2006-11-06 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

7 Mr. Tom McCormick, 520 Village Woods Lane, Earlysville, said it does not make sense to sterilize dogs. He said the ordinance can be improved. He said Section 415 is a punitive section. nd Ms. Elke Schwartz, 211 B 2 Street, N.W., thanked the committee for its work and said she strongly supports the ordinance. She suggested that the tethering limit be changed to three hours per day. She asked Council to consider prohibiting using animals for any entertainment. She said the provision about confining in a car is important. She asked that Council consider requiring that cats be neutered and spayed. Ms. Debra Thornton, Scottsville, past president of the Kennel Club, asked how it will be determined that a dog has been sterilized. She supported the tethering provision. She said revenue is brought to the City with dog shows. She said she does not think the fee increase will make any difference. She said Council is over legislating. She said she hopes the Kennel Club will be invited to be involved in the process. Ms. Tammy Londeree, 813 Locust Avenue, Apt. C, said she has found that when dogs are in heat they are more aggressive. She said owning animals should be a privilege. She said cat owners should also be required to neuter their cats. Ms. Mary Ann Sullivan, 2835 Penny Lane, said she does not understand why a dog on her own property and under her control is more dangerous than a neutered dog. She agrees that fees are not an incentive. She said she is a dog breeder and dog trainer, and females in heat are not more aggressive than when not in season. As there were no further speakers, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Norris thanked everyone who spoke. He said there is nothing in the ordinance suggesting that dog shows be outlawed or requiring neutering. He said the ordinance is a consensus proposal. He said there are lots of studies suggesting that non- neutered dogs are not as aggressive. He said he understands that some studies say otherwise, but that is not the only reason for doing this, noting that overpopulation at the SPCA is a problem. Responding to a question from Mr. Taliaferro about Section 4-11, Mr. Brown said it is no more than a declaration of common law in Virginia and is allowed. Mr. Brown said he spoke with a representative of Ringley Brothers Circus today and their only concern was that there be adequate time to obtain a permit. He noted that the John Paul Jones Arena is not in the City, and therefore the Circus there would not be affected by this ordinance. Mr. Lynch said he would like to see the license fee for unaltered dogs higher than proposed, but realizes there is a State limit. He said Charlottesville is a very dense locality and there are different issues than in rural areas. He said he agrees that if cats are allowed outside they should be neutered. Mr. Taliaferro said the ordinance is a step in the right direction and he supports it. He said we need an education campaign to make people understand their responsibility. Ms. Hamilton said she appreciates the work of the committee, and also acknowledged the passions of the people who spoke. She said she cannot really speak to the research regarding neutering versus non-neutering. She said she appreciates the permit requirement for circuses, which is aimed at small circuses that come to the City, and she is glad to be taking action to protect those animals. She said she is happy to see the tethering provision as the City has had no tools to deal with this issue before now. She said she supports enforcement and an enforcement week. She said we need to do something about the cat situation. She said she is willing to look at staffing and increasing funds for the SPCA. Dr. Brown said that $10 is not much to pay for a license, and he would like feedback about whether behavior changes are found to be due to the increase. He also asked about the amount of revenue from the license fees. He suggested that the fee for