2/20/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EB 2 0 1990 BOOK because the Police Department and the Sheriff's Dept. have their priorities also and because 4 or 5 animal control officers for the entire county is just way, way understaffed. Commissioner Bird understood that the insurance requirement only applies to someone who has a dog that has been declared vicious, and Attorney Brennan confirmed that to be correct. Commissioner Bowman asked Joan Carlsen, executive director of the Humane Society, to come to the microphone and explain what she feels would be the best type of restraining device for a dog riding in the back of a pickup truck. Mrs. Carlsen felt cages are appropriate, but with cages, there is a concern about ventilation and heat build-up within a carrier. She suggested that the ordinance read that whatever type of restraining device is used, that it be something that is appropriately manufactured for that purpose so that we wouldn't get people tying their animals with just ropes. A choke collar with a chain would be the worse type of restraint. In her opinion, a collar would be more appropriate than a harness. Commissioner Scurlock asked Attorney Brennan get with the appropriate people about the restraining device because he wanted that to be more liberal than it is. Commissioner Wheeler didn't want us to forget that the main purpose of the ordinance is to protect people, and secondly, the dog. Attorney Brennan understood from the discussion today that the Board would prefer to see that the animal is not just tied on one side and needs to be cross -tied in some way. Commissioner Bird had a problem with that because he didn't feel it is necessary to be cross -tied. He felt the animal could be center -tied, and that would make it a lot easier for owners of dogs who want to use the bed of their truck for other purposes such as hauling construction materials, etc. He would like to see us allow them to put in a center eye -bolt in the bed of the 36