Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, April 12, 1994 TAG: 9404120158
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: B-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: JAN VERTEFEUILLE STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
Supervisor Harry Nickens said he'd rather put money into a spaying/neutering program than into enforcing an ordinance to prevent cats from running at large, something critics argue is impossible.
Hiring and equipping another animal control officer to deal with cats would cost $62,000 next year; Nickens suggested instead that money - or even half that much - be devoted to a pet sterilization program.
"You can do a whole lot in spaying and neutering for $30,000," he said. "It might do a lot more good than trying to add officers on the road. It would do more good than rounding up cats after they're a problem."
Twice now, supervisors have sent the ordinance back to legal staff for changes. And still supervisors appear to have no consensus on what they want in an ordinance.
Board members say they've gotten calls and letters from people on both sides of the issue who feel strongly. A letter to the editor last week called the supervisors "nuts," and asked if regulating squirrels and rats was next on the agenda.
"It is my contention," Supervisor Ed Kohinke responded, "that the real `nuts' in this issue are the irresponsible pet owners who allow them to intrude onto the property of others."
Supervisor Bob Johnson said he thinks the ordinance in some form will pass tonight, altough all sections may not pass. But he supports putting something on the books that gives residents some redress when neighbors' pets are a nuisance. He said he would support a spaying/neutering program.
The board has spent more time drafting this ordinance - and heard from more constituents - than they usually do on county regulations.
"It's amazing the amount of time we've spent on this," Nickens said. "You know the reason? It's not anything we can get a handle on. The problem is not having an educated populace doing what they should for their animals."
The Humane Society of the United States points to Fort Wayne, Ind., as an example of a locality with the kind of progressive animal control policies that Nickens has suggested.
Twice the size of Roanoke County, Fort Wayne has 14 programs to address pet overpopulation. Roanoke County, with four officers and $176,000 in its animal control budget, appropriates no money for public education or overpopulation programs.
When an animal running at large is brought to Fort Wayne's pound, the owner must pay a fee to get the pet back. But the fee can be applied in full toward spaying or neutering, as can the fee to adopt a pet from the pound.
The city also started its own spay/neutering clinic, which has since been taken over by local veterinarians as a nonprofit clinic that doubles at night as an emergency animal hospital. It offers discounted sterilization with no income requirements.
Fort Wayne also administers a spaying/neutering assistance program that is run with private donations to fund surgery for pets of low-income people.
The population in and around Fort Wayne has grown since the aggressive animal control policies were started in the late 1970s, but the pet population has stabilized, Lewis said, with 42 percent fewer animals being euthanized than were 20 years ago.
"Is the answer to continue killing animals every day or to prevent them from being born?" Lewis asked. "Obviously, we've chosen to do our best not to keep killing every day."
This year's budget for Fort Wayne includes $14,500 for spaying and neutering and $15,000 for public education services.
But Lewis said the rate of licenses that are bought for pets is very low there, as it is in Roanoke County. Only 15 to 18 percent of dogs are licensed in the county, Chief Animal Control Officer Ken Hogan said. He doesn't expect cat owners to buy any more than dog owners do.
Because of state law, county cats cannot be required to wear their licenses, which limits licensing's effectiveness, according to Kate Rindy of the Humane Society of the United States.
Having a tag on their collar is critical to reuniting an animal at with its
\ Considering cats\ The draft ordinance the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will consider today includes:
\ AN ANIMAL NUISANCE provision would be created that would make it a misdemeanor to allow any domesticated animal (dog, cat, swine, cattle, geese, rabbits, etc.) to "unreasonably annoy humans," endanger other animals or people, or interfere withpeople's rights to enjoy their property. That includes, among other actions, barking, howling, creating "noxious odors," attacking people or cars and damaging property.
\ CATS WOULD JOIN dogs in being defined as personal property, meaning owners could seek restitution if they're hurt or killed. It also means larceny and other charges could be brought against someone stealing or hurting them.
\ CAT OWNERS WOULD be required to buy licenses for all cats over 4 months old. The cost would be $5 for altered cats, $10 for fertile ones.
\ THE NUMBER OF CATS per household would be limited to six, only two of which could be fertile, without a breeder's license. People living in agricultural areas would be exempt. Owners of more than six cats would be grandfathered in and could keep their current cats as long as they bought licenses for them all. As the cats die, they could not be replaced (beyond the six allowed).
\ ALL DOMESTICATED ANIMALS would be protected by a provision requiring humane treatment: adequate food and water, shelter from the weather and necessary veterinary care.
by CNB