Staffordshire Terrier Club of America - Legislative Committee

On Tuesday November 17th, the Orange County Board of Commissioners passed an ordinance strictly limiting tethering by a 4-1 vote. Dogs can now only be tethered for three out of every twenty four hours, and there are also kennel size restrictions as well.

The Durham Kennel club, of neighboring Durham county, officially opposed the ordinance, sending a representative to read a statement authored by STCA Legislative Committee member, Kristin Tresidder, advocating the enforcement of current animal cruelty laws.

Here is a copy of the letter that was sent to the commissioners, and read at the public hearing:

“Commissioners;

Comprised of over 250 members, more than 40 of which reside in Orange County, the Durham Kennel Club (DKC) has been promoting the care and welfare of North Carolina’s dogs for over thirty-nine years. Through owner education and community involvement, the DKC has striven for the betterment of all dogs, regardless of their background. The DKC officially opposes legislation limiting the rights of responsible dog owners to keep dogs in a humane manner, including anti-tether legislation. Where there are already laws in place dealing with neglect and animal cruelty, there is no need for further legislation to address the same issues.

The Orange County Animal Cruelty ordinance currently in place states:

“All animals in Orange County are required to have the following:

* Adequate Food - Animals should be fed with foodstuff that is nutritious and suitable for the species and age group. Such foodstuff shall be provided at least every 24 hours and served in a clean receptacle, dish, or container that is free of contaminants that may be injurious to the health of the animal.

* Adequate Water - Animals must receive constant access to a supply of clean, fresh water provided in a sanitary manner.

* Adequate Shelter - Non-aquatic animals shall be provided shelter which will keep them dry, out of the direct path of winds and the sun, and at a temperature level that is healthful for the animal. The animal containment area shall be free of accumulated waste and debris so that the animal can walk or lie down without coming in contact with any such waste or debris, and a suitable method of draining shall be provided to eliminate rapidly excess water or moisture.

* Aquatic animals shall have an adequate amount of clean water in which to move..”
http://www.co.orange.nc.us/animalservices/occruelty.asp

Considering that it is entirely possible, indeed easy, to tether a dog while meeting all of the stated requirements above, it is contradictory to define tethering in and of itself an act of cruelty punishable by law. Dogs tethered in a manor inconsistent with existing laws are already protected under said laws. We support the cruelty laws as they stand now and fully condone continued efforts to enforce them against those that choose not to comply. Those dog owners who keep their dogs responsibly on tethers, meeting all the requirements of the law, should not be penalized for the negligent actions of those who choose not to abide by the law.

Every “issue” broached in the proposed anti-tether legislation is already addressed by the current animal cruelty laws: adequate shelter, veterinary care, food and water, waste removal, etc. Anti-tether bills, such as this one are couched in emotional appeals, and personal anecdotes, rather than being based on factual evidence. Pictures of starving puppies on logging chains are used to sell a horror story, one not representative of the norm, to sympathetic dog lovers, the majority of which keep their dogs strictly inside as house dogs. It is entirely possible to tether a dog responsibly in a manner consistent with, and even above and beyond, all existing levels of mandatory care. Whether an outdoor dog lives in a kennel or on a tether, the obligation exists to keep the dog responsibly, which is contingent upon a combination of love, and common sense – neither of which can be created through legislation. “

After an unfortunate, but vague run in between a pit bull and a police officer, the town of Hope Mills, North Carolina is proposing to ban all “vicious dogs” from the city limits. So far as I can tell, the definition of vicious simply means that the dog is a Pit Bull, a Rottweiller, or a Doberman. One commissioner, by the name of Collins, went so far as to go on record saying,  “Through all my years of law enforcement, pits, Doberman and Rottweilers have been the most vicious …I’m concerned about the public safety and the citizens.”  Hope Mills’ Commissioner Maynor said, “I think we need to do whatever it takes…If it’s banning them within the city, then so be it.”

While there is no breed specific wording yet in the written legislation, NC residents would do well to take a proactive approach towards this situation.  The Legislative Liasions for the NC region will be sending a letter containing both the STCA’s position on BSL and some proposals to help Hope Mills better deal with the owners of dangerous dogs of any breed.

Hope Mills city officials can be reached as follows:

Mayor Eddie Dees
Mayor Pro Tempore Robert Gorman
Commissioner Tonzie Collins
Commissioner Eddie Maynor
Commissioner Doris Luther
Commissioner Jackie Warner

Town of Hope Mills
PO Box 367
5770 Rockfish Road
Hope Mills, NC 28348

Main Phone Number: 910-424-4555
Central Fax Number: 910-424-4902

Office Hours: 8 am to 5 pm Monday thru Friday

The Durham County Board of Commissioners held a public hearing to discuss the proposed anti-tether ordinance at 7:00pm on 8/25/2008. STCA Region 3 Legislative Liaisons Kristin Tresidder and Al Bincarousky attended the meeting to speak in support of the current legislation which already addresses the animal cruelty issues possible with any means of animal confinement.

Of the seventy four speakers at the meeting, sixty seven were in support and seven against, including private citizens, representatives of the North Carolina Responsible Animal Owners Alliance, the Cape Fear APBT club, and the STCA.  The seven speakers who were against the ordinance and in support of responsible animal confinement, be it in kennels or on tethers, were often subjected to derisive heckling and veiled threats by the proponents of the tethering ban and kennel size restrictions.

Those in favor of the ban relied almost solely on anecdotal evidence and personal grievances against neighbors to bolster their case, while those against were able to offer scientific studies and existing laws with subsequent penalties as evidence that the new ordinance banning tethering was unnecessary and would not be more effective than the current statutes.

In retrospect, it would have been useful to speak at greater length about the impracticalities of the kenneling size restrictions, as that is being largely ignored by proponents of the ban, as well as those who are against it.  Many more people keep their dogs in kennels than on runs, and it is doubtful that all of them meet the minimum size requirements proposed in the new ordinance.  If this law passes, the use of a 5′x10′ kennel will become a crime in Durham County, no matter how small the dog it contains, and that could be an eye opener for many who thought that they were in simply favor of ‘unchaining the dogs.’

On August 25th, the Durham County Board of Commissioners will hear both supporters and opponents of a proposed tethering ordinance. Amongst other things, the ordinance would completely ban tethering a dog while unattended, for any length of time, and mandate certain square footages for kennel dogs: ie a dog twenty pounds or less would have to be kenneled in an enclosure off at least one hundred square feet, or a 10′x10′ kennel. Any dog over twenty pounds would require two hundred square feet, or a 10′x20′ kennel.

The following is a copy of the letter sent by the Region 3 STCA Legislative Liaisons to the five County Commisioners:

The Staffordshire Terrier Club of America opposes any and all legislation limiting the rights of dog owners to keep dogs in a responsible manner, including anti-tether legislation. Where there are already laws in place dealing with neglect and animal cruelty, there is no need for further legislation to address the same issues.

The Durham County Animal Cruelty code currently in place states:
“It is not considered animal cruelty to house an animal outdoors. However, all animals must be provided adequate food, a constant supply of clean, fresh water and adequate shelter from the weather at all times.

Animals that are tethered outdoors are required to have no less than 10 feet of chain with swivels on both ends and are to be tethered in such a manner that the animal cannot become entangled. A chain or tether cannot exceed 10% of the animals body weight. A chain cannot be used as a primary collar. For the purpose of chaining or tethering a collar must be made of nylon or leather

It is unlawful to allow a collar, rope or chain to become embedded in or cause injury to an animal’s neck. It is important to monitor a growing animal’s collar for the necessity of adjustment. It is also unlawful to use a choke or pinch collar to be used as a primary collar when the animal is left unsupervised.”
http://www.durhamcountync.gov/departments/anml/Animal_Cruelty.html
Considering that it is entirely possible to tether a dog and meet all of the stated requirements above, it is contradictory to define tethering in and of itself an act of cruelty. Dogs tethered in a manor inconsistent with existing laws are already protected under said laws. We support the laws as they stand now and fully condone continued efforts to enforce them against those that choose not to comply. Those dog owners who keep their dogs responsibly on tethers, meeting all the requirements of the law, should not be penalized for the negligent actions of those who choose not to abide by the law.

Please add your voice by either coming out to the meeting at 7:00pm on August 25th, or by writing, emailing, or calling the following Durham County Commissioners:

Ellen W. Reckhow
Chairman
E-mail: ereckhow@aol.com
Mailing Address:
11 Pine Top Place
Durham, NC 27705
Phone Numbers:
(919) 383-3883 (H)
(919) 383-3833 (Fax)

Michael D. Page
Vice Chairman
E-mail: mpage@durhamcountync.gov
Mailing Address:
702 Basil Drive
Durham, NC 27713
Phone Numbers:
(919) 361-2146 (H)
(919) 699-3299 (C)
(919) 806-0866 (Fax)

Lewis A. Cheek
E-mail: lewis_cheek@nc.rr.com
Mailing Address:
5105 Copper Ridge Drive, #308
Durham, NC 27707
Phone Numbers:
(919) 401-8538 (Fax)

Philip R Cousin, Jr.
E-mail: prcousin@earthlink.net
Mailing Address:
509 Wellingham Drive
Durham, NC 27713
Phone Numbers:
(919) 683-1379 (W)
(919) 572-2257 (H)
(919) 572-9161 (Fax)

Becky M Heron
E-mail: bmheron@durhamcountync.gov
Mailing Address:
4425 Kerley Road
Durham, NC 27705
Phone Numbers:
(919) 489-4402 (H)
(919) 419-1398 (Fax)

A picture can say a thousand words…and help fight legislation at the same time!

The new and improved STCA Legislative Committee has found a new way to allow you to “showcase” your wonderful Staf with everyone in attendance at the banquet! The slide show will also be available on CD for purchase during the Club Banquet.

For a donation, your AST can be seen on the “Big Screen” during our National Club Banquet. Your donations will go to help build our club’s Legislative Defense Fund, with proceeds earmarked to help various clubs around the country defray the costs of battling crippling BSL and various other laws and lawsuits aimed at making owning our breed, or purebred dogs in general a thing of the past.

For the full specifics on this fundraiser please check out the page below.

2008 National Specialty Legislative Committee Fundraiser

Also make sure to check out the new region specific legislative pages by clicking your appropriate region on the map found on our STCA Legislative Zones page.

The Legislative Committee and the STCA thank you for your support!