Sun
Jan 13 2008
08:22 pm
By: wylamena

Did you know that the City of Harriman already has a Pit Bull Ban? How did this get by without us knowing it? Did I sleep through April?

How are they enforcing it? Not very well! There were several Pit Bulls among the crowd at the Labor day celebrations. There was an injury! From a motorcycle accident, but not one dog attack and they were not muzzled.

Breed ban is not the answer. We need a law that addresses ALL vicious dogs. One that makes owners responsible for irresponsible actions. One that does not penalize good owners.

I know we have some issues in Roane County where our pets are concerned, but this is not the answer. I would like to know what the citizens of Rockwood think about this item. I would also like to know what Roane County thinks. As a Pit Bull owner, it would result in the sale of my home and my moving to another area. What a shame that would be since I love this area so much.

I have some thoughts and ideas on making us more people and dog friendly. I would be happy to share them(surprise, surprise!) if anyone is interested.

Wylamena
PS Please excuse spelling and grammer. I was a little excited while on this soap-box.

We tried to tell you

Pit Bull Ban

I never saw the ordinance, but it could be problematic. Even the AKC hs trouble defining a breed of dog and there really isn't any such thing as a pit bull breed, anyway.

That is Rockwood...

WC,

I saw that and have been attending meetings to come up with an alternative. I am talking about the City of Harriman. They passed a Pit Bull Ban back in April. PASSED! Not are looking at. It is on the books. It is the same ordinance that the City of Rockwood is looking at. This ordinance says that any dog judged to have Pit Bull "traits" can be declared banned. It states that to house them outside, the fencing must be 1 foot in the ground and concreted. It requires a liability insurance policy, spay/neuter, muzzle whenever out in public. The cost of keeping the dog would be above the means of the average Roane County citizen. Please do not misconstrue my point here. Unless it will improve the breed of dog, I believe all dogs should be spayed or neutered. That is not a point of contention for me.

My point is that if the neighbor's labrador nuts up and attacks someone, there is no ordinance to use for enforcement of regulating this owner or dog. I actually live up the street from 2 Dobermans that are a menace to anyone walking their pets. These two dogs will and have attacked dogs on leashes being walked by their owners with children present. I do not have any ill will towards Dobies. I think the owners need a hefty fine and forced to correct the "dog-at-large" problem. The problem needs addressed as a "Vicious Dog" problem and not a breed problem. What will they do when banning Pits doesn't work? I know! Ban all dogs over 20 pounds! Now that ought to catch people by surprise when the city says you must get rid of your cocker spaniel!

Oh Lord, I did not mean to get started again!

Wylamena

Oops, you're right.

But please..."get started" all you want.

I have heard it said best this way: "Ban the Deed, Not the Breed"

If a Cocker Spaniel bites someone, or a German Shepherd, is that a crime of lesser degree than if some dog with mystery traits that make it a pit bull bites someone?

Who decides whether a dog has pit bull traits and what does that consist of, exactly? Four legs and a waggly tail? What if the tail has been cut off?

AMEN!

Yes, this is the direction we should take our county. One that is positive and targets the actaul problems.

Thank you, Robyn!

Wylamena

Great Post!

We really are at a crossroads here. We have an opportunity to think progressively and plan for the future we want for this community or we can take a quick and ineffective action that leaves us at this spot again down the road.

Communities with pit bull bans as there only action against dog problems, still have dog problems. I would love to see this community lead by example. Choosing ordinance structure that REALLY protects the citizens.

Let's get real and make it about vicious dogs and bad owners, not a breed.

Wylamena

Yes, all dogs bite but it

Yes, all dogs bite but it has been proven too many times that a PitBull not only bites it tries (and does) KILL people! I say Ban Them Now.

Please provide those facts...

WC,

Where are you? I have seen you bust many a bubble here by demanding supporting evidence (right RB?). The facts are that breed has been shown to NOT be a determining factor in bites cases. This research was done by the Veterinary Medical Association and by the CDC. Determining factors were found to be unaltered animals (spay and neuter), poor socialization, lack of education for children where dogs are concerned and animals left to run unattended. I grew up with Pit Bulls in my home. As children, all of us were dog bit, but NEVER by a pit bull. I was bit by a sheltie and my neighbors Scottie bit me, my sister and a child down the street. That dog was finally put to sleep when the 7 year old required 27 stitches to her calf. I was baby-sitting at 15 and the familiy I was sitting for had a dobie with pups. She bit me. No, none of these killed me, but the fact is that it would have hit all of the media outlets if these dogs had been pits. Temperment testing shows that Pits test in the 80% and higher. Don't believe the media hype. Use your brain and you fingers. Google Pit Bulls. Don't look at the sensational stuff. Look at the expert documentation. Are you going to elect a politician based on the news reports? All I am asking is that you research this and THINK!

Make the ordinances about vicious dogs and if there is a pit that falls into this category, you will catch it. What will not be here is the Pit that is trained, well socialized and owned by a responsible owner. What will not be in this group is an innocent dog that is judged by his looks.

Wylamena

hey, Wylamena

I'm here, but it looks like You folks are doing exactly what this site was put up to do...have the Community work together for more open government and fire everybody up to make contact with their elected officials themselves.

The best time to deal with bad law is before it gets enacted, and unfortunately, some officials don't want to have a conversation with their constituents on relevent issues.

The Hrriman Pit Bull law is a bad one. I suggest you folks get in touch with your mayor and Commissioners and let them know...BUT!

What I suggest you do is ask that the law not be enforced until you have the opportunity to offer alternative language that deals with bad dogs. We know they exist and cause problems. What City officials are looking for is some easy fix, so help them out.

It is the rare elected official that is always good and diligent even when nobody is paying attention.

Show them you care!

Have I said...

Have I said how much I love this site? Thank you WC for a place to be heard. We want to be a part of the solution and not part of the problem. There are many people with good input. We need those people talking to our law makers. Everybody needs to know who represents them and how to contact that person. Poor Mr. Tedder is my County Commissioner. I had a problem when I first moved back to Roane County and I know he had to call on God every time he saw my number on the caller ID box. We did not resolve the issue the way I wanted, but I was able to see the reasoning behind the alternative chosen. Talk to your elected official and tell him how you feel.

Judge by behavior and not breed.

Wylamena

MTAS seems to have provided

MTAS seems to have provided a lot of language that is clearly unconstitutional. Do they have somebody besides Glen Reynolds helping them?

My understanding of MTAS is

My understanding of MTAS is there are multiple consultants used in providing support to the municipalities at their request. I've since learned that Steve Lobertini authored the Pit Bull ordinance that city council's are using. Also, he based his information from Denver, Colorado, law. The law enacted in Denver resulted in the killing of more than 1,500 innocent bull breed/pit bull dogs. However, the number of dog bites in Denver have increased with German Shephards and Chows now heading the list. In Denver, owners of Pit Bulls refuse to allow an animal control officer/policeman in their homes without a search warrant. Interestingly there has developed an underground railroad, of sorts, to ferry Pit Bulls out of harms way and out of the city of Denver while animal control is sent to obtain a search warrant. The Pit Bull is escorted out the back door to the arms of a "rescuer" who takes it to a safe haven. Not much different than the underground railroad which helped save thousands of slaves during the Civil War. Of course, BSL is simply canine racism. We need to hold irresponsible owners accountable. I agree with Llamamamma, we should look at the ordinance Knoxville is using. It focuses on problem owners and on dangerous dogs but is not breed specific and, therefore, does not punish the responsible owners and innocent dogs that otherwise could face a terrible outcome. How refreshing to see this community working together and to see the triumph of common sense.

You know..

Anytime a community comes together with the good of the community as the goal, there are ways to determine the actual need and the solution that will best serve the community. The problem arises when the community at large is kept out of the loop or the needs of the individual override the needs of the whole. There are a lot of intelligent, thoughtful people out here that understand making choices for the good of the whole. It doesn't have to be "myside" vs. "yourside." I like win-win and the Vicious Dog Ordinances as opposed to Pit Bans are win-win. The public is protected without violating my rights to keep my dog or assigning false characteristics to an innocent dog.

Come on Rockwood, let's make history in Roane County!
Wylamena

I agree, Wylamena. Let's

I agree, Wylamena. Let's hope the Rockwood City Council will follow a dangerous dogs ordinance instead of specific breed bans. They can be a leader in Roane County!

Can we get a link to the

Can we get a link to the Knoxville ordinance?

Hope this works Link...

Hope this works

(link...)

Okay, just tried it and it

Okay, just tried it and it doesn't work. Just go to Knoxnews.com and in the search box type is "proposed dangerous dog ordinance" and when the story comes up click the box on the left to read the entire proposal. Hope this helps.

Proposed Knoxville

Proposed Knoxville Ordinance...I copied/pasted this from Knoxnews.com

ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COMMISSION
OF KNOX COUNTY, TENNESSEE,
AMENDING KNOX COUNTY CODE
CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE II. ANIMAL CONTROL BY
MODIFYING DEFINITIONS IN SECnON 6-31, AND
BY REPEALING DIVISION 2, DANGEROUS DOGS
AND ADOPTING A NEW DANGEROUS DOG
ORDINANCE AS DIVISION 2 (Ord. No. 0-96-5-101,
§§ 1(2), 1(8), 1(9)(A-C) & 1(10), adopted 6-24-96).
ORDINANCE: 0-07-12-102
REQUESTEDB Y: COMMISSIONERI. HARMON
PREPARED BY: KNOX COUNTY LAW
DIRECTOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND CORRECTNESS:
DIRECTOR OF LAW
APPROVED 1STR EADING:
DATE
APPROVED 2ND READJNG:
DATE
APPROVEDE MERGENCY:
(YES) (NO)
VETOED:
DATE
VETO
OVERRIDE:
DATE
WHEREAS, by interlocal cooperation agreement executed on or about November 8,
2000, Knox County (the "County") and the City of Knoxville (the "City") established a
joint animal welfare board known as the Knoxville-Knox County Animal Board (the
"Animal Board") to administer the service delivery system for the care and sheltering of
animals, including without limitation maintaining and operating an Animal Welfare
Center; and
WHEREAS, the Animal Board has built and currently operates an an~mal center
known as the Young Williams Animal Center to provide for, among other things, the
housing, adoption, and disposal of stray dogs, cats and other animals; and
WHEREAS, it is the sense of the Commission that the deimitions in the current
Knox County Animal Control Ordinances should be modified to specifically reference the
Young Williams Animal Center; and
WHEREAS, the County Code and the City Code currently contain different
classifications and enforcem~nt schemes for dealing with dangerous or vicious dogs; and
WHEREAS, due to difficulties and confusion presented to staff at the Animal
Center, the public, and others involved in the care and control of animals by the differences
between the County and City ordinances the Animal Board has recommended, and the
Commission desires, to amend the County's dangerous dog ordinances to be consistent
with the City and to enhance the ability of Knox County animal control officers to enforce
the ordinances and restrictions relating to dangerous dogs.
NOW THEREFOREI BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF KNOX
COUNTY AS FOLLOWS: i
SECTION 1. Knox County Code Section 6-31 is hereby amended by deleting the
definition for "Animal shelter" and substituting instead the following:
Animal Center means the Young Williams Animal Center or
any other animal shelter owned by, controlled by or under
contract with the county.
SECTION 2. Knox County Code Chapter 6, Article II. Animal Control is hereby
amended by repealing Division 2. Dangerous or Vicious Dogs and adopting a new Division
2. Dangerous Dogs (§6-71 etseq. of the Knox County Code), a copy of which is attached
hereto and incorporated he~ein by reference.
7
SECTION 3. This Ordinance shall take effect upon passage, as provided by the
Charter of Knox County, Tennesseet,h e public welfare requiring it.
Presiding Officer of the Commission Date
Chief Deputy
under the authority ofT.C.A. 18-6-115
County Clerk Date
Approved:
County Mayor Date
Vetoed:
County Mayor Date
3
DIVISION 2. DANGEROU~ DOGS
Sec. 6-71. Definitions.
For the purposeso f this divisior, the following words andp hrasess hall havet he meanings
respectivelya scribedt o themb ~ this section:
Attack means an unprovoke~!ttack in an aggressive, terrorizing or threatening manner on a
human in which the victim s ered a physical injury, including but not limited to a scratch,
abrasion, or bruise; or on a do esticated animal that causes death or injury that requires
veterinary treatment.
Confined means securely confined indoors, within an automobile or other vehicle solely for
transportation and transported jn a humane manner, or confined in a securely enclosed and
locked pen or structure or fenCt ' electronic or otherwise, upon the premises of the owner of such
animal. However, under no cir umstances is an electronic or similar fence sufficient to confine
an animal in heat or a level tw dangerous dog.
Dangerous dog means any do that has been designated as such by the county general sessions
court. ,
i
I Electronic fence. A fence, coltar, or a combination of a fence and collar that controls the
movement of a dog by emitting an electrical shock when the animal wearing the collar nears the
boundary of the owner's property.
Minor injury means an injury lin which the victim suffers pain as a result of an attack by an
animal but which does not pro~uce any broken bone, bleeding or death on the part of the victim.
,
Proper enclosure means a Pl~ e in which a dog is securely confIned indoors or in a securely
enclosed and locked pen or s cture suitable to prevent the entry of children under the age of
twelve (12) and designed to p event the dog from escaping and shall also provide protection for
the dog from the elements. The enclosure shall be of suitable size for the dog.
Properly restrained means:
(1) Controlled by a competent person by means ofa chain, leash, or other like device not to
exceed six (6) feet in length; II (2) Secured within or upon alvehicle being driven or parked; or
(3) Kept within a proper enclosure.
Properly restrained in or UPo1 a vehicle does not include restraint or confmement that would
allow an animal to fall from 0 otherwise escape the confines of a vehicle or that wo~ld allow an
animal to have access to pers ns outside the vehicle.
Provocation means that the threat, injury or damage caused by the animal was sustained by a
person who, at the time, was committing a willful trespass or other tort upon the premises
occupiedb y the ownero f the animal, or wast ormenting,a busing,o r assaultingth e animal, or
was committing or attempting to commit a crime.
Severe injury means any injury in which the victim suffers pain as a result of an attack by an
animal and which includes anYibroken bone, bleeding or death on the part of the victim.
Sec. 6-72. Citation for designation of level one dangerous dog or level two dangerous dog;
hearing; designation of level one dangerous dog or level two dangerous dog; imposition of
conditions; no change of ownership pending hearing.
(a) If an animal control officer or a law enforcement officer has investigated and determined
that there is probable cause to believe that a dog is level one or level two dangerous, a citation
shall be issued for the owner to appear in general sessions court for the purpose of determining
whether or not the dog in question should be designated as a level one or level two dangerous
dog. Except by agreement of the respondent and counsel for the county and with the approval of
the judge, the hearing shall be held not less than five (5) nor more than fifteen (15) business days
after service of citation upon the owner of the dog.
(b) The general sessions court shall designate a dog as a "level one dangerous dog" if the
municipal court fmds, upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the dog:
(1) Has, when unprovoked while on the property of its owner, attacked a person on two (2) or
more occasions witllin the prior twenty-four-month period; or
(2) Has, within the prior twenty-four-month period while off the property of its owner, engaged
in any behavior when unprovoked that reasonably would have required a person to take
defensive action to prevent bodily injury; or
(3) Has, when unprovoked while off the property of its owner, bitten a person or domestic
animal causing a minor injuryl
(c) The general sessions court shall designate a dog as a "level two dangerous dog" if the
general sessions court finds, upon a preponderance of the evidence, that. the dog:
(1) Has, when unprovoked while on the property of its owner, attacked a person on three (3) or
more occasions within the prior twenty-four-month period; or
(2) Has, on two (2) or more occasionsw ithin the prior twenty-four-monthp eriod while off the
propertyo f its owner,e ngagedin any behaviorw henu nprovokedt hat reasonablyw ould have
required a person to take defensive action to prevent bodily injury; or
(3) Has, when unprovoked while off the property of its owner, bitten a person or a domestic
animalc ausinga severein jury; or
I
(4) Has previously been declared a level one dangerous dog but has not been kept in
cdoomg;p olira nce with any restrictio'ns placed by the general sessions court upon the owner of such
(5) Has beeno wned,p ossessedk,e pt, usedo r trained in violation ofT.C.A. § 39-14-203
(d) No dog mayb e declaredl evel one or level two dangerousa s a resulto f injury or damageif ,
at the time the injury or damage:
(1) The person who was injured or damaged:
a. Was committing a willful trespass or other tort upon the premises occupied by the owner of
the dog; i
b. Was teasing, tormenting, abusing or assaulting the dog; or
c. Was committing or attempting to commit a crime;
(2) The dog was protecting Ot defending a person within the immediate vicinity of the dog from
an unjustified attack; or I
(3) Injury or damage was sustained by a domestic animal which, at the time of the injury or
damage, was teasing, tormenting, abusing or assaulting the dog.
(e) Upon designating a dog as a level one or level two dangerous dog, the general sessions court
shall impose the restrictions on the owner of such dog as set forth in this article and may impose
such additional restrictions on the respondent as are appropriate under the circumstances of the
case. The general sessions court shall reduce such restrictions to writing and have them served on
the respondent.
(f) It shall be unlawful for any person who is subject to any such restrictions to fail to comply
with such restrictions.
(g) It shall be unlawful for any person who has been served with a citation to appear in general
sessions court for the purpose of detemlining whether such person's dog should be designated as
a level one or level two dangerous dog to transfer ownership of such dog until after the general
sessions court has issued a ruling on such citation.
(h) It shall be unlawful for any person whose dog has been designated as a level one or level
two dangerous dog to transfer ownership of such dog to another person without:
(1) Having advised such oth~r person that the dog has been designated as a level one or level
two dangerous; or I
(2) Having advised such other person in writing of the restrictions that have been placed upon
such dog; and I
(3) Having notified the animal control division in writing at least fifteen (15) days prior to such
transfer of the name, address and telephone number of the proposed new owner or custodian, the
proposed new location of the dog, and the name and description of the dog.
Sec. 6-73. Notice of designatipn.
Within ten (10) working days fier a hearing conducted pursuant to this article, the owner of the
dog, if absent from the hearin , shall be notified by the general sessions court in writing of the
decision of the general sessio court and of any restrictions imposed upon the respondent, either
personally through the animal ontrol division or by first-class mail, postage prepaid. If a dog is
declared to be level one or lev I two dangerous, the owner shall comply with all restrictions
imposed by this article and the general sessions court within the time period to be specified by
the general sessions court at time the restrictions are imposed.
Sec. 6-74. Impoundment and abatement of level one or level two dangerous dog.
(a) If upon investigation it'is!etermined by an animal control officer or law enforcement
officer that probable cause exi ts to believe a dog poses an iIIimediate threat to public safety,
then the animal control officer or law enforcement officer may immediately seize and impound
the dog pending a hearing to b held pursuant to this article. At the time of an impoundment
pursuant to this subsection or as soon as practicable thereafter, the officer shall serve upon the
oonwen eorr olef vtehle t wdoog d aa nnogteicroeu osf. a hearing to beheld pursuant to this article to declare the. dog level
(b) Any animal control officer may impound any level one or level two dangerous dog if the
animal control officer has reasonable cause to believe that any of the mandatory restrictions upon
such dog are not being follow~d if the failure to follow such restrictions would likely result in a
threat to public safety. The owner of a level one or level two dangerous dog shall surrender such
a dog to any animal control oi cer or law enforcement officer upon demand. In the event such a
dog is impounded, the animal ontrol officer or law enforcement officer shall serve a citation
upon the owner of such dog fi r violation of the provisions of this chapter.
(c) Ifa dog has been impoun!ed pursuant to subsection (a) or subsection (b), the animal control
officer may pennit the dog to e confined at the owner's expense in a veterinary facility pending
a hearing pursuant to this arti Ie, provided that such confmement will ensure the public safety.
(d) No dog that has been des gnated by the general sessions court as a level one or level two
dangerous dog may be released by the Animal Center or a veterinarian until the owner has paid
all veterinary costs and all oth r fees and cost of the Animal Center that are nonnally charged to
an owner prior to redemption fthe animal. If the owner fails to pay such fees and costs and take
possession of the dog within t n (10) days of the owner's receipt of notice of the designation of
the dog as a level one or level two dangerous dog, the dog shall be deemed to have been
abandoned and may be dispos d of by the Animal Center or the animal control division.
Euthanasia or surrender to the animal control division or the Animal Center of such a dog does
not free the owner of responsipility for all costs incurred up to and including the date of
euthanasia or surrender. I
Sec.6 -75. Possessionu nlawful without proper restraint; failure to comply with mandatory
restrictions.
(a) It is unlawful for a person 0 have the custody of or own or possess a level one or level two
dangerous dog that is not prop rly restrained. It is unlawful for a person to have the custody of or
own or possess a level one or vel two dangerous dog unless such person is in full compliance
with all restrictions placed up n such person by the general sessions court that has designated
such dog as a level one or lev I two dangerous dog.
(b) Ifa level two dangerous dog is impounded due ~o the owner's failure to comply with the
mandatory restrictions PlacedfPon such owner by the General Sessions Court, the animal
contr.ol d.ivision shall request ~t the district a.tt°rney general ~or the county file a petitIon with
the CIrCUIct ourt for the destrU non of the dog m accordanceW Ith Tenn. Code Ann. § 44-17-120.
(c) Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to limit the county's authority to request that the
district attorney general file a petition with the circuit court of the county for the destruction of
any dog in accordance with T~nn. Code Ann. § 44-17-120 or to dispose of animals pursuant to
any other legislative authority Fhatsoever.
Sec. 6-76. Mandatory restrictions on level one dangerous dogs.
(a) Once the dog is designat~d as a level one dangerous dog by the general sessions court, the
following restrictions shall be Imandatory upon the owner of such dog:
(1) The dog must be confme~ indoors or confined on the owner's property by a fence (other
than an "electronic fence") ca*able of confming the dog or by a proper enclosure;
(2) A level one dangerous d~shall not be pennitted to leave the premises of the owner unless
it is properly restrained by a fi ed leash or lead under the control of a person physically capable
of restraining the dog and the og must be obedient to that person's commands;
(3) The owner must allow in~pection of the dog and its enclosure by the animal control division
and must produce, upon dem~d, proof of compliance with such restrictions;
(4) In the event that the own* Ofthe dog is a tenant on real property where the dog is being'
kept, the owner must obtain Otten permission from the landlord or property owner, to be filed
with the animal control divisi n, to keep the dog on certain specified premises;
(5) The owner and dog must I attend and complete a course on commonly accepted dog
obedience methods approved by the animal control division;
(6) The owner and dog mustlattend and successfully complete an American Kennel Club canine
good citizenship course and t+st within a time specified by the general sessions court;
(7) Neutering or spaying of the dog;
(8) Implantation of an identification microchip in such dog; the serial number of the
identification microchip must be supplied to the animal control division; and
(9) The owner of a level one ~angerous dog shall not pennit such a dog to be chained, tethered
or otherwise tied to any inani'fate object such as a tree, post or building, inside or outside of its
fence or proper enclosure. I
(b) The general sessions cowit may impose such additional restrictions that it deems necessary.
(c The costo f all suchr estrictionsm ustb e paid by the owner.
Sec. 6-77. Mandatory restrictions on level two dangerous dogs.
(a) Once the dog is designated as a level two dangerous dog by the general sessions court, the
following restrictions shall be ~ai1datory upon the owner of such dog:
(1) The dog mustb e kept in securelye ncloseda ndl ockeds ecurede nclosures uitablet o
preventt he entryo f young chi drena nd designedto preventt he animal from escapingA. secured
enclosurem ustb e a minimum of six (6) feeti n heighta nd musth ave secures idesa nda secure
top. If it hasn o bottom secure to the sides,t he sidesm ustb e embeddedin to the groundn o less
than two (2) feet deep. A sec ed enclosure must also be humane and provide some protection
from the elementsf or the animal.I f the dog is maintainedu nattendedo ut-of-doors,s uchs ecured
enclosurem ustb e enclosed~ thin an outerf ence,a ndt he outerp erimetero f the secured
enclosurem ustb e no lesst h~ five (5) feet from the outerf ence.
(2) The owner must allow in~pectiono f the dog andi ts enclosureb y the animal control division
and mustp roduce,u pond emapd,p roof of compliancew ith suchr estrictions.
(3) In the event that the ownJr or custodian of the dog is a tenant on real property where the dog
is being kept, the owner or cuJtodian must obtain written permission from the landlord or
property owner, to be filed with the animal control division, to keep the dog on certain specified
preInlses.
(4) The owner and dog mus~attend and complete a training class and/or behavior modification
course approved by the anim control division that is designed to teach the owner how to deal
with, correct, manage and/or ter the problem behavior.
(5) The owner must diSPlay"i.n a conspicuous manner, a sign at all entrances to the owner's
premises on or within which e dog is kept warning that a dangerous dog is on the owner's
premises by stating in capital etters measuring at least one and one-half (1.5) inches in width
and one and one-half (1.5) inches in height and reading "W ARNING--DANGEROUS DOGKEEP
A WA Yo" The sign mu1be visible and legible from the public way and from fifty (50)
feet away from the secured e losure required pursuant to section 6- 77(a)(1) of this article. The
owner must obtain the approv of the animal control division prior to posting the warning sign.
(6) A level two dangerous dog shall not be permitted to leave the premises of the owner unless
such dog is properly restrained and humanely muzzled for protection of persons and other
animals.
(7) A level two dangerous dog may never, even with the owner present, be allowed to be
unrestrained on property that allows the dog direct access to the public.
(8) The owner of a level tw°tangerous dog shall not peffi1it such a dog to be chained, tethered
or other\:vise tied to any inani ate object such as a tree, post or building, inside or outside of its
own separate enclosure. i
(9) Such dog shall be photographed by the animal control division for future identification
purposes.
(10) Neutering or spaying of the dog.
(11) Implantation of an identification microchip in such dog; the serial number of the
identification microchip must pe supplied to the animal control division.
(12) Requiring the owner of~e dog or owner of the premises in which the dog is kept to
procurea nd maintain in effect liability insurancei,n cluding coverageo f claims arising from the
conducto f the dog, in an amo t not lesst han oneh undredt housandd ollars ($100,000.00a) nd
to furnisha certificateo f insuranceto the animalc ontrol division, within ten (10) businessd ays
of the designationo f the dog ¥ a level two dangerouds og. The insurances hall include a
provision whereby the insurer notifies the animal control division not less than thirty (30) days
prior to cancellationo r lapseo f coverage.
(13) Maintaining and updating annually a record maintained with the animal control division
that lists the dog owner(s) or agent contact information, emergency contact persons and phone
numbers, veterinarian, landlor~ and/or property owner contact information, property/liability
insurance carrier, vaccination, licensing and/or permit number, photograph of the animal and any
other information deemed nec ssary by the animal control division.
(14) Samples preserved for P'loSSible DNA identification which must be delivered to the animal
control division.
(15) Notification in writing tthe animal control division of the location of the dog's residence,
temporary or permanent, incl ding prior notice of plans to move the dog to another residence
within the city or outside the ity and/or to transfer ownership of the dog.
(b) The general sessions co¥ may impose such additional restrictions that it deems necessary.
(c) The cost of all such restriftions must be paid by the owner.
Sec. 6-78. Removal of designation of level one d~ngerous dog.
If there are no additional ins~es of the behavior described in section 6-72(b) within eighteen
(18) months of the date ofdesi nation as a level one dangerous dog, the dog shall automatically
be removed from the list of Ie el one dangerous dogs. The dog may be, but is not required to be
removed from the list of level ne dangerous dogs prior to the expiration of the eighteen-month
period if the owner of the dog demonstrates to the animal control division that changes in
circumstances or measures taken by the owner, such as training of the dog, confinement, etc.,
have mitigated the risk to the public safety; in such event, the owner or the animal control
division may petition the gene~al sessions court to remove such designation.
Sec. 6-79. Change of ownership, custody or location of dog; death of dog.
(a) The owner ofa level one ())rl evel two dangerousd og who moves or sells the dog, or
otherwise transfers the owners~p, custody or location of the dog, shall, at least fifteen (15) days
prior to the actual transfer or r moval of the dog, notify the animal control division in writing of
the name, address and telepho e number of the proposed new owner, the proposed new location
of the dog, and the name and scription qf the dog.
(b) The owner shall, in addition to the above, notify any new owner or custodian of a level one
or level two dangerous dog in writing regarding the details of the dog's record and the tenus and
conditions for confinement and control of the dog. The transferring owner shall also provide the
animal control division with a copy of the notification to the new owner of his or her receipt of
the original notification and acceptance of the tenus and conditions. The animal control division
may impose different or additi?nal restrictions or conditions upon the new owner.
(c) If a level one or level two dangerous dog should die, the owner shall notify the animal
control division no later than:enty-four (24) hours thereafter and, upon request from the animal
control division shall produce e animal for verification or evidence of the dog's death that is
satisfactory to the animal con 01 division.
(d) If a level one or level two~angerous dog escapes, the owner shall immediately notify the
animal control division and m e every reasonable effort to recapture the escaped dog to prevent
injury and/or death to humans r domestic animals.
(e) The following persons m~st notify the animal control division when relocating a dog to the
county, even on a temporary b~sis:
(1) The owner of a level one ~r level two dangerous dog that has been designated as such by
another lawful body other thaq the county; and
(2) The owner of a dog that ~as had special restrictions placed against it by any humane society
or governmental entity or age~cy other than the county based upon the behavior of the dog.
No such designation as a leve~ one or level two dangerous dog or any similar such designation by
another lawful body, humane $ociety or governmental entity shall be recognized by the county if
such designation is based solely upon the breed of the dog. Any person relocating a dog to the
county is subject to the restrictions set forth in this article.
Sec. 6-80. Penalties.
Any person violating the provisions of this article upon conviction shall be fined fifty dollars
($50.00) and each day ofviol~tion shall be deemed a separate violation.
Date Submitted 1?-3-o7 This form must be submitted
Requested By
Department/Phone
Ivan Harmon by Noon on the first Monday
Commission/2l5-4625 of each month
1. Item for consideration: (Please Indicate type and describe legislative action desired.
x Ordinance Resolution
DESCRIPTION
2. Committee: (Please indicate the appropriate committee(s) for legislative action.)
~_Intergovernmental, Chairman, Craig Leuthold
x Finance, Chairman, Paul Pinkston
3. This item (please mark one). ..
x does not require the expenditure of funds
is funded in the current budget
requiresa n additionala ppropriation( in which case,f ill out the reverse side of this form)

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Lost Medicaid Funding

To date, the failure to expand Medicaid / TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding.