Post by michele5611 on Mar 19, 2013 16:39:33 GMT -5
hamptonroads.com/2013/03/dogtethering-restrictions-council-agenda
By Jeff Sheler
The Virginian-Pilot
© March 18, 2013
SUFFOLK
A move to restrict dog-tethering in the city appears to have hit a snag, and that has at least one member of City Council more than a little upset.
The council was supposed to consider an ordinance this week that would set strict limits on how, and for how long, dogs may be tied or chained outdoors.
Right now, Suffolk is one of three Hampton Roads cities that doesn't regulate tethering - a practice animal rights advocates consider inhumane.
On Feb. 20, the council adopted a motion instructing the city attorney to present a draft ordinance at its March 20 meeting.
But when the meeting's agenda came out late last week, the ordinance wasn't on it. Instead it listed an informal discussion of tethering during the council's afternoon work session.
That caught Councilman Mike Duman by surprise.
"I'm disappointed to say the least," said Duman, who is spearheading the move to restrict tethering. "I'm not sure what's going to happen now."
The council discussed potential ordinance provisions during its March 6 work session. While it was clear some details still needed to be worked out, the discussion brought the broad outlines of an ordinance into sharper focus.
"Apparently, some council members think we need more input from the city staff and the police chief on enforcement," Duman said. "I still think it should be on the agenda. That's what we voted to do and it hasn't been rescinded."
He said he has heard from dozens of constituents who want to speak on the subject.
"I've been telling them to come on Wednesday, but now if it's off the agenda, they won't be allowed to appear as agenda speakers. I'm not happy about that."
Mayor Linda Johnson said it became clear by the end of the March 6 discussion "a majority of the council thought we needed to hear more from the chief and the city staff" to help clear up some unresolved issues.
Among the provisions council members seemed to agree on were that tethered dogs must be given adequate space - enough to allow them to "easily stand, sit, lie, turn about and make all other normal body movements in a comfortable, normal position."
They agreed the tether must be at least three times the length of the dog, be attached to a "properly applied collar, halter or harness that is not made primarily of metal," and have swivels at both ends. The tether could not weigh more than one eighth of the dog's weight.
They also agreed tethers must be positioned so a dog doesn't become entangled or risk falling over an object or edge, resulting in strangulation. Dogs could not be tethered outdoors during extreme weather, and dogs younger than 6 months could not be tethered at all.
What council members could not agree on was the length of time dogs could be tethered. Some suggested a maximum of three hours a day, which is what ordinances in Norfolk, Virginia Beach and Portsmouth allow.
Hampton bans tethering outright. Chesapeake and Newport News have no limits.
Duman said he is willing to allow up to 10 hours a day to allow people to keep their dogs outdoors while they are at work.
"I've looked at tethering ordinances around the country and many of them do it that way," he said. "I want to be reasonable."
Johnson and Councilman Jeffrey Gardy indicated they would prefer a total ban.
Police Chief Thomas Bennett told the council a total ban would be easier to enforce than a prescribed time limit because officers would have to monitor a residence to document violations.
To do that, Bennett said, "I might need some additional help."
Duman says enforcement should not be a problem because "most people are responsible and will abide by the rules. We just need to give them clear guidelines."
"People who have an emotional attachment to their dog and consider it part of the family won't treat it in an irresponsible fashion," he said. "Others, who consider it an object or an alarm system, won't keep the dog if means dealing with new restrictions. I don't think there's much in-between."
Duman says if money and enforcement become issues, "the only alternative might be a total ban."
He said he may ask that the ordinance be placed on the April 3 agenda so residents will have a chance to speak.
By Jeff Sheler
The Virginian-Pilot
© March 18, 2013
SUFFOLK
A move to restrict dog-tethering in the city appears to have hit a snag, and that has at least one member of City Council more than a little upset.
The council was supposed to consider an ordinance this week that would set strict limits on how, and for how long, dogs may be tied or chained outdoors.
Right now, Suffolk is one of three Hampton Roads cities that doesn't regulate tethering - a practice animal rights advocates consider inhumane.
On Feb. 20, the council adopted a motion instructing the city attorney to present a draft ordinance at its March 20 meeting.
But when the meeting's agenda came out late last week, the ordinance wasn't on it. Instead it listed an informal discussion of tethering during the council's afternoon work session.
That caught Councilman Mike Duman by surprise.
"I'm disappointed to say the least," said Duman, who is spearheading the move to restrict tethering. "I'm not sure what's going to happen now."
The council discussed potential ordinance provisions during its March 6 work session. While it was clear some details still needed to be worked out, the discussion brought the broad outlines of an ordinance into sharper focus.
"Apparently, some council members think we need more input from the city staff and the police chief on enforcement," Duman said. "I still think it should be on the agenda. That's what we voted to do and it hasn't been rescinded."
He said he has heard from dozens of constituents who want to speak on the subject.
"I've been telling them to come on Wednesday, but now if it's off the agenda, they won't be allowed to appear as agenda speakers. I'm not happy about that."
Mayor Linda Johnson said it became clear by the end of the March 6 discussion "a majority of the council thought we needed to hear more from the chief and the city staff" to help clear up some unresolved issues.
Among the provisions council members seemed to agree on were that tethered dogs must be given adequate space - enough to allow them to "easily stand, sit, lie, turn about and make all other normal body movements in a comfortable, normal position."
They agreed the tether must be at least three times the length of the dog, be attached to a "properly applied collar, halter or harness that is not made primarily of metal," and have swivels at both ends. The tether could not weigh more than one eighth of the dog's weight.
They also agreed tethers must be positioned so a dog doesn't become entangled or risk falling over an object or edge, resulting in strangulation. Dogs could not be tethered outdoors during extreme weather, and dogs younger than 6 months could not be tethered at all.
What council members could not agree on was the length of time dogs could be tethered. Some suggested a maximum of three hours a day, which is what ordinances in Norfolk, Virginia Beach and Portsmouth allow.
Hampton bans tethering outright. Chesapeake and Newport News have no limits.
Duman said he is willing to allow up to 10 hours a day to allow people to keep their dogs outdoors while they are at work.
"I've looked at tethering ordinances around the country and many of them do it that way," he said. "I want to be reasonable."
Johnson and Councilman Jeffrey Gardy indicated they would prefer a total ban.
Police Chief Thomas Bennett told the council a total ban would be easier to enforce than a prescribed time limit because officers would have to monitor a residence to document violations.
To do that, Bennett said, "I might need some additional help."
Duman says enforcement should not be a problem because "most people are responsible and will abide by the rules. We just need to give them clear guidelines."
"People who have an emotional attachment to their dog and consider it part of the family won't treat it in an irresponsible fashion," he said. "Others, who consider it an object or an alarm system, won't keep the dog if means dealing with new restrictions. I don't think there's much in-between."
Duman says if money and enforcement become issues, "the only alternative might be a total ban."
He said he may ask that the ordinance be placed on the April 3 agenda so residents will have a chance to speak.