Agenda - 09-20-1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

5434 . - 023 addressed in any number of ways. If the concern is with the requirement contained in Section Xl and the public nuisance definition that dogs be maintained at all times under the control, physically or otherwise, by their owners, it can be addressed by removing this condition county-wide and by creating a process for clearly defined "districts" within the county to petition for the full application of Section XL Under this proposal the first patak;raph ti of Section Xi would be re-written as follows: ' .4•=1 I Section XL From sunset until sunrise, it shall be unlawful for any owner or keeper of a dog to permit it to run at large or be off the premises of its owner or keeper and not under the restraint of a competent person. Upon on Animal Control Officer's observation of a dog running at large or off the premises of its owner or keeper and not under the control of a competent person, said officer shall impound said dog. [followed by the newly recommended provision related to hunting dogs). The public nuisance definition would be amended by eliminating subsection (a) which defines as a nuisance an animal repeatedly found at large off the premises of its owner or keeper. Finally a new section would be added which permits the creation of a district or districts (defined for example as contiguous property owned by a certain number of people consisting of a certain area) to petition the Board for provisions the same as those now contained in Section XI and the public nuisance definition. 7. An issue not raised at the public hearing but subsequently raised by the Health Director which has merit is the addition of a remedy to deal with problems which might otherwise result in impoundment. Under certain circumstances the Health Director could be authorized to issue a • *.