attorney's office, in consultation with the Animal Services
staff, and presented for consideration. The amendment drafted by staff and revised by the
ASAB includes the following restrictions on the tethering and alternative containment of dogs:
• No more than a total of 3 hours of tethering within a 24-hour period
• A specification of the types of collars and equipment permissible for allowed tethering
• A requirement for minimum kennel sizes
• An exemption for certain organized and lawful animal functions
The proposed amendment is formulated so there is an 18-month implementation period to
ensure effective public outreach and encourage voluntary compliance. An initial twelve month
period will consist of public outreach activities aimed at promoting awareness of the new
restrictions on tethering and requirements of alternative containment. In addition, the
2
amendment stipulates only warnings would be issued for lack of compliance with the tethering
restrictions during the six-month period following the date the ordinance actually becomes
effective.
In response to direction received from the BOCC at its fall work session, Animal Services staff
sought to ensure broad awareness of the proposed tethering ordinance. In preparation for a
public hearing at the May 20th, 2008, BOCC meeting, staff issued media advisories and posted
flyers to ensure interested parties were aware of and invited to participate in the public hearing.
In addition, a set of frequently asked questions (FAQ) was developed and posted on the Animal
Services website (http://www.co.orange.nc.us/animalservices), along with the proposed
amendment, the Tethering Committee's full report, and the staff document recommending
kennel sizes.
At the May 20th BOCC public hearing, over twenty-five citizens spoke, offering diverse and
varied opinions. It was clear there were very strong feelings on both sides of the issue. Many
of the issues expressed at the meeting had been previously heard by the Tethering Committee
during public input meetings. Exceptions for "escape artist" doggy and hunting or sporting dogs
were considered, but ultimately decided against by the Tethering Committee because they were
believed to be unworkable. For hunting and sporting dogs, the Tethering Committee decided
against a full exception, but did allow for an exception during actual sporting or hunting events.
At the end of the May 20th ~ublic hearing, the BOCC decided to reschedule tethering as an
agenda item for their June 3 meeting so there would be ample opportunity for them to consider
and reflect upon different viewpoints, as well as the work of the Tethering Committee and
ASAB. In many respects, the June 3`~ BOCC meeting mirrored the public hearing itself. No
fewer members of the public spoke than at the public hearing and again they expressed strong
and contradictory views. As a result of the sheer volume of testimony, the Board was not able
to discuss the agenda item itself.
At the end of testimony presented at the June 3~ meeting, the BOCC indicated the issue of
tethering would be brought back in September. Thus tethering is again being scheduled as an
agenda item with the expectation the BOCC will have the internal discussion that is an essential
step in its decision-making process. In this way, the BOCC will be able to consider the
proposed tethering ordinance, its critical elements and their justification, opinions heard from
members of the public as well as the recommendation of the ASAB and Tethering Committee.
To facilitate preparation for BOCC discussion, Animal Services staff has summarized the
concerns expressed by individuals who spoke for and against tethering at the May 20th and
June 3`~ BOCC meetings. In addition to the proposed ordinance itself, this summary, and the
documents upon which it is based, are provided as attachments. Additional supporting
documents are available in hard copy at the Clerk's Office or at the Animal Services website
(http://www.co.orange.nc.us/animalservices). These include the Abstracts for May 20th, 2008
BOCC Public Hearing and June 3 , BOCC Meeting; the Tethering Committee's Final Report 8
Recommendations; an Animal Services Staff Memorandum Recommending Minimum Kennel
Size Requirements; Tethering Committee Meeting Summaries; and ASAB Minutes from
Meetings with Discussion on Tethering.
Related recent developments in Durham County deserve summary in this abstract. On
September 8th, 2008, Durham's Board of County Commissioner adopted an amendment to the
County's animal control ordinances that limits tethering effective January 1, 2010. Under the
3
ordinance, tethering will be outlawed with several exceptions. The exceptions include "lawful
dog activities," "shepherding'or herding livestock," "meeting the requirements of a camping or
recreational area," and situations in which a caretaker is outside and within eyesight of a
tethered dog.
In addition, the Durham ordinance also establishes space requirements for outdoor enclosures.
Pen space for a dog less than 20 pounds must be a minimum of 100 unobstructed square feet,
and for dogs more than 20 pounds, it must be a minimum of 200 unobstructed square feet.
Between now and the implementation of the ordinance at the beginning of 2010 there will be a
coordinated campaign for public outreach and education. Also, only warnings will be issued for
the first six months after implementation; citations will not be issued until July 1, 2010.
Durham Commissioners voted 4 to 1 in favor of the amendment. Those in favor indicated the
amendment was justified for humane reasons and because the prohibition of tethering would
improve community life in a variety of ways such as curbing barking and reducing dog bites.
The Commissioner who voted against the amendment questioned whether tethering had been
demonstrated to be a problem and also expressed concerns there were no provisions to help
low-income pet owners build alternative enclosures.
On August, 25th, 2008, the Durham County Board of Commissioners held a public hearing on
the proposed amendment following its introduction at an earlier Work Session. More than
seventy-five citizens spoke and reports indicate that an overwhelming majority spoke in favor of
the amendment. The proposed amendment was formulated by Durham County's Animal
Control Advisory Board in coordination with the County's Animal Control Program.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no direct cost associated with the review and consideration of
the proposed ordinance amendment. The costs of administering and enforcing the new
tethering provisions, if enacted, are believed to be readily absorbed within the Animal Services
departmental budget and staffing complement. This expectation is based upon discussions
with animal control authorities in other jurisdictions with similar tethering regulations and the
belief that effective public relations and outreach can facilitate a transition in standards of
animal care. Costs will be incurred during the twelve-month period of public education and
outreach. Staff expects that the total costs will not exceed $1,500, and these monies will largely
be used for display advertisements.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the Board discuss the proposed
ordinance amendment on the tethering of dogs and identify the necessary follow-up to facilitate
its decision-making process.
4
AMENDMENTS TO THE
ORANGE COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE
(Only those sections or subsections amended are set out below)
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF ORANGE
COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA, hereby amends the Ordinance To Provide For Animal
Control Protection In Orange County, North Carolina by adding (indicated by double
underlined language) and deleting (indicated by stricken through language) as follows:
Section VII -Definitions. As used in this ordinance, the following terms mean:
2. ....
3. ....
22. Restraint: An animal is under restraint if it is under sufficient physical
restrain such as a leash, cage, bridle, or similar effective and humane device which
restrains and controls the animal, or within a vehicle, or adequately contained by a fence
on the premises or other secure enclosure as permitted in accordance with Sub ections
XI(Kl and XI(Ll of this ordinance. If a competent adult is physically outside on the land
with the animal, on land where the owner or keeper of the animal resides, then the animal
shall be deemed to be under restraint during the time the animal is in the company of and
under the control of that competent person and the animal is on the premises. If any
unattended animal is restrained by a chain, leash or similar restraint, it shall be designated
and placed to prevent choking or strangulation. Such chain or restraint shall not be less
than ten (10) feet in length and shall be either on a swivel designed to prevent the animal
from choking or strangling itself, ^~ ^^ ~ ^"^~^ ^~^. The restraint of unattended dOQS by a
fence, kennel. outdoor enclosure. chain, leash or similar restraint is further reeulated
under Sections XI(K) and XI(L) of this ordinance.
23. ...
24. ...
25. ...
Section XI -Mistreatment of Animals Unlawful. The following acts or failure
to act relating to the mistreatment of animals are unlawful and violations of this
ordinance:
A. ...
B. ...
C. ...
D. ...
E. It shall be unlawful to restrain any animal except in a humane fashion;
as set e~ forth in Section VII(22) above.- and Sections
XI(Kl and XI(Ll below.
F. ...
G. ...
H. ...
I. ...
J. ...
K It shall be unlawful for anv person to restrain a doe usine a chain wire or
other twe of tethering device in a manner prohibited by this subsection.
1. No person shall tether, fasten, chain, tie. or restrain a dog. or cause
such restraining of a dog. to a tree. fence. post. dog house, or other stationary obiect for
more than a total of 3 hours in a 24-hour period. During periods of tethering that are not
unlawful under this subsection. anv tethering device used shall be at least 10 feet in
length and attached in such manner as to prevent strangulation or other iniurv to the dog
and entanglement with obiects.
2. No person shall tether, fasten, chain, tie, or restrain a dog, or cause
uch restraining of a dog. to a cable trolley system. that allows movement of the
restraining device, for more than a total of 3 hours in a 24-hour period. During periods of
tethering that are not unlawful under this subsection. the length of the cable along which
the tethering device can move must be at least 10 feet, and the tethering device must be of
such length that the dog is able to move 10 feet away from the cable peroendicularly.
3. No person shall tether a dog with a chain or wire or other device
to. or cause such attachment to. anv collar other than a buckle type collar or body
harness.
4. No person shall tether with a chain or wire or other device to. or
cause such attachment to. a head harness. choke-type collar or pronged collar to a dog.
5. No person shall tether with a chain, wire or other device to a dog
where the weight of the tethering device and the collar combined exceeds ten (10) percent
of the dog's body weight.
6. No person shall tether with a chain or wire or other device a dog in
uch manner that does not allow the dog access to adequate food. water. and shelter.
7. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (1) and (21 of this
subsection. a person may. subiect to the provisions of subsections (3)-(61 of this Section
XIK:
(il Tether and restrain a dog while actively engaged in:
a. Use of the dog in shepherding or herding livestock. or
b. Use of the dog in the business of cultivating agricultural
products. if the restraining is reasonably necessarv for the
safety of the dog. or
c. Use of the dog in lawful hunting activities if the restraint is
reasonably necessarv for the safety of the dog. or
d. Use of the dog at dog training or performance events.
including but not limited to field trials and obedience trials
where tethering does not occur for a period exceeding
7 consecutive davs.
iil After taking possession of a dog that appears to be a stray dog an
after having advised animal control authorities of the capture of the
og. tether and restrain the dog in accordance with the provisions
of Section XI(Kl for a period not to exceed seven (7) davs as the
person having taken possession of the dog is seeking the identity of
the owner of the dog.
(iii) Walk a dog with a handheld leash.
L. It shall be unlawful for anv person to keen a doa outdoors in an enclosure
includine a pen, run, kennel, fence, or electronically controlled containment device or
other outdoor enclosure in violation of this subsection.
1. Outdoor enclosures containing dogs must meet or exceed the
followinu dimensional requirements:
Size of Doe Required Minimum Enclosure Area
1-35 Pounds 80 Square Feet
36-75 Pounds 100 Square Feet
76 Pounds and greater 120 Square Feet
All outdoor enclosures must be of sufficient height so that the tallest dog contained
within the enclosure is able to walk naturally without its head reaching the roof or ton of
said enclosure. however the height of anv such enclosure shall not be included for the
purooses of determining the required minimum enclosure area. The provisions of this
ection XI(L) shall not apply to anv Person who held a valid permit to operate a Class I
Kennel or Class II Kennel from Orange County on or before January 1.2008 for so long
as such permit remains in full force and effect without lapse or revocation. All Persons
applying for a new Class I or Class II Kennel Permit after January 1.2008 shall comply
with this Section XI(Ll prior to the issuance of anv such permit.
(i) In addition to the required minimum enclosure area
established herein. additional space must be provided for each additional doa that is kept
in an outdoor enclosure as follows: for the second and each additional dog that is kept in
an outdoor enclosure with another dog fifty percent of the required minimum area
s ecified in subsection XI(L)(1) must be added to the minimum enclosure area. The
required minimum enclosure area shall be based on the weight of the largest dog
contained within the enclosure.
Subsections XI(Kl and XI(Ll become effective. March 1.2009 and apply to acts
ommitted on or after that date Anv person who violates either of these subsections after
March 1.2009 and prior to September I. 2009. shall be issued a written warnine Divine
the violator 30 days to come into compliance with the ordinance. Anv person who
violates subsection XI(Kl and XI(Ll after September 1.2009, or any violator who fails to
omply with the ordinance after the expiration of 30 day followine such per ons receipt
of a warning specified in the precedine sentence. is subiect to one or more of the
Penalties established in Section XXI of this ordinance Anv doe that i kept in violation
of subsections XI(Kl and XI(Ll of this ordinance may be seized and subsequently
impounded in accordance with Section XIII of thi ordinance until such a time a the
Animal Control Director is reasonably assured that the doa will not be subiect to restraint
in violation of this ordinance The Animal ontrol Director hall post a notice at the
lace of the illegal restraint. or at such other location. that is designed to reasonably
apprise the Owner or Keeper of the doa the place. date. and time the dog was seized
along with the location where the dog was taken. Such notice shall clearly state that the
doe may be returned to the Owner or Keeper upon providing reasonable assurances to t__h_e_
Animal Control Director that the doa will not be subiect to restraint in violation of this
ordinance.
Upon motion of Commissioner ,seconded by
Commissioner ,the foregoing Animal. Control
Ordinance amendments were adopted this the day of
2008 and shall become effective as of the day of , 200_.
Donna Baker, Clerk, Orange County Commissioners
.~
Q
`n e...:•s
Orange County Animal Services
501 W. Franklin St, Suite 106, Chapel Hill, NC 27516 (919) 968-2287
The following documents have been prepared by Animal Services staff based upon
unapproved minutes from Board of County Commissioner (BOCC) meetings on May 20`t'
and June 3`d, 2008.
To summarize the concerns of over fifty citizens, staff has taken the minutes from those
two meetings where public comment was received and created from them two sets of
documents. One is a set of bullet point summaries of each speaker's concerns and
opinions. Those views were then organized into the second set of documents, which
contains main themes of concern both for and against the amendment, put together under
three main categories. Those categories are `Citizen and Animal Rights,' `Education and
Enforcement' and `Tethers and Pens.'
Both sets, as well as the original minutes taken from the two meetings, have been
provided as a part of this document for use by the BOCC members in looking at this
issue.
I. Main Themes and Views, For and Against
a. Citizen and Animal Rights
b. Education and Enforcement
c. Tethers and Pens
II. Summary of Minutes, For and Against
a. Those in opposition of amending ordinance
b. Those in favor of amending ordinance
III. Excerpts From BOCC Meeting Minutes
a. Excerpt from May 20~' BOCC Meeting
b. Excerpt from June 3`d BOCC Meeting
~o
Main Themes and Views, For and Against
Citizen and Animal Rights
Arguments against Restriction of Arguments for the Restriction of
Tetherin Tetherin
Animals do not have rights Animals feel pain, fear, loneliness, etc. and
there is a ublic interest in rotectin them
This is an encroachment on human rights. It seems in society when we move toward
justice, always the oppressors feel that their
ri is are bein tram led
There should be an exception for sporting There is an exception for sporting dogs
dos durin trials, for eriods u to 7 da s
Tethering is not mistreatment. Many This is about the humane treatment of
tethered dogs are happy members of a animals. Tethering can cause trachea
family. damage, strangulation, starvation and make
animals more susceptible to attack and
ne lect
Many of those for this amendment do not Many opposing amendment are out-of-
live in Orange County or are not even from county paid lobbyist, breeders or persons
the unincorporated areas of County that charged with animal cruelty. All of the
will be affected. ASAB members live in Orange Coun
Those against the amendment were not A position opposing tethering restrictions
invited to be on the Tethering Committee. was advertised along with all other
Those against it are not being heard. positions. No applications were received.
Public hearings were held by the tethering
committee and all sides were considered
and balanced b the committee.
Dog owners pay taxes on their animals and Tethering leads to public nuisance and
should have the right to do what they want unwanted litters of puppies, costing tax
for whatever reason. payers money. It also presents a public
safe issue.
Main Themes and Views, For and Against
Education and Enforcement
Arguments against Restriction of
Mistreatment is already against the law.
We should enforce the existing laws.
Education is what is needed, not restricted
tethering.
Restricting tethering won't solve the
animal mistreatment problem. Animals
can be neglected in fences just as easily as
on tethers. This is a people problem, not a
dog problem.
Breed is the problem in Orange County.
We need a ban on dangerous dog breeds.
Restricting tethering is expensive and
unenforceable
This amendment doesn't reflect the
realities of life. There are times when a
dog needs to be tethered.
Arguments for the Restriction of
Tethering
Need enforceable laws to protect these
animals. Other jurisdictions have had
positive results.
This will give ACO's an additional tool
with which to enforce and educate the
public, as well as protect animals. Our
children should get the right message and
not be desensitized to animals' needs by
seeing them living permanently on chains.
Animals can be neglected in many
situations, but tethering presents additional
concerns because of the lack of a barrier-
makes animals more susceptible to outside
attacks and presents a public danger by not
preventing children and others from
approaching the dog. This is a step in the
right direction.
Many breeds have a tendency to become
aggressive if chained. Dogs need more
than food and water.
Other jurisdictions have found it to be
enforceable and have a positive effect on
the number of calls for bites, mistreatment,
unwanted litters, etc. Other jurisdictions
have also found that there is a short-term
increase in work load but that the long-term
effects actually decrease work load.
This is only one tool to protect animals.
Many people do not understand the
condition some of these animals are in or
the dangers presented to them.
Main Themes and Views, For and Against
Tethers and Pens
Arguments against Restriction of Arguments for the Restriction of
Tetherin Tetherin
Tethers are better than pens because they Tethers deprive dogs of their basic needs
can give more space than pen of equal size for socialization and subject them to
and aze easier to clean than pens. dangers of attack, stazvation, trachea
dams a and other tetherin -related in'uries
USDA akeady has minimum pen sizes. Smaller pens restrict movement and
exercise and deprive dogs of basic needs.
USDA ruling prohibits tethering as a
method of rim enclosure.
Some dogs escape from pens. There aze Coalition to Unchain Dogs builds fences
diggers, climbers and even dogs that chew that escape artist dogs cannot get out of
throu fences.
Some tethered dogs aze not mistreated and Families in other azeas that have received
have more interaction with family members fences from the Coalition have reported
than they would in a pen. This amendment positive results and have been pleased to
doesn't distinguish between responsible discover dog's new personality when
and irres onsible tetherin . fenced instead of chained
Tethers are needed for some types of Tethering is not productive in training
trainin . animals
Tethers don't make animals aggressive. Investigators, trainers, animal rescuers,
The studies that say that aze flawed. famous dog experts and various studies
have stated that tethered dogs are more
likely to become aggressive and contribute
to roblems of ublic safe
13
Summary of Minutes, For and Against
Those in opposition of amending the animal ordinance
Name Title Sunaort Reasons
or
O ose
Henri Lobbyist for Oppose • Animals do not have rights, but people do have rights and
McClees NC Sporting responsibilities
Dog • This proposal does not meet the needs of the people
Association • Inhumane treatment is already against the law
• Questions that tethering is mistreatment
• There is no distinguishing between animals that aze
abused and not abused
Jason Payne Member of Oppose • Restricting tethering would not accomplish better
Eno River treatment of animals
Coon Hunters
Association
Lamaz Citizen Oppose • Some dogs chew through fences
Chapman • Most people supporting this aze not from Orange County
• People from unincorporated part of the County aze not
awaze of the ro osal
George President of Oppose • This is a people problem, not a dog problem
Painter Eno River • Need education of dog owners
Coon Hunters • A person who neglects an animal. will neglect it in a fence
Association or tether
• Enforce the laws that are ahead there
Andrea NC Director Oppose • People are being spoon fed the idea that tethering is wrong
Press of • Children get killed by dogs that aren't tethered as well
Responsible from things such as pazental neglect
Dog Owners, • Responsible dog owners have the right to chain or not to
Pit Bull chain for whatever reason
Breeder • The most dangerous dog is an at-lazge dog
• Education is what is needed
Bobby Kirk Citizen, Oppose • Has trained dogs for 40 years and his best dogs are
Trainer tethered
• Tethering is not bad and some of the most aggressive dogs
have to be tethered to train them
• Education is what is needed
• Eve do is different
Michael Citizen Oppose • Doesn't know how the cost of the amendment will be
~~
Kirk absorbed back into the budget
• Drove around within 5 miles of Chapel Hill alone and
counted 38 tethered dogs and 72 in kennels smaller than
those proposed
• His tethered dogs are his friendliest
• Thinks this is a sli a slo e
Steven Citizen Oppose • Thinks there needs to be an exception for sporting dogs or
Hopkins people who cannot kennel
• Existin laws should be enforced
Susan Kelly Citizen Oppose • Her dogs are tethered because they dig under the fence and
jump the fence
• Her dogs are not mistreated and she has no other options
• People want to do the right thing for their animals and she
thinks for some, that ma be tetherin
Lauren Citizen Oppose • Has one tethered dog because she is overprotective of him
Knapp- because of an accident he had while running free
Resnik • The ordinance should be on a case b case basis
Joseph Representativ Oppose • Do not fall into animal rights agenda
Clees e of NC • It is the responsibility of humans to protect these animals
Sporting Dogs and take care of them
Chad Citizen Oppose • If dogs on chains bite people, we should merely teach
Resnik children not to go neaz strange dogs
• His dog is on a huge tether and it would be infeasible for it
to move to a much smaller 12 x 12 kennel
Tim Frazier Officer of Eno Oppose • Didn't know how to get on the committee
River Coon • He has a dog that will climb or dig out of a fence
Club • Tethering is ok if people tether in a humane way
• The roblem in Oran a Coun is the breed
Diane Breeder Oppose • Problem is not tethering but the implementation of
Genteel tethering
• Proper tethering socializes, cares for, and exercises
animals very well
• This is a question of education
• A dog on a 10-ft tether has more room than a dog in a 10-
ft en
Josh Citizen Oppose • Just because a dog is on a chain does not mean it will be
Chapman depressed
• You can abuse do s b uttin them in a en
Dennis Quail Farm Oppose • This ordinance invades their rights as hunters and dog
Cazden Beagle Club owners
• The USDA ahead has a standard size en
Charles Best Citizen Oppose • Does not see how smaller dogs need the same size pens as
lazger dogs
• More laws are not needed because there are laws now for
~5
eo le who mistreat do s
Robin Citizen Oppose • This amendment does not make sense
Harrison • Her do s would climb, 'um or di out of a fence
Sandi Coy Chairperson Oppose • It is impossible to enforce
of • Statistics on dog bites aze inaccurate and the study is
Responsible flawed
Dog Owners- • Other studies show that there is no significant difference
from between dogs who aze chained and those that aze not
Kentuck
Phillip Citizen Oppose • What we need is a dangerous dog breed ban, not a
Pennell tethering ban
• A ten foot chain allows a ton more movement than a 10
foot en
Tommy Citizen Oppose • Chains aze cleaner than pens
Frazier • Citizens pay taxes on dogs and there should not be a law
on them
Amanda Former Oppose • Anti-tethering is too restrictive
Stipe Animal • Each dog should be considered individually
Control • Education on animal behavior is key to responsible dog
Officer welfaze and ownership
• Regulations should not be so restrictive that they hinder
options to dog owners who aze willing to do the right
thing
Stillman Citizen Oppose • He has tethered champion dogs and his dogs aze not
Wright mistreated
Frank Tilley Citizen Oppose • Has seen len of a essive do sin ens
Brian Fee Oppose • Some tethered dogs aze much happier and better treated
than penned. dogs
• My dog has 2280 square feet on her trolley run and would
not be able to have nearly as much in a pen
• There is a whole segment of the population here not
represented- normal families with one or two dogs
humanel tethered
Mickey Citizen Oppose • There aze laws now that azen't being enforced
Oliver
Alan Green Citizen Oppose • Owns working dogs and would prefer not to tether any of
them
• There aze times, however, when he has to tether a dog on a
30-foot chain
• There aze instances when this law does not deal with the
realities of life
Brian Lane Citizen Oppose • Does not own dogs but feels it his civic duty to oppose
this amendment because it is an encroachment on
individual freedom in Orange County
• We need extensive roof of abuse before this ordinance
~(O
should be amended
Frances Citizen Oppose • Hunters have a right to do what they are doing
Jones • Cha el Hill do s are treated better than Fairview citizens
Kevin Breeder Oppose • Pens aze dirty when it rains
Young • If embedded collazs aze a problem, use a body harness to
tether
• Education is ve im ortant
Fred Stipe Sporting Dog Oppose • This amendment would not solve the problems of abuse
Owner and neglect
• This would further com licate the 'ob of Animal Control
Beth Oliver Citizen Oppose • Against the ordinance
• She tethers her do s for their rotection
17
Summary of Minutes, For and Against
Those in favor of amending the animal ordinance
Name Title Support Reasons
or
O ose
Dr. Ross ASAB Chair Support • Humane Treatment of Animals
Oglesbee • Tethering Committee akeady took all of these concerns
into account and made a fair recommendation
David Citizen Support • Give ACOs an additional tool with which to come to the
Aman aid distressed and ne lected animals
Elaine Animal Support • Laurinburg has a restricted tethering ordinance and it is
Modlin Control enforceable
Officer, • We found chained dogs to be responsible for more
Laurinburg, complaint calls than fenced dogs before passing
NC legislation
• Passing restrictive legislation has definitely improved our
records for protecting citizens
• It has helped eliminate residence with multiple chained
dogs
• It has reduced nuisance, barking, and odor complaints
• It has reduced our number of dog bites
• It has drastically reduced the number of unwanted puppy
litters
• Owners have commented that dogs seem happier and are
easier to care for
Pat Sanford ASAB Support • Tethering is not productive in training animals
Member and • Did investigations for Orange County for 17 years and
Animal found a very high number of those were with tethered
Trainer animals
• Ordinance needs to pass to help the animals
• All ASAB members are from Oran a Coun
Deanna • Humane Treatment of Dogs
Rowan • No one wants to take away right to hunt- it is just an issue
of how the dogs are kept
• This isn't about hunters, but about the hundreds of dogs
permanently chained, exposed to elements, rarely given
attention and sub'ected to abuse and ne lect
Kitty Lynn Animal Support • Has rescued hundreds of dogs and has seen chained dogs
Rescuer become aggressive and territorial for lack of love and
attention.
l~
• Chained dogs will attack those who enter their territory,
including children
• More and more communities are passing regulations on
tetherin
Mark Citizen Support • Public safety- chaining dogs contributes to aggression and
Soloman is a public safety threat
• Humane treatment- prolonged chaining is harmful and
deprives dogs of necessary exercise and socialization,
subjects them to dangers caused by collars or starvation,
and makes them vulnerable to attack from wildlife or
roaming dogs
• Overpopulation- chained dogs greatly contribute to the
County's pet overpopulation problem. Chained dogs are
frequently unsterilized and cannot get away from breeders
• Important tool for Animal Control- other jurisdictions
have positive results from restrictive ordinances and a
decrease in cruel and bite com Taints
Nancy Citizen of Support • Too important an issue to be silenced by intimidation.
Garson New Hanover Encourages commissioners to move forward thoughtfully,
County compassionatel and not fearfully
Ellen Volunteer Support • It seems a lot of times in society, when we move toward
Whitaker with Coalition justice, always the people that are oppressors feel that their
to Unchain rights are being trampled
Dogs • This does not mean it is not right to pass the law
• The Coalition builds fences that even escape artist dogs
cannot get out of
• The recipients of their fences can see their dogs now have
a personality because they are not chained and able to run
around
Jackie Citizen Support • Emphasized that it is restriction of tethering, not
Rosati elimination of tetherin
Arielle Citizen Support • Been in Orange County since 1960's and this is long
Schechter overdue
Jean Animal Support • Protection of community's companion animals
McNeill Control • You cannot enforce what you do not have- must have the
Manager, law there to be able to effectively stop neglect and abuse
New Hanover • Anti-tethering is a step in the right direction to enhance
County responsible pet ownership
• Our residents have responded favorably to having a means
of preventing cruelty in at least one form
• Prior to our ordinance, we saw many cases of dogs left on
short ropes for hours or permanently, as well as cases of
strangulation, heat stroke and starvation
• Having an enforceable law was the only means we have to
reventsuch cases
10
iq
• It is the responsibility of the County to act responsibly for
its pets
• The majority of your residents are counting on you to do
the ri t thin ,des ite the ve vocal minori
Soren Group of 9 Support • Prolonged tethering deprives dogs of necessary exercise
Windram, County and socialization
DVM Veterinarians • Tethered dogs can and do contribute to various
Kay Bishop, ~ community nuisance issues such as barking and pet
DVM overpopulation
Ken • Tethered dogs can and do pose a risk to public safety and
Redmont, health because they may become aggressive and are not
DVM confined behind a barrier
Kathy • Tethered dogs are subjected to a variety of physical
Crabtree, dangers, including trachea damage, embedded collars and
DVM injuries from attacks
Pat Pagel, • There are many alternatives to chaining
DVM
Michelle
Droke,
DVM
Deborah
Stein, DVM
Megan
Harris, _
DVM
Marjorie
Lindeke,
DVM
Suzanne ASAB and Support • Neglected animals can be anywhere but there are special
Roy Tethering circumstances that make tethering an issue that should be
Committee a policy issue
Member • Lack of a barrier and lack of protection for people are
among main differences between tethering and other
forms of confinement
• Tethered dogs are a lure for children and children
constitute a large portion of attacks by chained dogs
• Tethering Committee did consider all sides.and
recommended an 18-month phase in period specifically
for those people who would have to make changes if this
were passed
• Many of the opponents speaking are out-of-county paid
lobbyist or pit bull breeders
• One of the opponent speakers has animal cruelty charges
against her in another state -others have moved due to
citations for breaking anti-tethering laws elsewhere
• Tetherin Committee did hold two ublic hearin sand
11
~o
invited those from all sides to be on the committee-
received no applications from members of the opposing
sides
• Read quote from Cesar Milan (The Dog Whisperer)
stating that chained dogs will have pent up energy and
frustration and are much more likely to become aggressive
and become a wea on
Elise Citizen Support • Must remember that this is about public safety and the
Roosevelt humane treatment of animals, not about professions or
financial welfare
• Referred to the USDA ruling prohibiting tethering as a
method of primary enclosure
• Cruel comes in man. forms and this is onl one tool
Lori Volunteer Support • Gives Animal Control an enforcement tool
Hensley with Coalition • Most people want what is best for their dogs, but need to
to Unchain be shown how to do it a better way
Dogs • Read success stories about people and neighborhoods that
had received fences from the coalition and were changed
and ateful for the transition
Robert Volunteer Support • Disturbed by animal cruelty charges on Ms. Coy
Hensley with Coalition • Made mention of other paid lobbyist in the crowd,
to Unchain including breeders of fighting dogs
Dogs • Built lots of fences for people in the past years and have
man success stories
Kris ASAB and Support • Supports restriction of tethering
Bergstrand Tethering
on behalf of Committee
Jean Austin Member
Walt Von Citizen Support • Firmly believes that keeping dogs on chains will increase
Shernz the propensity for the dog to develop anti-social behavior
• Watering and feeding a dog does not fulfill all its needs- a
do needs to be unencumbered
Loren Hart Citizen Support • Animals are individual beings that feel pleasure, pain, fear
and loneliness
• This amendment would help create a kinder and gentler
world that is more just, more peaceful and more loving
• Tethering for prolonged periods is a form of abuse that
should be stopped- it is neglect
• Ordinance should demand a higher level of care than it
does presently
• Animals should not be exploited,
• Animals have interests too and this isn't just about what
humans want
Amanda Director of Support • Sometimes you must legislate in order to educate
Arrington Coalition to • Cruel can ha en in an situation, but chained do s are
12
a~
Unchain Dos es eciall susce tible to thin s such as bein attacked
Jamie Citizen Support • Owns a pit bull and was told by the breeder that in order
Jacobs to make it aggressive and dangerous, all she had to do was
chain it and leave it alone
• This breed is very susceptible to becoming vicious and
dangerous if chained
• Must rovide for do sin other wa sand socialize them
Kris ASAB and Support • Tethering Committee members learned a lot from Orange
Bergstrand Tethering County residents and worked hard to balance the citizens'
Committee rights and animals' needs
Member, • Humane Treatment of Dogs
DVM • Public Safety
• Tethering Committee did extensive work on other
jurisdictions with tethering ordinances and found those to
have cost effective programs with decreases in dog bites,
unwanted puppies, and animal surrenders
• Benefits that other jurisdictions have seen will do well .in
this Coun
Jane Trainer Support • Expert on evaluation dogs for aggression and familiar with
Marshall aggression triggers
• Living on a chain deprives a dog of its basic needs and
causes high levels of stress and frustration, which can lead
to aggression
• Chained dogs will often target anything moving nearby,
which is unfortunately often children
• It is important for children in our County to learn empathy
for other beings and to grow up to be compassionate,
contributing citizens
• Seeing dogs regularly tethered sends the wrong message
to children and desensitizes them to animals' needs
• Chained dogs are often victims of taunting
• We would be a more caring, compassionate community
with this restriction
Emily Citizen Support • Animals do have rights
Weinstein • Su orts this amendment
Nancy Citizen Support • Most people do not realize the conditions under which
Carson many of these animals are found
Eickert
13
~a
EXCERPT FROM MAY 20th BOCC MEETING
APPROVED 9/2/2008
EXCERPT from MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
May 20, 2008
7:30 p.m.
b. Proposed Animal Ordinance Amendment on the Tethering of Dogs
The Board conducted a public hearing for a proposed ordinance amendment to
the Orange County Animal Ordinance restricting the tethering of dogs, and considered
adoption of the ordinance amendment.
Animal Services Director Bob Marotto said that there has been a concerted effort
involved in staff and the citizen advisors and the process has gone on for a year and a
half or more. He said that this issue came to the Animal Services Advisory Board from
the community as a serious issue for the community to consider and address and to
seek to resolve. He thinks that the concerned citizens have driven the process that staff
has pursued. One of the citizens advisory boards appointed by the Board was the
Tethering Committee, which met more than six times in 2007. This resulted in a
proposal for the ordinance amendment. The Animal Services Advisory Board has
considered this issue five additional times.
He said that he would underscore that the Tethering Committee and the ASAB
have tried to balance some conflicting concerns. He said that there are some
exceptions to the three-hour tethering limit and the proposal is not an outright prohibition
of tethering. He said that there has been a strong commitment to encourage education
and seek to implement this amendment over a period of time that would span 18
months, 12 of which would be dedicated to education and awareness. After the first 12
months, there will be another six-month period in which the new ordinance amendment
would not be fully enforced, but would be enforced with warnings. The amendment
would become effective and fully enforced as of January 1, 2010 and would become
effective as of July 1, 2009.
Vice-Chair of the ASAB, Susan Elmore recognized the Animal Services staff.
She said that there are strong passions concerning this issue on both sides of the fence.
She said that she is here in support of this proposal. She pointed out pages 16-17 of the
Tethering Committee report, which outlines the tasks of the committee. She said that
the committee considered all of the concems on both sides.
Commissioner Nelson commended the Tethering Committee and said that it was
hands down the best committee he has worked on, everyone genuinely listened to each
other, and there was a tremendous amount of discussion on this topic. He said that the
committee really listened to the community and the staff was extraordinary.
Commissioner Carey commended Bob Marotto and said that the ASAB worked
really hard to be reasonable and to educate regularly. He thinks that the proposal
reflects the character of what the County Commissioners are trying to do in Orange
County.
Chair Jacobs said that there are 22 people signed up to speak and he
encouraged people not to repeat what previous speakers have said.
14
~3
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Lori Hensley is a volunteer on the Coalition to Unchain Dogs and she said that
they build fences for owners of dogs that cannot afford them. The coalition also provides
free spay and neuter and vaccinations for the pets. She said that this type of ordinance
gives Animal Control another tool for enforcement. She said that most people want
better for their dogs, but they need to be shown that there is a better way to do things.
She read an email from the neighbor of a person who received a fence from the coalition
for a dog that was continuously chained in Chapel Hill. °I just have to tell you that your
civilizing Neptune has also civilized the entire family. Now whenever I stop by to see my
neighbor, Neptune is either sitting on the front porch with a family member, playing in the
house, or when he sees my car coming running down the stairs to greet and kiss me.
He even has his meals inside now and sleeps beside the bed. See how the beauty of
your work spreads to others. So much abuse and neglect are due to just plain
ignorance, are they not?" She said that this is not the only situation where the Coalition
has helped dogs. She asked the County Commissioners to approve the ordinance to
limit the chaining of dogs.
Henri McClees is a lobbyist for the North Carolina Sporting Dog Association,
which is a coalition of dog owners, dog breeders, and dog clubs. She said that the
membership's philosophy is that animals do not have rights, but people have rights and
responsibilities. They do not believe that this proposal meets the needs of the animals,
and they are certain that it does not meet the needs of the people. She said that it is a
bad idea, it is not needed, it is not fair, and it is bad public policy. She said that this
same concept was debated in a Senate committee in the legislature, but the bill never
got out of committee. She said that inhumane treatment of animals is already against
the law. She asked the County Commissioners to consider cautiously looking at this
from the attitude and the positions of the citizens. She questioned the assumption that
tethering is mistreatment of animals.
Jason Payne is a member of the Eno River Coon Hunters Association. He said
that he and his father have raised and trained dogs since he was 15 years old, and they
tether their dogs, but they also exercise them and take care of them. He is opposed to
this amendment because he does not believe that the descriptions in the amendment
would accomplish what people are trying to accomplish, which is better treatment of
animals.
Lamar Chapman lives in Orange County and said that he has numerous dogs
and most are not tethered. The ones that are tethered chew through a fence. He said
that he has been to all of the committee meetings and the committee is not listening to
the citizens of Orange County. He said that most of the people that are supporting this
ordinance are not from Orange County. He said that people are scared of speaking
tonight because of Animal Control coming to their property. He said that the people of
unincorporated Orange County are not even aware of this proposal. He showed some
pictures that someone else had brought of dogs that were chained and the collars were
not embedded and the dogs were healthy. He suggested having another public
meeting.
George Painter is President of the Eno River Coon Hunters Association. He said
that this is a people problem, not a dog problem, and there needs to be education of dog
owners on the treatment of dogs. He said that a person that neglects an animal will
neglect it no matter if it is on a chain or in a kennel. He said that the County
Commissioners should spend more time and better time on other problems in the
County than passing more laws that will not help dogs or the animal control problems.
15
~~
Andrea Press is the N.C. Director of Responsible Dog Owners. She said that
this movement has been going through the country for the past year and a half. Animal
rights activists are quick to show pictures of dogs who have been chained improperly
and the media are quick to vilify the owner who tethers the dog. He said that people are
being spoon fed the idea that tethering is wrong by the animal rights activists. She gave
statistics of children that were killed by dogs because of parental neglect. She said that
responsible dog owners have the right to chain or not chain their dogs for whatever
reason.
Amanda Arrington said that she represents people not here as the Director of the
Coalition to Unchain Dogs. She said that sometimes you must legislate in order to
educate. She agreed that cruelty can happen in any situation. She said that dogs that
are chained are more susceptible to being attacked.
Bobby Kirk said that he is disappointed in the way that this is going. He has tried
to get on the committee, and he was not allowed. He said that he has trained dogs for
40 years. He said that he has dogs come to him from all over the country that have
been kenneled, but his best dogs are tethered. He urged the County Commissioners to
reconsider this. He said to the committee that they never listened to the Orange County
citizens. He said that tethering dogs is not bad.
Michael Kirk lives in southern Orange County. He said that he looked at the
Animal Services website and read the amendment. He said that the costs of this
amendment are supposed to be absorbed back in the budget. He asked if the Animal
Control Officers do anything all day now. He said that he rode around within five miles
of Chapel Hill and he counted 38 tethered dogs and 72 dogs that were in kennels
smaller than what is recommended. He does not know how the costs of this are going to
be absorbed, because this will be a lot of work. He said that he has had dogs all of his
life and the ones that are tethered are the friendliest dogs.
Steven Hopkins said that he is a citizen of Orange County and he has owned
dogs all of his life. He asked that there be an exemption for sporting dogs or for
homeowners that cannot kennel because most sporting dogs must have daily exercise
and must be chained to be in events. He said that putting dogs in kennels will not solve
any problems. He thinks that the existing laws should be enforced.
Pat Sanford is on the ASAB. She said that she is an animal trainer and she
would never tether her dogs because it is not productive in training. She said that for 17
years she did animal investigations for Orange County, and during that time there was a
very high number of investigations with tethered animals. She said that it is a human
problem and not an animal problem. She thinks that the ordinance needs to pass to
help the animals. She understands the sporting dog owners' concerns. She said that
she is in support of the ordinance.
Jamie Jacobs is a resident of Orange County and an owner of a pit bull. She
said that she was asked to speak by a friend to share some statistics. She said that her
breeder has been breeding pit bulls for over 20 years in the North Carolina mountains,
and he was very clear with her about what she needed to do with the dog if she wanted
him to become a vicious and dangerous animal, and that was to chain him and leave
him alone. If she wished him to become a loving and social animal, then she must
provide for him in other ways, which she does. She contains her dog with an Invisible
Fence and she takes him for long walks. She said that there is a book sold in pet stores
that gives very specific information about this breed, that if they are chained, they will
become vicious and dangerous animals.
Kris Bergstrand lives in Chapel Hill and was a member of the Tethering
Committee and the ASAB. She said that the members learned a lot from the residents
of Orange County and they struggled with how to balance the needs of the animals with
16
~5
the rights of the citizens. She said that a number of people think that PETA activists
drove the subcommittee to make this recommendation and she disagrees. She is a
veterinarian and she cares about the humane treatment of dogs. However, public safety
is very important to her. She said that the subcommittee got feedback from animal
control professionals in the state who said that they did not find it to be more work or
more costly to have tethering ordinances, they noticed a decrease in dog bites, a
decrease in puppies, and a decrease in surrenders. She thinks that the benefits that
other jurisdictions in the state have seen from restricted tethering would do well in this
County.
Susan Kelly lives in Carrboro and she has two dogs, which are tethered because
they dig under the fence and they jump the fence. Both of them are spayed. She said
that the dogs have a very nice area to live in, and she does not know what her option
would be other than not letting her dogs outside to play together.
Jacky Rosati is a resident of Orange County and she has a dog that lives inside
her house. She is in support of this ordinance and emphasized that it is restricting
tethering and not an anti-tethering ordinance. She said that she is also here on behalf of
Jane Marshall who could not be in attendance. She read a letter from Jane Marshall:
"Dear Commissioners,
I have been a dog trainer in Orange County for 20 years. One of my areas of
expertise is evaluating dogs for aggression and so I am very familiar with what triggers
aggression in dogs.
Living on a chain deprives a dog of his basic needs and causes high levels of
stress and frustration. Frustration is apre-cursor to aggression. This is a very
dangerous type of aggression as the dog is in a highly aroused emotional and hormonal
state and will target anything moving nearby. The unfortunate victims of chained dogs
are often unsupervised children who wander into the dog's space. Mutilating injuries are
usually sustained in these situations.
I am also a mother, raising my children in this community, and a humane
educator. As well as the huge safety factor for children around chained dogs, it is
important for our children to learn empathy for everything around them, to grow up to be
caring, contributing citizens. Successful humane education programs focus on helping
children relate to the animals in their environment and to respect and care for them.
Living with a dog chained at the bottom of the garden desensitizes our children to the
needs of animals and conveys the wrong message to them. Chained dogs are often the
victims of taunts from neighborhood children, a terrible situation for the dog and an
incorrect learning experience for the child.
So I respectfully ask you to disallow the permanent tethering of dogs in Orange
County, for the safety of our children, for the humane treatment of dogs and for Orange
County to become a caring, compassionate, community for all.
Jane Marshall°
Emily Weinstein thanked everyone for the work on the ordinance and said that
she believes that animals do have rights. She has fenced her yard and her dogs come
in and out of her house. She supports this ordinance.
Lauren Knapp-Resnik lives in Hillsborough and she thinks that everyone agrees
with no cruelty to animals, and she is a total animal lover. She lives on 20 acres and has
horses, chickens, dogs, cats. She has one dog that is tethered, because she is over
protective of him because of an accident that he had while he was running free. She is
against this ordinance because it is not a solution to this problem. She thinks that the
ordinance should be on a case-by-case basis.
17
~~
Loren Hart is a UNC Alum and a resident of Orange County. He is here as an
advocate for all animals, human and otherwise. He said that animals can feel pleasure,
pain, fear, and loneliness. He suggested that if the County Commissioners pass this
ordinance, then they will help to create a kinder and gentler world, a world that is more
just, more peaceful and more loving. He said that chaining dogs for long periods is a
form of abuse and should be stopped. He suggested that humans should not exploit
animals for any reason.
Joseph Clees is a representative of the N.C. Sporting Dogs. He represents 12
different counties. He said that this is a very controversial issue. He said that he has
watched Chair Jacobs, and he has talked with sensitivity and compassion. He
complimented Chair Jacobs on this. He said that he can see some fundamental flaws
that there are segments of the population that feel that they have not had an adequate
public process. He said that there are members on both sides of the issue that feel fear
and intimidation. He asked the County Commissioners to please not fall into an animal
rights agenda. He said that it is the responsibility of humans to protect these animals
and take care of them. He encourages the County Commissioners to have at least 3-4
public hearings.
Suzanne Roy lives in Hillsborough and was on the Tethering Committee. She
said that the committee held two public hearings and invited members who are opposed
to this ordinance to come onto the committee, and she does not know of any
applications. She thinks that the committee has listened. She does not think that there
is any question that tethering dogs is inhumane. She read a quote from the Dog
Whisperer, °Chaining is a very dangerous and cruel practice. The more tightly a dog is
chained, the more pent up energy he will have. The more pent up energy, the more
aggression. A frustrated dog on a chain becomes a weapon and is nearly three times
more likely to attack or bite a person than a dog that is simply loose in the yard." She
believes that this ordinance has broad community support.
Chad Resnick said that one of the people that spoke said that dogs on chains
have a tendency to bite people. His response to that is to teach children not to go near
dogs that they do not know. His dog has a 45-foot lunge line with a 12-foot lead on it
and has a heated and air-conditioned dog house. He said that it would be infeasible for
his dog to be in a 12x12 fence and restrict his movement that .much, which is one of the
recommendations.
Tim Frazier is an officer of the Eno River Coon Club, but he is speaking for
himself. He said that he was told at the other public meetings that sporting dogs would
be exempt from the ordinance. He said that no one told him how to get on these
committees. He said that the sporting dog owners feel that they are being singled out.
He said that he has a dog that will dig out or climb out of a fence. He said that he did not
find anything out about this meeting until Saturday. He asked the County
Commissioners to really think about this before passing it.
Ellen Whitaker is with the Coalition to Unchain Dogs and she said that they build
fences that dogs cannot dig out of. She said that it is possible to keep a dog that digs in
a fence. She said that when the coalition is able to provide a fence, then the owner can
see that the dog now has a personality because it can run around and not be chained.
Diane Genteel said that she raises and shows rat terriers, and she does not
tether her dogs. She said that the problem is not the tethering, but the implementation of
tethering. She said that proper tethering socializes, cares for, and exercises animals
very well. She asked the County Commissioners to please consider tethering from a
different point of view.
Nancy Carson Eickert lives in Orange County and has participated with the
Coalition to Unchain Dogs. She affirmed everything that the representatives of the
18
~~
coalition said. She does not think that most people realize the conditions under which
they find some of these animals. She thinks that education about proper tethering would
help the situation.
Josh Chapman is 15 years old and was bom and raised in Orange County. He
has had dogs all of his life, and said that just because a dog is on a chain does not mean
that it will be depressed. He said that his chained dogs run around and play and are
happy. He said that he had a dog that was in a pen and was not gaining weight and
barked all the time, and when the dog was put on a chain, it gained weight and stopped
barking. He asked the County Commissioners to please oppose the ordinance.
Commissioner Nelson said that he would like to absorb all of this and take time to
reflect and wait to make a decision.
Commissioner Carey agreed.
Chair Jacobs said that it would probably be on the June and agenda. The public
asked for proper notice.
Chair Jacobs said that if the Board does not vote on it now, it will be scheduled
for June 3ro.
A motion was made by Commissioner Nelson, seconded by Commissioner
Foushee to defer this item to June 3ro on the regular agenda.
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
19
a~
EXCERPT FROM JUNE 3rd BOCC MEETING
APPROVED 9/16/2008
EXCERPT From MINUTES
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
REGULAR MEETING
June 3, 2008
7:30 p.m.
6. Regular Agenda
a. Proposed Animal Ordinance Amendment on the Tethering of Doas
The Board considered adopting a proposed ordinance amendment to the Orange
County Animal Ordinance restricting the tethering of dogs.
Animal Services Director Bob Marotto introduced Chair of the Animal Services
Advisory Board, Dr. Ross Oglesby. He said that the proposal before the Board is the
result of a tremendous amount of work by the Tethering Committee and the ASAB over
a very long period of time. The committee and the ASAB had discussions with experts
from other jurisdictions in North Carolina. Public input sessions also played a role in the
recommendations. He said that there was a concerted effort to reach a balance
between some opposing views in the community. He said that the original review and
discussion referenced exceptions for escape artist dogs and for hunting dogs. The draft
includes exceptions for these animals, but ultimately, the Tethering Committee and the
ASAB opted to not include those exceptions for three reasons:
1) concerns about the legal issues that might arise by creating exceptions;
2) impact that exceptions might have on the ease of enforcement; and
3) the issue of fairness.
Dr. Ross Oglesbee read her prepared statement:
As human beings we have free will, self-determination, and the power to control
our environment and the environment of all things on this planet. Along with the
privilege of being the dominant species, comes a responsibility to respect, not only each
other, but all other living things that are on this planet with us and to use our domination
responsibly and compassionately. Perhaps we should treat other species of animals as
we would wish them to treat us, were they in our dominant position. Dogs are conscious
beings. They feel cold, heat, pain, fear, pleasure, and affection. The overwhelming
information about this issue is that the quality of life for dogs, and their well-meaning
humans, would be improved if tethering was limited or eliminated entirely. You have
heard and read a lot about this issue. The Tethering Task Force, which is composed of
diverse and knowledgeable individuals from this county, at your behest, have already
spent a lot of time, effort, and research into this issue. The Task Force and Animal
Services Advisory Board have provided you with their consensus on this matter; they
have imparted their knowledge about this issue to you. Knowledge is power. You now
have the knowledge to do the right thing with respect to this issue. You know what the
right thing is and you have the power to do the right thing. Gandhi said: The greatness
of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. I
will paraphrase that to say that the greatness of this county and its moral progress can
be judged by the way its animals are treated. Hippocrates said: I expect to pass
through this world but once; any good thing therefore that I can do, or any kindness that I
20
a~
can show to any fellow creature, let me do it now; let me not defer or neglect it, for I shall
not pass this way again. The soul is in all living creatures, although the body of each is
different. And finally, from George Bernard Shaw: The worst sin towards our fellow
creatures is not to hate them, but to be indifferent to them, that is the essence of
inhumanity.
Please don't be indifferent to the quality of a dog's life; don't be indifferent to the
information you have received; act on the knowledge you have. The Tethering
Committee did what it was charged to do and drafted a sound, reasonable, and fair
proposal. Now, with the power you have, do the right thing; vote tonight to approve the
tethering amendment. Thank you.
Commissioner Carey commended the ASAB and the Tethering Committee on
their hard work on this emotional issue. He said that the Board of County
Commissioners has not had a chance to discuss this item as a Board yet. He said that
the public all wants the same thing -humane treatment of animals. He does have
concerns about the size of the pen that is proposed in this ordinance and he wants to
discuss this. He said that the Board needs to talk about athree-hour limit of tethering
and he is not ready to make a decision on this item tonight.
Commissioner Nelson said that the last public comment session was about an
hour long and there are 60 + signed up to speak tonight. He said that when this is
brought back, it will be for Board of County Commissioners' discussion only. The Board
needs to be able to discuss this.
Commissioner Carey said that the Board may ask staff to bring back further
information and it may want to refer this back to the Tethering Committee or ASAB for
consideration, if need be.
Commissioner Foushee said that there are questions that the Board of County
Commissioners needs an opportunity to raise, but she does not want to bring this up
until the public has had their say. She has questions about enforcement.
Chair Jacobs made a few suggestions. He said that it is not a competition to see
who gets the most speakers or who has the loudest applause. He said that he sees a
number of people signed up to speak who spoke last time, and he asked that they not
speak again, in courtesy to others who have not spoken yet. He said that the Board
does listen, and the same things do not need to be said again. There was a citizen in
opposition to what Chair Jacobs said.
Chair Jacobs also asked that anyone that comes to speak please remove their
hats.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Dennis Carden is from Caldwell in Orange County and is a charter member of
the Quail Farm Beagle Club. This club has 50 kennels built to USDA standards, and
they oppose this tethering ordinance and the pen laws that are included in it. He said
that he is an AKC licensed judge and he travels all over judging beagles. He feels that
this ordinance invades their rights as hunters and dog owners. He said that these dog
owners have had a lifetime commitment and he feels like they are not even being
considered. He thinks that it is all about what the Tethering Committee thinks. He said
that USDA already has a standard size pen. He asked what is big enough. He said that
he takes very good care of his dogs and keeps his pens and feeding bowls clean. He
said that he was proud to be an Orange County citizen until recently.
Charles Best is a lifetime resident of Orange County. He owns 300 acres of land
and said that he works hard to keep it. His father taught him how to hunt as a child, to
respect a gun, and how to treat a dog. He said that in the 30's, it was good to have
21
~3~
rabbit or squirrel on the table. He said that he feels like he was losing his right to teach
his children about having dogs. He has small dogs now. He does not see how smaller
dogs need the same size pen as larger dogs. He does not think that more laws are
needed, because there are laws now for people that mistreat dogs. He challenged the
Board to come out to NC 54 and the Quail Farm Beagle Club. He said that revenues
come in to the County through the field trials that the beagle club coordinates. He said
that he has had dogs all of his life and he loves his dogs. He thinks that he is being
penalized.
David Aman said that he is speaking in favor of the tethering ordinance
amendment. He said that passage of this amendment would give the Animal Protection
officials an additional tool with which to come to the aid of a distressed and neglected
dog that has been chained for an inordinately long period of time. He said that this
ordinance amendment is based on a genuine expressed interest driven by citizens who
live within the boundaries of this County. To his knowledge, there is no ordinance
amendment supporter who receives money from anyone within or outside of the County
to professionally organize or lobby for the passage of this type of local issue. He said
that this process has been going on for one year, and this is the fourth public hearing.
Robin Harrison said that she has been a resident for 20 years. She said that her
dog is tethered now, and she would be breaking this ordinance by just attending this
meeting. She said that if she left her dogs loose, they would dig under, climb over, or
high jump her fence. She said that this amendment does not make sense and she is
opposed to it.
Elaine Modlin read a prepared letter to the County Commissioners. She is an
Animal Control Officer from Laurinburg, NC.
"Dear Commissioners:
The City of Laurinburg passed its first tethering ordinance in November, 1997
with an effective date of December 1998. The first ordinance allowed dog owners to
tether their dogs for up to 8 hours within a 24-hour period. This proved to be too time-
consuming to enforce, so in 2000 we amended the ordinance to one hour within a 24-
hour period.
We passed our tethering ordinance for two main reasons (1) the safety of our
citizens and (2) for the humane treatment of animals. On the issue of safety, our records
indicated that fifty-one percent of our dog bites were from dogs that were confined on
chains or had been chained and had broken loose. This is compared to only 19 percent
of bites from dogs that were confined in a fence. On the issue of inhumane treatment of
animals, we were constantly receiving calls in reference to chained dogs. They were
usually tangled up and unable to get to shelter or water. Many of these cases had been
like this for long periods of time. Attempts to correct or eliminate these situations were
futile and time-consuming.
Passing this ordinance has definitely improved our records for protecting our
citizens from dangerous dogs. It has helped eliminate residences with multiple dogs
chained out, reducing such complaints as nuisance barking and odor. Our cruelty cases
are significantly reduced as well as our dog bites from chained or loose dogs and
complaints about dogs running loose. We have also seen a dramatic reduction in litters
of puppies, partly because of the tethering ordinance, but also because of the state
spay/neuter law.
Although enforcing this ordinance had brought on extra work and time in the
beginning, after almost 10 years our impoundments have been reduced by half. And
most of these are strays, not owned by our citizens. It has been very rewarding seeing
the addition of fenced in backyards and the dogs happily running around. Owners have
22
3(
commented to me that their dogs seem happier and easier to take care of. I hope that
Orange County decides to pass a tethering ordinance, you will be making the lives of
your residents safer and improving on the lives of many deserving dogs.°
Pat Sanford spoke at the last meeting and said that she is a member of the
ASAB and she supports this amendment. All of the members of the ASAB are from
Orange County.
Sandi Coy is the Chairperson of Responsible Dog Owners of the Eastern States.
She is also the new CEO of the United Responsible Dog Owners International. She is
from Kentucky and was asked by residents of Orange County to come and speak. She
said that she came tonight to try and set a few myths to bed. She said that laws of this
sort are very difficult to enforce and they tend to give another law on the books that
people are not going to follow. It is almost impossible to enforce, especially if there is a
short limit for tethering. She said that a lot of the groups that try and start the anti-
tethering movement have usually quoted a study done by the CDC, which was done in
1994 and is called, "Which Dogs Bites, aCase-Controlled Study of Risk Factors.° This
study was done on dogs that were taken in by Denver Metro Animal Services in 1991, so
the study is already 17 years old. She said that the information is probably not still
pertinent. Also, there were lots of exclusions in the study. The study started out with
991 dogs, and by the time the exclusions were done, the number was down to 357 dogs.
She said that there are many flaws in this study. After this study was done, with all of
the flaws, and the authors even said that the study was flawed, the Animal Rights
Movement still uses it. She quoted something from the study: "One hundred and
sixteen were aggressive when they were approached in their fence. Only 64 of the
tethered dogs were aggressive. Our results, however, showed no significant difference
in the behavior of dogs chained and those not chained, suggesting that chaining was not
likely to have been the result of aggressive behavior."
Deanna Rowan is a resident of Orange County. She supports this ordinance
amendment. She said that this is not an animal rights agenda issue; it is a humane
treatment of dogs' issues. She said that no one wants to take away anyone's right to
have dogs and to hunt. The concern is how the dogs are being kept. She said that the
first part of her life was spent in Georgia and Alabama where hunting is a way of life, and
she had a lot of close friends that had hunting dogs, and none of them were chained or
tethered. She said that this is not about the hunters, but about the hundreds of dogs in
Orange County that are chained 24/7, exposed to elements, rarely contacted by their
owners, and are subjected to abuse and neglect.
Kitty Lynn said that she has rescued hundreds of dogs. She said that chained
dogs often become aggressive and territorial for a lack of love and nutrition. They will
attack children who enter their territory. She read the names of some children that have
been killed or injured by dogs all over the United States. She said that more and more
communities are passing laws that regulate the practice of tethering animals, and
Orange County will not be the first. She read the names of some cities that have done
this. She spoke in favor of the ordinance amendment.
Phillip Pennell said that his feelings run deep on this issue. He said that, from
the list of children read by Ms. Lynn, there were only a few that were killed by tethered
dogs. He said that Person County has a dangerous breed law that Orange County
needs to have to contain these types of dogs. He said that he has searched and not
once has a hound ever inflicted wounds, but they were mostly from dangerous breeds.
He brought out a chain to show the County Commissioners what the Orange County law
is with aten-foot chain. He said that aten-foot chain would allow 400 square feet of
movement, versus 100 square feet with aten-foot pen. He read from the summary from
23
3~
the Tethering Committee: "Of particular concern are dogs that spend their lives tethered
as they are naturally active and social, being that required exercise and frequent
interaction with humans and other animals.° He said that aten-foot cage is restricting
the dog from exercise. He said that when you take the sociality out of a dog, it makes
them mean. He said that he has owned hundreds of dogs, and he has always taken
very good care of them. He does not appreciate people coming in and trying to say that
chains make bad dogs.
Tommy Frazier said that he has dogs and they are better off on a chain than in a
pen. He said that it is cleaner to have a chain than a pen. He said that the citizens pay
taxes on dogs and there should not be a law.
George Painter said that he is opposed to this becoming a law and if the ones on
the book now were enforced, there would not be a problem. He said that Ms. Modlin
was trying to do a good thing in Scotland County, but he pointed out that she said that
those that do not agree with the law are those whose dogs are not well taken care of.
He said that when the committee was formed, the Board of County Commissioners
asked that there be members on both sides of the argument. The one person that was
against it was not allowed to be on the committee. He said that he attended the first
open meeting for comment, and two people from his group volunteered to fill the vacant
position of someone that was in favor of tethering. This was denied. He said that the
whole study was done by those who wanted this amendment passed. He said that the
Board of County Commissioners needs to restudy this and put some people on the
committee that are on the other side of the issue so that it is fair.
Mark Soloman said that he supports this ordinance for several reasons. The first
is public safety. Chaining dogs contributes to aggression and constitutes a public safety
threat. He said that it has been shown that dogs that are chained are more likely to bite
than unchained dogs. The second is the humane issue. Prolonged chaining is harmful
to dogs and deprives them of necessary exercise and socialization; it subjects them to
dangers of becoming entangled, preventing them from reaching food, shelter, or water
and causing injuries such as strangulation, trachea damage from pulling, and the
embedding of collars; it makes dogs vulnerable to attack from free-roaming dogs and
wildlife. Numerous Orange County veterinarians have endorsed this tethering
restriction. The next reason is over-population. Chained dogs contribute to the
community's pet over-population problem. Dogs that are continuously tethered are
frequently unsterilized and there is no barrier protecting chained female dogs from
unwanted breeders. In fact, every chained female dog that the Coalition to Unchain
Dogs has helped locally has had at least one and often multiple litters of puppies. The
puppies end up in local shelters and cost taxpayers' money. Finally, this is an important
tool for animal control. Seven North Carolina jurisdictions, including the counties of New
Hanover and Scotland, report positive results from anti-tethering ordinances, including a
decrease in the number of animal cruelty complaints and dog bite incidences.
Nancy Garson- Anger read a letter on behalf of Jean McNeill, Animal Control
Services Manager of New Hanover County. She said that the anti-tethering ordinance is
too important an issue to be silenced in an atmosphere of intimidation. She encouraged
the County Commissioners to move forward thoughtfully, compassionately, and not
fearfully.
"Dear County Commissioners,
1 am writing this letter in support of your county passing an anti-tethering
ordinance for the protection of your community's companion animals. New Hanover
County has had the privilege of such a law for many years, and our residents enjoy the
24
33
safety it affords our pets. Animal cruelty is a serious matter, and we must do all we
know to do to keep it from happening in whatever manner we are able.
Many would argue that you should merely enforce the laws that you already
have; however, in our experience, you cannot enforce what you do not have. The
majority of offenders will not comply with suggestions, so adequate enforceable laws are
necessary to cause compliance. Anti-tethering is a step in the right direction to .enhance
responsible pet ownership. Having a pet entails great responsibility, so we must be
proactive in educating owners about the best care they can provide.
We passed the ordinance many years ago, but did not write actual citations until
quite some time after the law became effective. We issued warning notices, which gave
the dog owner time to make corrections. This is not nearly as effective as simply writing
the citation. In our experience, an owner will comply more rapidly, if there are
consequences for failure to do so. We have the administrative ability to void a citation, if
they correct the problem in a timely manner. Again, this would not be possible if no law
was on the books to enforce. Our residents have responded favorably to having a
means of preventing animal cruelty in at least one form.
Prior to passing the ordinance, we saw many cases of dogs being left on short
leads or ropes for many hours - or permanently - at the household. Many individuals
lost their pets due to strangulation, heat stroke, and in some severe cases -the owner's
intentional animal abuse of starvation. We had no means of preventing this abuse until
the law was enforceable.
The ordinance was challenged in April 2007. We had a group of Pit Bull owners,
who desired to tether their dogs with heavy chains connected to tire axles. Fortunately,
our advisory committee, board of health, and County Commissioners saw through these
individuals and upheld the law. We are grateful. We are also in high hopes that you will
also act as responsibly for your community pets as we have in New Hanover County.
The majority of your residents are counting on you to do the right thing, despite the very
vocal minority that opposes the law.
Please feel free to contact me about this important issue. I look forward to
hearing back from you with a good report. I can be reached at 910-798-7505 or
imcneil _nhcgov.com.
Sincerely,
Jean P. McNeil
New Hanover County
Animal Control Services Manager"
Amanda Stipe is a Chapel Hill native, a former Animal Control Officer within the
area, and a dog trainer. She believes that enforcement is an option. She said that a
one size fits all approach will not work to confine animals, protect them, and protect the
public. She said that governments and organizations should continue to work together
to educate the public to the responsibilities of dog ownership. She said that the proposal
for anti-tethering is too restrictive and each dog must be considered individually. She
read an excerpt from the book, "The Love of a Dog," by Patricia McConnell, where a
visiting young friend did not survive a dog attack. "The two girls were alone in the
house, except for a total of six large dogs. An adult male, an adult female, and four
adolescents. None of the dogs had been spayed or neutered. All were underweight and
in poor condition. None of the dogs had received any training, nor had they been
outside the house beyond being tied up to a chain in the yard. Neighbors reported
several incidents in which the dogs had been screamed at, struck, and kicked. Social
services reported that most of the surfaces in the home, including the beds, were
25
~~
covered with the dogs' urine and feces." She said that this shows the people problem
that we have. She said that a tethering law would not have helped in this circumstance
and might have been the reason the dogs were confined indoors with unsupervised
juveniles. Training people on animal behavior is key to responsible dog welfare and
ownership. Educating people on the benefits of spaying and neutering is also important.
She said that regulations or laws should not be so restrictive that they hinder options to
dog owners who are willing to do the right thing for themselves, the public, and their
pets. Animal Control may have a more difficult time in locating animal abusers as they
move indoors, no longer under plain sight. She asked the County Commissioners to
consider not enacting this proposal in its current state, but to provide Animal Control and
law enforcement additional monies to enforce current laws.
Lamar Chapman said that he spoke at the last meeting, but he said that he was
here to speak on behalf of some people that could not attend. He said that at the last
meeting people were saying that dogs had feelings and were emotional, etc. He said
that all dogs may not like chains, just like some people like coffee or tea. He said that
some dogs will run off if left out, but his dog will run around and then come home. He
said that this is not mistreatment. He read from something: "We are our own town; we
don't care how other counties are run. If they said, `jump in front of a bus,' would you do
it? Everything they have presented us with is from another county. It is not from Orange
County. We are our own county.° He said that the committee should have talked to the
people in the community and not people from other counties. He said that most of the
people that are for the anti-tethering ordinance were not even raised in Orange County.
He said that if this ordinance is passed, his dogs will go to another residence in another
county.
Eliana Beattie does not live in Orange County, but she works at the animal
shelter. She read a letter signed by nine local veterinarians:
"To the Board of County Commissioners:
We, the undersigned veterinarians who practice in and around Orange County
urge the Board of County Commissioners to vote in favor of the Animal Control
Ordinance amendment to restrict the practice of tethering dogs and establish minimum
kennel sizes for dogs.
We agree with the Tethering Committee's findings that:
- Prolonged tethering deprives dogs of necessary exercise and socialization;
- Tethered dogs can and do contribute to various community nuisance issues
such as barking and pet overpopulation;
- Tethered dogs can and do pose a risk to public safety and health because
they may become aggressive and they are not confined behind a barrier.
In addition, as veterinarians, we believe that chained dogs are subjected to a
variety of dangers, including trachea damage from pulling on the chain; embedded
collars; and injuries sustained in attacks from free-roaming dogs.
There are many alternatives to chaining available, including adequately-sized
pens, fences, and simply keeping dogs inside and walking them several times a day.
By voting in favor of this amendment, the BOCC will be taking a positive step
toward protecting the public and improving the treatment of dogs in our community. We
urge you to do so without delay.
Sincerely,
Soren Windram, DVM, New Hope Animal Hospital
26
35
Kay Bishop, DVM, New Hope Animal Hospital
Ken Redmond, Vine Veterinary Hospital
Kathy Crabtree, DVM, Carver Street Veterinary Hospital
Pat Pagel, DVM, Cole Park Veterinary Hospital
Michelle Droke, DVM, Cole Park Veterinary Hospital
Deborah Stein, DVM, Cole Park Veterinary Hospital
Megan Harris, DVM, Cole Park Veterinary Hospital
Marjorie Lindeke, DVM, St. Francis Veterinary Hospital"
Timmy Frazier said that he has tried to make all of these meetings and has tried
to talk to people in the community, especially those in the northern part of the County.
He said that he is a responsible dog owner, and he believes that tethering is okay if the
owner takes care of his/her dogs and tethers in a humane way. He thinks that the
problem in Orange County is the dog breed. He said that when the County
Commissioners force something like this amendment down their throats, it makes the
citizens mad.
Susan Kelly is against the tethering amendment. She agreed with Commissioner
Carey and they all want to do the right thing for the animals. For some, she thinks that it
could be tethering.
Stillman Wright was born and raised in Chapel Hill. He said that he has tethered
champion dogs and his dogs are not mistreated. He showed pictures of his dogs. His
dogs are kept on ten-foot chains, which give them 365 square feet. He said that he is a
responsible dog owner. He also showed a picture of an American Pit Bull Terrier that
got out of a fence.
Josh Chapman was born and raised in Orange County. He read from an article
from the News and Observer. "Barbara Sherman, a Clinical Associate Professor at N.
C. State University College of Veterinary Medicine, said `method of animal confinement
should not be blamed for neglect. You can abuse those same dogs by putting them in
tiny pens. We really need to examine the welfare of each dog.'° He asked those that
live in Orange County and that have dogs that live on chains to raise their hands. He
said that most people who raised their hands are from Orange County. He said that
most of the people that are pushing this are from Chapel Hill and are not going to be
affected by this. He said that he has dogs on chains at his house, and they will not stay
in pens.
Frank Tilley is opposed to the tethering ordinance. He said that there are
surveys that say that dogs on chains become aggressive. He has seen plenty of
aggressive dogs in pens. He has trained dogs for 12 years and you can make any dog
aggressive and it is not just because it is on a chain. A dog can be happy on a chain just
as much as he is in a pen.
Suzanne Roy was a member of the Tethering Committee and the ASAB. She
would like to answer any of their questions rather than referring it back to the Tethering
Committee. She said that neglected dogs can be anywhere, but there are special
circumstances that make tethering an issue that should be a policy decision -lack of a
barrier, protecting the people from the dog, etc. She said that it is a situation similar to
having an uncovered or unfenced pool. It is both a lure and a danger to children. She
said that 175 children in the last four years have been killed or injured by chained dogs.
She made reference to the people that would have to make changes if this ordinance is
passed, and she said that these were people that the Tethering Committee had in mind
when it recommended the 18-month phasing period. Regarding the hunting committee,
there are very strongly held beliefs against government regulation related to animal
27
~~
welfare. She respects those beliefs, but she does not agree with them. She said that
they believe that animals are property and they each should have a right to do what they
want with their animals. She said that animals are not property, and there is a public
interest in protecting them. She said that some other opponents here are out-of-county
paid lobbyists and Pit Bull breeders. She said that Sandi Coy, who spoke earlier, is a Pit
Bull breeder and has animal cruelty charges pending against her in Kentucky. Another
person is Andrea Press, who is also a Pit Bull breeder, who sells dogs with known dog
fighting blood lines. Ms. Press led the unsuccessful effort to overturn the New Hanover
County law, and she moved from that county after she was cited for illegally tethering
dogs. She said that animal cruelty is a serious issue, and as a community, they should
take a stand against it. Orange County needs this law, and she hopes that the County
Commissioners will pass it.
Arielle Schechter has been in Orange County since the early 1960's and she fully
supports the anti-tethering ordinance. She said that it is overdue.
Kris Bergstrand spoke on behalf of Jean Alston, who is a member of the
Tethering Committee and is in support of the ordinance amendment.
Elise Roosevelt lives in Hillsborough. She has been in Orange County for eight
years and she is a lifelong animal owner of dogs and cats. She strongly supports the
anti-tethering ordinance because what she has personally seen and what she has read.
She said that it is important to remember that this is about both public safety and
humane treatment of animals. She referred to the USDA ruling prohibiting tethering as a
method of primary enclosure. She said that this is about 24/7 enclosure and not 2-3
hours. She said that cruelty comes in many forms, and this is only one tool. She said
that this is about the welfare of animals and the safety of the community and not about
people's professions and financial welfare.
Lori Hensley is opposed to chaining dogs.
Robert Hensley said that he is a volunteer with the Coalition to Unchain Dogs. In
the past year, they have built 50 fences in Orange, Durham, and Wake Counties and
have removed approximately 85 dogs from chains. He showed some pictures. He said
that one thing that disturbs him is that Ms. Coy was charged with cruelty to animals. He
read something from his PDA, including that one dead dog still on a chain was found on
her property. He also acknowledged that Andrea Press was involved in breeding dog
fighters, as mentioned above. Sitting next to Ms. Press is another paid lobbyist, Mr.
McClees, from the North Carolina Sporting Dogs Association. He spoke in support of
the anti-tethering ordinance.
Mickey Oliver has lived in Orange County for over 46 years. He said that this is a
touchy situation here and the Board of County Commissioners appreciates the work of
the Tethering Committee, and he asked that the Board please appreciate his
commitment to his dogs for over 50 years. He said that a law is out there now -the
leash law -that is not being enforced now.
Brian F. Fee read a prepared handout:
°Dear Sirs:
My name is Brian Fee and I live in Chapel Hill with my wife and three children.
After many years of renting homes and apartments, we bought a home in Chapel Hill -
one with a big yard for plants and animals. Last summer we were told about three
puppies that were dropped off and abandoned at a minister's house. We adopted the
puppy, which is part Labrador, part German Shepard.....but mostly mutt. Her name is
Lily and the kids painted rainbows and lilies on her doghouse that I built. The agreement
with my wife was that the dog would remain outside during the day on a line (a cable-
trolley system) but remain inside in the evening and in a crate at night. Everything was
working out fine....even as she has grown to 60 Ibs... until I saw Dave Hart's editorial in
28
37
the Chapel Hill News that brought up the tethering issue again. I was astonished that
the issue of tethering was still being debated.
Mr. Hart wrote that basically there were two distinct camps of thought -the anti-
tethering group that says that tethering can cause physical or psychological damage to a
dog, and apro-tethering group, composed mainly of hunters and dog breeders who say
that tethering is humane and that neglect by people is the real problem. It seemed like
one major group - I would think they can be best called the silent majority -are families
who have one or two dogs that are humanely tethered and are played with in their
backyards. I was concerned enough that this group was not being represented that I
stand here tonight.
I read about how restrictions on tethering in other jurisdictions decreased dog
bites, reduced unwanted litters, and reduced cruelty due to improper tethering. Well, our
dog lives in our backyard, so even if she did have a mind to bit someone, which she
hasn't had a mind to yet, the person would have to be in our backyard. She has been
spayed, so puppies are not an issue. With regards to cruelty, Lily is a member of our
family. Her tether has been installed properly and she always has food, water, shade,
and room to run and dig. On this note, let's do some math.
She is on a trolley line 60 feet long and she can go 19 feet each way from the
center of the line. How many square feet can Lily play?
The answer is 2280 square feet. Our house is only around 1500 square feet!
This seems more humane than 100-200 square feet in a kennel or a 10-square foot
crate. Attached to my talk is a picture of Lily's domain, where she can run, dig, and play
-either with us or by herself - sleep....whatever she wants to do. By the way, we
certainly interact with her much more on a line than we would with her stuck in a kennel.
I believe the main issue is not how a dog is confined, but how well a pet owner
takes care and interacts with an animal. Key words -pet owner responsibility. I'm all for
it. I once found a dog....in a side yard....on a chain....with a collar that had grown into
the dog's neck. I knocked on the owner's door, and they said that there wasn't a
problem and that they were applying some sort of lotion to the neck....and then to get
lost....or something like that. I called animal control ASAP and the dog was removed.
The chain was not the problem -neglect was. I strongly support the laws against animal
cruelty.
This whole issue reminds me of gun control -some are adamantly against all
guns and others start quoting the 2"d Amendment to have as many guns as they want.
Neither side promotes gun-owner responsibility to solve the problem.
Bottom line -our dog Lily is one of the vast majorities of dogs that are humanely
tethered and cared for. I resent the fact that this proposed bill assumes that we are not
taking care of our dog. I take responsibility for her care and safety. If any of you
Commissioners wish to come over and visit Lily, just let me know."
S. Henri McClees said that she is the proud lobbyist of the North Carolina
Sporting Dog Association. She said that her clients are great guys and they love their
dogs. She said that the issue is really will the County Commissioners forbid her clients
to own their dogs and to care for them as they see fit. Based on this issue, she asked
the County Commissioners to reject this ordinance. She said that this proposal
demands that all dog owners comply with the demands of the small majority. This would
pit the citizens against each other in a needless battle that sets the stage for constant
conflict. She said that this is about the rights of the people. She said that the citizens
have the right to be protected from any tyranny that would be imposed upon them by a
small majority. She said that "the few" want to order all citizens to comply essentially
with their philosophy and they do not distinguish between animals that are abused or not
29
3$
abused. She said that the abuse does not come from the type of confinement, but
comes from the person.
Allan Green represents a group that does not own pet dogs or hunting dogs, but
own working dogs. He is a small farmer that lives in the Orange Grove community. He
has a number of Border Collies. He does not have a problem with the intent of having
humane treatment of dogs and he would prefer not to have to tether a dog. He said that
there are times when he has to tether a dog on a 30-foot chain, particularly when a
female dog comes along and his dog can get out of his pen. He said that this is an
instance where the tethering law does not deal with realities of life. He asked why the
exceptions were not allowed. He said that it seems that the committee was loaded with
members who think tethering is bad. He is opposed to the anti-tethering law.
Brian Lane is from Chapel Hill and he is not a dog owner. He said that he has
come here out of civic duty and what he sees as an encroachment on individual freedom
in Orange County. He said that he believes in the citizens of Orange County, and the
Board of County Commissioners does not need to rule them with an iron fist. He is
proud of these hunters and how they treat their dogs. He thinks that a pressing case
would need to be made that is extensive proof of abuse before this ordinance is
amended. He thinks that this is not happening here. He said that if this ordinance is
passed on such weak evidence, he would like to know where the Board will stop.
Walt Von Shernz is a resident of Durham County and he has lived in Orange
County before. He grew up in another state where there were a lot of hunters that
chained their dogs all the time. He said that from his own experience, he has seen what
chaining of dogs can do. He firmly believes that keeping dogs on a chain will increase
the propensity for the dog to develop anti-social behavior. He does not think that feeding
and watering a dog fulfills all of the needs of a dog. A dog needs to be unencumbered.
Andrea Press said that she was at the last meeting, and she would like to bring
both sides together. She said that the simple solution, instead of turning one half of the
room into criminals, would be to put the two groups together. She said that people can
be educated on proper ownership, continue building fences, if dogs are bad off on
chains. It is all about education. She said that education is not regulation. She said that
these people are here because they love their animals and they do not want to get rid of
them. She asked if the County Commissioners were prepared to take on the liability for
what happens when the dogs that are put in pens escape the pens. She said that the
bottom line is that the most dangerous dog is a dog at-large. On a personal level, she
said that she does raise American Pit Bull Terriers. The reason that she is not a paid
lobbyist is because New Hanover County ruined her existence with an anti-tether law.
She had dogs behind her fence tied up while she was at home and she received written
citations. She had four weeks to find a place to move and her daughter lost her spot in
private school
Frances Jones is a lifetime citizen of Orange County. She said that she has
never seen the Chair disrespect citizens as he has tonight. She applauded the hunters
for standing up for their rights. The hunters have a right to do what they are doing. She
said that dogs in Chapel Hill are treated better than Fairview Community citizens
because they have parks with trails. Fairview has been begging for a park for the last 30
years. She said that they are going to do what they have to do to get that park. She
said that most of the money in the County goes to Chapel Hill. This is why people feel
divided. The Fairview citizens feel that the County thinks more of the dogs in Chapel Hill
than it does the citizens. She said that the County Commissioners need to do what they
were voted in to do.
Bobby Kirk said that he has several good ideas, and the big one is education.
He said that there are only six ordinances nationwide that dictate kennel size. He said
30
~~
that he trains over 60 dogs a year, and he travels the nation infield trials. He has a dog
coming in tomorrow that is 75 pounds and is a biter. The first thing he will do with this
dog is put him on a tether. He said that his dogs are happy on tethers. He agrees that
everything has to be done right. He said that every dog is different and tethering is a
great thing for a dog. He urged the County Commissioners to vote against this. He said
that it would solve no problems and there is no way that it could be enforced.
Loren Hart said that he is in support of the dog ordinance. He said that dogs and
other animals are individual beings, can feel pleasure, pain, fear, and loneliness. For
these reasons, he believes that tethering dogs for prolonged periods is a form of abuse
that should be stopped. It is a different kind of abuse than kicking a dog, but it is a form
of neglect. He thinks that the current ordinance should be amended to mandate a higher
level of care owed to the dogs by their human guardians. He said that he is a resident of
Orange County and he works at UNC. He made reference to his uncle who died
recently, and said that, in addition to being a veteran of the U. S. Navy, he was also an
avid duck hunter, a charter member of the Migratory Waterfowl Hunters and Ducks
Unlimited. He remembers fondly fishing with his uncle, but he never hunted with him.
He said that he used to eat fish, deer, and other animals, but he does not anymore
because he thinks that it is wrong to do so. He still respects his uncle and everyone in
this room, but he disagrees with animal exploitation. For the past five years he has
chosen a vegetarian diet because of the interests of animals. He thinks that this mindset
would be helpful in looking at this ordinance. He made reference to the comments about
tyranny and said that we all have rights and we all want to be free, but there is not
unlimited freedom. The freedom ends somewhere. He said that animals have interests
and it is not just about humans.
Kevin Young is a dog owner and breeder and he asked the Board of County
Commissioners to use common sense. He asked the County Commissioners to look at
the safety issue. He asked where the supervision was of the children who were killed by
dogs. He made reference to the breeding that happens and said that the leash laws
need to be enforced. Regarding cleanliness, when it rains with a dog in a pen, it causes
a multitude of problems. He said that this is not seen with a dog on a tether. He
suggested using a body harness to tether a dog so that there would not be embedding of
collars. If the dogs were taken care of, then there would not be a problem of embedded
collars. He said that education is very important.
Diane Genteel said that she spoke before. She said that the issues of
aggression, socialization, pet overpopulation, etc. will not be remedied by this law and it
is a question of education. Tethering is not the culprit; it's the inappropriate use of
tethering. She said that a dog on a ten-foot chain has more liberty than it would have in
a ten-foot pen.
Michael Kirk made reference to one of the committee members who is the North
Carolina Director of In Defense of Animals, and said that he is afraid of what will be next
with the tethering campaign. He is worried that if this gets passed, what will be next -
mandatory spay/neuter all dogs, taxes going through the roof, etc. He thinks that this is
a slippery slope.
Fred Stipe was bom and raised in Orange County and he is the owner of the
number one ranked male American Fox Hound in the nation. His dog competes in AKC
and USDA-sanctioned agility trials. He is also the owner of one of the greatest
obedience trained beagles in the state. He said that this proposed amendment is not the
panacea that everyone would like to see. He believes that the County would be far
better served by increasing the resources available for Animal Control to more
vigorously enforce the existing abuse and neglect statutes. He said that passage of this
31
`~["~
amendment would not solve the problem of abuse and neglect, but would create new
problems that would further complicate the job of Animal Control.
Ellen Whitaker is a volunteer with the Coalition to Unchain Dogs. She made
reference to the comments about this amendment being an infringement on rights and
said that it seems like a lot of times in the society, when we move towards justice,
always the people that are oppressors feel that their rights are being trampled. This
does not mean that it is not right to pass the laws.
Beth Oliver is opposed to the tethering ordinance. She said that she has animals
that are tethered during the day, and she lets them run free when she gets home. She
said that she tethers the dogs for their protection. She said that she loves and protects
her animals.
Chair Jacobs said that the Board of County Commissioners does take this issue
seriously and this item will be brought back in September. He said that all will be notified
of the next meeting.
32