Agenda - 09-22-2008 - 2 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

37 the Chapel Hill News that brought up the tethering issue again. I was astonished that the issue of tethering was still being debated. Mr. Hart wrote that basically there were two distinct camps of thought -the anti- tethering group that says that tethering can cause physical or psychological damage to a dog, and apro-tethering group, composed mainly of hunters and dog breeders who say that tethering is humane and that neglect by people is the real problem. It seemed like one major group - I would think they can be best called the silent majority -are families who have one or two dogs that are humanely tethered and are played with in their backyards. I was concerned enough that this group was not being represented that I stand here tonight. I read about how restrictions on tethering in other jurisdictions decreased dog bites, reduced unwanted litters, and reduced cruelty due to improper tethering. Well, our dog lives in our backyard, so even if she did have a mind to bit someone, which she hasn't had a mind to yet, the person would have to be in our backyard. She has been spayed, so puppies are not an issue. With regards to cruelty, Lily is a member of our family. Her tether has been installed properly and she always has food, water, shade, and room to run and dig. On this note, let's do some math. She is on a trolley line 60 feet long and she can go 19 feet each way from the center of the line. How many square feet can Lily play? The answer is 2280 square feet. Our house is only around 1500 square feet! This seems more humane than 100-200 square feet in a kennel or a 10-square foot crate. Attached to my talk is a picture of Lily's domain, where she can run, dig, and play -either with us or by herself - sleep....whatever she wants to do. By the way, we certainly interact with her much more on a line than we would with her stuck in a kennel. I believe the main issue is not how a dog is confined, but how well a pet owner takes care and interacts with an animal. Key words -pet owner responsibility. I'm all for it. I once found a dog....in a side yard....on a chain....with a collar that had grown into the dog's neck. I knocked on the owner's door, and they said that there wasn't a problem and that they were applying some sort of lotion to the neck....and then to get lost....or something like that. I called animal control ASAP and the dog was removed. The chain was not the problem -neglect was. I strongly support the laws against animal cruelty. This whole issue reminds me of gun control -some are adamantly against all guns and others start quoting the 2"d Amendment to have as many guns as they want. Neither side promotes gun-owner responsibility to solve the problem. Bottom line -our dog Lily is one of the vast majorities of dogs that are humanely tethered and cared for. I resent the fact that this proposed bill assumes that we are not taking care of our dog. I take responsibility for her care and safety. If any of you Commissioners wish to come over and visit Lily, just let me know." S. Henri McClees said that she is the proud lobbyist of the North Carolina Sporting Dog Association. She said that her clients are great guys and they love their dogs. She said that the issue is really will the County Commissioners forbid her clients to own their dogs and to care for them as they see fit. Based on this issue, she asked the County Commissioners to reject this ordinance. She said that this proposal demands that all dog owners comply with the demands of the small majority. This would pit the citizens against each other in a needless battle that sets the stage for constant conflict. She said that this is about the rights of the people. She said that the citizens have the right to be protected from any tyranny that would be imposed upon them by a small majority. She said that "the few" want to order all citizens to comply essentially with their philosophy and they do not distinguish between animals that are abused or not 29