Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Tethering Committee Report July 30th, 2007 <br />tethering was not necessarily inhumane, and that for some individuals and animals, it could be the <br />only possible or effective means of restraint. <br />a� <br />Also at these sessions were representatives of an area hunting association, the Eno River Coon <br />Hunters Association, and other interested parties who expressed two main concerns about the <br />restriction of tethering. One. was that they would not be, able to hold their very successful annual <br />field trial if tethering was prohibited. In this regard, they stressed that this event draws people from <br />around the country and generates considerable income for the County. <br />Their other concern was the keeping of hunting dogs themselves. They emphasized that these dogs <br />were often, if not always, kept on tethers and that, in their opinion, it was sometimes the best way to <br />keep such dogs. Advantages included the easy separation of incompatible dogs, and the allowance <br />of greater space on a daily basis. Finally, they stated that dogs can he neglected in a variety of <br />situations that do not involve tethering, for instance, the inappropriate confinement of dogs in small <br />kennels and crates. <br />Committee Deliberations <br />The Committee weighed testimony from the public and came to a series of recommendations that <br />are intended to address some, if not all, of the concerns raised in the public testimony. The <br />Committee believes that tethering raises significant humane, public safety and community welfare <br />concerns, and that the continuous tethering of dogs is inhumane. The Committee concurs that dogs <br />can be neglected in other circumstances not involving tethering, but believes that there are <br />significant public safety and humane issues unique to tethering that merit action by the BOCC. <br />Because it believes that tethering can be humane for limited time periods under certain <br />circumstances, the Committee is proposing a three -hour limit per 24 hours with specifications for <br />appropriate tethers and equipment. The Committee believes that this should reduce any hardship <br />imposed by this restriction, and accommodate the needs of those members of the public who wish to <br />tie their dogs outside for limited periods of time. More generally, the Committee has attempted to <br />limit the hardship imposed by this restriction by recommending a phase -in period for the law that <br />13 <br />