ORD-2008-102a - Animal Control Ordinance - Tethering of Dogs

Browse Search

1 J- Tethering Committee Report July 3& 2007 Over a six-month period, the Tethering Commits met numerous times to organize itself; gather and review information about the practice of tee research ordinances to restrict or prohibit tethering in other North Carolina ju isdictions, and collect input from the public. Altogether there was one organizational meeting, two information gathering meetings, and two public input meetings. Two additional m6atings were held to formulate recommendations aid review and approve the Committee's Report and Proposal for Ordbuin a Amendwent The Committee came to its general findings on the basis of the weight of available information gathered through its meetings and work These findings are generally consistent with the concerns that hive prompted other jurisdictions to outlaw or otherwise control the practice of tethering. According to one source, there are now more than 50 jurisdictions in the United States with tethering regulations? Most of these are county and local governments, but these are also four states that have prohibited tethering. Some national organizations— including the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which has advised the County on animal sheltering issues -- advocate for prohibitions on tethering dogs. Specifically, the Committee's findings include: Humane Concerns • Tethered dogs, and certainly those that are isolated and continuously tethered, may be deprived of essential exercise and socialization. • Tethered dogs are at risk of various tethering - related injuries, such as embedded collars and accidental strangulation or hanging: • Tethered dogs are also at risk of becoming tangled and prevented from reaching food, water and shelter, and attacks by other animals in which they are usually unable to defend themselves. 2 See ht rJ/wwwIc4inganInW& am/ga t &w egistaiian.esp. 6 56