Vicki
Administrator
Lack of officers a problem for Kanawha anti-tethering law
by Cara Bailey
Daily Mail staff Monday July 20, 2009
CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- After wrapping up public hearings on a proposed anti-tethering ordinance, Kanawha County officials are left with the daunting task of figuring out how to enforce new rules meant to protect man's best friend.
More than 130 people turned out for a series of meetings about a proposed ordinance that would limit how and when animals could be chained.
About 80 showed up at hearings last week in Belle and Cross Lanes. More than 50 filled the county commission courtroom for a hearing the week before.
The majority seemed to favor imposing new restrictions on how long pet owners could tie up their dogs.
But there has been some question about how to enforce such a law in Kanawha County, a 900-square-mile area with only two humane officers.
Kim Hutton, president of the Kanawha-Charleston Animal Shelter's board, said that concern is still valid. It's something the animal shelter is working on, with the help of the county commission.
"We're still looking at the number of humane officers," she said. "That's why we want to work with the commission to develop the ordinance, to make sure we're not overstretched."
County law clerk Andrew Gunnoe said a major concern during the recent public hearings was dogs running along roadways and through neighborhoods.
Officials say they're trying to craft the ordinance to balance worries about pets running loose with concerns about animals being tethered for extended periods of time.
The anti-tethering law would restrict the number of hours an animal could be chained.
"This would be for people who continuously chain animals 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year," Gunnoe said. "It would just help give the humane society more teeth to prosecute people."
The ordinance became a topic of debate in May after an incident in the Frame area. Officials said they had heard about a dog that drowned after it was left alone and chained to a stake during a flash food.
Similar incidents in the Huntington area prompted leaders there to consider an anti-tethering ordinance. But just last week the ordinance's sponsor, Councilman Jim Ritter, asked for the proposal to be tabled after he became concerned it was too difficult to enforce, the Herald-Dispatch reported.
In Kanawha County, Gunnoe said one idea would be to have a progressive scale of enforcement. First-time offenders would get a warning but would face harsher penalties each subsequent time they were caught breaking the law. The penalties could vary from fines to having their animal taken away to possible jail time.
Right now, Kanawha County has no animal ordinance. State laws regulate tethering and other animal control issues in towns and unincorporated areas that don't have local regulations.
It will take several more weeks to write an ordinance, and Gunnoe said a draft should go before the commission by September.
Hutton, the shelter board president, said she saw more support for the ordinance than opposition during the public hearings.
"I think it's going very well," she said. "My blanket statement at the meetings has been on behalf of the board. We are united in supporting the countywide anti-tethering ordinance."
Gunnoe agreed that most of the people at the meetings were there in support of the anti-tethering ordinance.
"There has been overwhelming positive support for the ordinance," he said.
However, a handful of people have argued against it. Hutton said there is worry from residents in some other counties that an anti-tethering law in Kanawha County will have an effect elsewhere.
"There has been some opposition from Cabell County," she said. "They're worried that if we pass this, it's going to spread."
http://www.dailymail.com/News/Kanawha/200907190290?page=2&build=cache
by Cara Bailey
Daily Mail staff Monday July 20, 2009
CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- After wrapping up public hearings on a proposed anti-tethering ordinance, Kanawha County officials are left with the daunting task of figuring out how to enforce new rules meant to protect man's best friend.
More than 130 people turned out for a series of meetings about a proposed ordinance that would limit how and when animals could be chained.
About 80 showed up at hearings last week in Belle and Cross Lanes. More than 50 filled the county commission courtroom for a hearing the week before.
The majority seemed to favor imposing new restrictions on how long pet owners could tie up their dogs.
But there has been some question about how to enforce such a law in Kanawha County, a 900-square-mile area with only two humane officers.
Kim Hutton, president of the Kanawha-Charleston Animal Shelter's board, said that concern is still valid. It's something the animal shelter is working on, with the help of the county commission.
"We're still looking at the number of humane officers," she said. "That's why we want to work with the commission to develop the ordinance, to make sure we're not overstretched."
County law clerk Andrew Gunnoe said a major concern during the recent public hearings was dogs running along roadways and through neighborhoods.
Officials say they're trying to craft the ordinance to balance worries about pets running loose with concerns about animals being tethered for extended periods of time.
The anti-tethering law would restrict the number of hours an animal could be chained.
"This would be for people who continuously chain animals 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year," Gunnoe said. "It would just help give the humane society more teeth to prosecute people."
The ordinance became a topic of debate in May after an incident in the Frame area. Officials said they had heard about a dog that drowned after it was left alone and chained to a stake during a flash food.
Similar incidents in the Huntington area prompted leaders there to consider an anti-tethering ordinance. But just last week the ordinance's sponsor, Councilman Jim Ritter, asked for the proposal to be tabled after he became concerned it was too difficult to enforce, the Herald-Dispatch reported.
In Kanawha County, Gunnoe said one idea would be to have a progressive scale of enforcement. First-time offenders would get a warning but would face harsher penalties each subsequent time they were caught breaking the law. The penalties could vary from fines to having their animal taken away to possible jail time.
Right now, Kanawha County has no animal ordinance. State laws regulate tethering and other animal control issues in towns and unincorporated areas that don't have local regulations.
It will take several more weeks to write an ordinance, and Gunnoe said a draft should go before the commission by September.
Hutton, the shelter board president, said she saw more support for the ordinance than opposition during the public hearings.
"I think it's going very well," she said. "My blanket statement at the meetings has been on behalf of the board. We are united in supporting the countywide anti-tethering ordinance."
Gunnoe agreed that most of the people at the meetings were there in support of the anti-tethering ordinance.
"There has been overwhelming positive support for the ordinance," he said.
However, a handful of people have argued against it. Hutton said there is worry from residents in some other counties that an anti-tethering law in Kanawha County will have an effect elsewhere.
"There has been some opposition from Cabell County," she said. "They're worried that if we pass this, it's going to spread."
http://www.dailymail.com/News/Kanawha/200907190290?page=2&build=cache