Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: THURSDAY, September 14, 1995                   TAG: 9509140011
SECTION: NEIGHBORS                    PAGE: E-8   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: CHARLES STEBBINS STAFF WRITER
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

CODE RESTRICTING LIVESTOCK WITHIN VINTON TOWN LIMITS IS NOTHING NEW

Councilmen and town officials described the pigs as livestock, but the couple said they were pets.

A General District Court judge ruled the couple could keep the pigs because Vinton's code regarding livestock was not clear and was outdated on the issue of potbellied pigs.

It might well be outdated, because the question of livestock in Vinton goes back more than 100 years.

One of Vinton's earliest town codes, known then as "Laws, Rules and Regulations," was passed by council in 1892. It contained regulations concerning livestock.

Section 7 read: "No stock of any kind shall be allowed to run at large within the town limits, except cattle, and then only in daytime and then shall not be belled. All cattle shall be penned at night, under a penalty of 50 cents for each offense."

The penalty today for violation of the current animal control ordinance - Chapter 4 of the Town Code - is a fine of $10 to $100.

There was another section of that same code - Section 30 - which declared that the owner of any "hog" found running at large in the town would be subject to a fine of $1.

Back then, Vinton also had a ban against geese running at large.

Horses were regulated but not prohibited in that 1892 ordinance.

Section 15 set a speed limit of 8 mph on horses on town streets and made it an offense to hitch a horse "so as to obstruct."

Violating this section could cost a horse owner $1.

Another animal question, in Section 3, was directed at people who would "exhibit a stallion or jackass on any of the streets of the town, on which persons reside."

Violation of that law could bring a stiff fine by standards of that day - up to a full $5.

Vinton's 1892 ordinance also addressed another issue that now is in debate. Section 14 said: "Any person who shall discharge firearms of any description within the corporate limits, without urgent necessity, shall be fined not less than $1 nor more than $20 ."

The town's 1892 ordinance also contained another regulation that seems quaint by 1995 standards. Section 35 required that "All privies shall be cleaned once a month from March 1st to November 1st."

Violation of that ordinance could bring a $1 fine.

A property owner also could be fined 25 cents if a front gate was allowed to be left open so that it obstructed a sidewalk.