Browse
Search
Vicious Animal Summary
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Animal Services Advisory Board
>
Other Meeting Materials
>
2013
>
05_May 2013
>
Vicious Animal Summary
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2018 8:49:04 AM
Creation date
6/15/2018 8:49:02 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Vicious Animals in the Proposed Unified Animal Ordinance <br />For Orange County, North Carolina <br /> <br />May 15, 2013 <br /> <br />Introduction <br />Attached is the section of the current version of the proposed unified ordinance pertaining to vicious <br />animals. My goal is to identify what I will call “the elements” of this section to assure that the Animal <br />Services Advisory Board has clarity about these elements. I will do so by creating a context for receiving <br />the attached, and of course, I will be glad to discuss specific elements of the attached at the board’s <br />request. <br /> <br />Creating a Unified Ordinance <br />Recall that the unified ordinance comes from our experience with the existing county animal control <br />ordinance and the comparable ordinances in the towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro. All three of these <br />ordinances are available online at http://orangecountync.gov/AnimalServices/info.asp. <br />Our working group consisted of the staff attorney for Animal Services, the Carrboro Police Chief, a <br />Carrboro Police Captain, the staff attorney for the Chapel Hill Police Department with animal control <br />responsibilities, our Animal Control Manager and me in my role as Animal Services Director. Our work <br />practice was to compare the same or similar section of the three ordinances and to decide which made <br />the most sense in light of our combined experience in providing effective animal control services in our <br />respective jurisdictions. <br />In doing so, we identified some key gaps based upon our experience. These gaps are: <br />1. Required microchipping for identification <br />2. Clearly defined enclosure requirements <br />3. Enclosure requirements for animals declared under local as well as state law <br />4. Bites and aggression on owner’s property <br />5. Impoundment authority as needed to assure public safety <br />6. Appeal process of declarations made under local law <br />More will be said below about these gaps. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.