Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
<br /> <br />Pa <br />g <br />e <br />1 <br />Unified Animal Ordinance Considerations <br />Orange County Animal Services <br />March 14, 2018 <br /> <br />Below is a current listing of considerations for amendments to the Unified Animal Ordinance. <br />The first two sections are based upon the experience of the Animal Services Hearing Panel Pool. <br />The next two sections are based upon concerns residents have raised with the Animal Services <br />Advisory Board as well as county staff. The final section is based upon further legal review of <br />the Unified Animal Ordinance. <br />Hearing Based Language Clarification <br />1. Sec.4-42. (b) (3) <br />a. Language: “Without provocation has injured, maimed or killed a pet or domestic <br />livestock, except where such animal has bitten or killed a pet or domestic <br />livestock that is on the land of another without permission or is defending a <br />person” (italics added). <br />b. Issue one: The exception appears to provide a significant gap. One animal may <br />kill another animal when both animals are off the property of their owner, and if <br />the victimized animal is in the yard of a third person without permission, no <br />declaration may be made of the aggressor dog. <br />c. Issue two: “Injured” as a term may not cover the impact of one dog on another <br />dog in an encounter. In one case, a large breed dog left its property and pinned <br />another dog to the ground but the latter dog had no apparent injuries. (My <br />personal opinion is that this is a very exceptional situation and it may not be <br />possible or desirable to craft language that applies to this situation.) <br />General Policy Issue Based upon Hearings <br />Several issues have arisen from the hearing experience about whether the ordinance needs to <br />be more flexible with respect to the declaration of an animal as dangerous. An ongoing <br />concern for some members of the Animal Services Hearing Panel Pool is that “one size fits all,” <br />that is, that all dogs should be declared a danger on the basis of a single incident and also that a <br />dog should not necessarily be subject to strict restrictions based upon a single “oops.” <br />The following possibilities are identified for the purpose of facilitating further discussion of this <br />multifaceted issue: <br />1. Offense citation: Instead of proceeding directly to a declaration, a citation may be <br />issued for the first offense under the ordinance. Accordingly, a second offense would