My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/20/1990
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1990
>
2/20/1990
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:02:44 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 8:48:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/20/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
85
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
PF - <br />1 0 'A <br />BOOK '19 [,,,Uu 291 <br />Chairman Eggert asked if this would be just for vicious <br />dogs, and Commissioner Scurlock emphasized that it would not, as <br />this ordinance was more encompassing than just for vicious dogs. <br />Commissioner Wheeler didn't like to see any dogs loose in <br />the back of pickups, especially those that look like they are <br />going to take your leg off. He didn't feel that people should <br />have to submit to that intimidation just because someone wants to <br />carry their dog around in the back of a pickup truck. <br />Chairman Eggert pointed out that as far as complaints are <br />concerned, a clear distinction in the ordinance between a <br />nuisance animal and a vicious animal. <br />Chairman Eggert opened the Public Hearing, and asked if <br />anyone wished to be heard in this manner. <br />Terry Aston of K-9 Services in Ft. Pierce commended the <br />County Attorney's Office and the Animal Control Department for <br />their efforts in the proposed ordinance, but was concerned about <br />the limitations the ordinance would place on personal protection <br />dogs, who are usually pets as well, and private sentry dogs, etc. <br />His firm supplies and/or trains personal protection dogs for <br />people and a substantial amount of their business comes from <br />Indian River County. When a dog owner wants his dog to be <br />trained, they first test the dog's temperment, and if they don't <br />like it, they decline to train it. Mr. Aston felt that the <br />proposed ordinance should include an exemption for personal <br />protection dogs, and requested that paragraph (e) on page 5 be <br />reinstated in this ordinance: "(e) This section shall not apply <br />to animals trained for security or guard purposes, provided the <br />incident involved occurred during the course and scope of such <br />duty. Nor shall any incident be deemed an offense if it occurs <br />within the real property limits of the owner, provided the <br />property is conspicuously marked as to the presence of the <br />dangerous or vicious animal." Mr. Aston noted that they just <br />want people to understand that if they wish to purchase a well <br />27 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.