County commissioners will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. Aug. 25 on a dog anti-tethering ordinance being considered for 2010.
For more than two years, animal advocates and the county have discussed implementing such a law, based on the premise that chaining or otherwise tethering animals outside is cruel and inhumane, and that the practice contributes to constant barking and even causes dogs to become overly aggressive and attack people who cross into their territory.
The board of commissioners had asked the county's Animal Control Advisory Committee to look at the issue and draft a proposed ordinance.
At a work session Monday, commissioners saw this draft (PDF attachment) and scheduled a public hearing for the end of the month, to be held at the commissioners’ chambers at 200 E. Main St.
The document shows the county's current animal control ordinance with proposed changes either crossed out or added in the yellow highlighted portion.
Amanda Arrington, chairwoman of the county's Animal Control Advisory Committee, plans to meet with her committee to further revise that draft to address some of the commissioners' questions and concerns.
That revision is scheduled to be ready at the Aug. 25 public hearing, Arrington said.
If necessary, commissioners could hold a second public hearing in September, just before the board votes on the final proposed ordinance.
If commissioners approve the new law, it would go into effect after a 15-month education campaign by the county. The ordinance would be enforced by the county’s animal control department in the entire county, including the city limits.
Orange County commissioners also have been discussing a similar proposed ordinance for that county.
We've written several stories about the issue in both counties. Here is a list of the ones available on our Web site.
We'll have more to come this weekend in The Durham News.
Comments
Follow-up article
Sun, 08/10/2008 - 20:56 — Anonymous (not verified)While this blog announces the upcoming hearing in a very fair way, your piece in Saturdays N&O was incredibly biased. The woman you featured allowed one of her dogs to have at least one litter of homeless puppies (her other dog pictured in your article has also had puppies as is evident from her sagging teets), allowed those puppies, sans one, to 'wander off' to unknown fates (my guess is they were either hit by cars, died of a preventable virus or were found and chained in someone elses yard awaiting yet another homeess litter) and says she feels 'bad' about chaining them when she leaves for work (likely because it is one of very few times a week she actually sees her dogs.) By virtue of her feeling 'bad' and that she gives her dog ice cubes when it is hot excuses her proven history of poor dog ownership and the unnecessary suffering of her dogs?
If you truly believed half of what you wrote, I certainly hope you do not have dogs. Most of us know they deserve better than that.