Browse
Search
Agenda - 11-01-2018 6-a - Unified Animal Control Ordinance Amendments
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2018
>
Agenda - 11-01-2018 Regular Meeting
>
Agenda - 11-01-2018 6-a - Unified Animal Control Ordinance Amendments
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/26/2018 1:22:44 AM
Creation date
10/26/2018 1:29:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/1/2018
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
6-a
Document Relationships
Agenda - 11-01-2018 Regular Board Meeting
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\2010's\2018\Agenda - 11-01-2018 Regular Meeting
Minutes 11-01-2018
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2018
RES-2018-064 Amendment to Chapter 4 - Animal Control Ordinance
(Message)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Resolutions\2010-2019\2018
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
4 <br /> of similar declarations, specifically Wake and Pasquotank counties, require 36 <br /> months to pass without incident before a declaration can be reviewed. <br /> Also, a review of relatively recent violations of Ordinance restrictions on <br /> dangerous animals resulting in criminal summons revealed that, of eight <br /> violations, four occurred less than one year from the declaration, and four <br /> occurred more than one year from the declaration. Of the four occurring more <br /> than one year from the declaration, two violations occurred approximately two <br /> years after declaration, and the other two violations occurred three or more <br /> years after the declaration. <br /> Further, the following table shows the number of dangerous dog and/or animal <br /> declarations made for the period 2016 to 2018. The declarations reported in <br /> the table are made under state law, local ordinance or both. The bites all <br /> involve reports Animal Services has received about a dog biting one or more <br /> people (as these bites are required to be reported under state law). <br /> Declarations Dog Bites <br /> 2018 (YTD) 40 109 <br /> 2017 44 195 <br /> 2016 23 163 <br /> As the table shows, the number of declarations each year is often upwards of <br /> 50. These declarations are often but not always made on the basis of a dog <br /> bite. In some instances, they are made as a result of injury caused by a dog to <br /> another domestic animal off its owner's property. In others, they are made on <br /> the basis of a dog behaving aggressively toward a person off of its owner's <br /> property. <br /> Finally, the issues addressed on appeal of a dangerous animal declaration are <br /> different than those addressed by the proposed review. An appeal is made to <br /> the hearing panel pool and then Superior Court immediately following a <br /> declaration, in order to determine if the incident forming the basis of the <br /> declaration (often, a bite to a person or other animal) occurred and justified the <br /> declaration under statute and/or Ordinance. The declaration may be overturned <br /> if the hearing panel or a judge determines the incident did not occur or the <br /> elements of the offense as defined in the Ordinance have not been met. <br /> A review is made with the understanding that the incident occurred and justified <br /> the declaration (which actually may have been appealed). However, the <br /> review examines not only the severity of the underlying facts but several other <br /> factors, including measures taken by the owner since the declaration to prevent <br /> reoccurrence, to determine whether a similar incident is likely to happen again, <br /> and if there does not appear to be a continued risk to the public safety, the <br /> declaration can be rescinded following review. <br /> 3. Animal Control Officers raised concerns about their authority under the Ordinance to <br /> impound animals subject to cruel treatment, as Section 4-41(k), Mistreatment of animals, <br /> could be read as allowing for only the impoundment of animals subject to tethering. The <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.