Animal Ordinance Makes Good Sense

Local advocates for animals have done an excellent job drafting an animal control ordinance for the county. The draft was presented to the County Commission this month. The commissioners referred it to their planning board, who will meet next week.
The measure is desperately needed, and the county should enact it without delay.
All the paranoid bleating you'll hear about private property rights are entirely misguided. The ordinance is a set of sensible rules any decent, respectable person already abides by anyway.
The draft defines neglect as the failure "to provide adequate food, water, shelter, or failure of an owner or a person in possession of an animal to obtain appropriate veterinary care for the animal in the event of injury or illness."
It outlaws owning, training, selling or fighting of fighting dogs, and the possession of equipment associated with that loathsome industry.
It carefully defines a nuisance animal in very common sense terms.
The ordinance defines animal cruelty clearly, making clear exception for use and slaughter of livestock, hunting, biomedical research and lawfully "putting down" an animal by the owner, a vet or by officers.
The ordinance forbids leaving your animal in a hot car for hours on end while you go shopping.
These are all rules decent people already live by, and want their neighbors to do as well. The only people violating these rules currently are, frankly, scummy trash who never did anybody any good anyhow, so who cares what they think? Why should good, tax-paying, voting citizens protect scummy peoples' alleged right to abuse their animals?
Perhaps most importantly, given the inadequacy of the existing ordinance, it defines neglect and allows officers to do something about it. How many of you want to tenaciously cling to the right to starve your animal, or beat it to death, or deprive it of water or shade, or freeze it to death? How many of you want to defend your neighbor's right to do those things?
Unlike that of neighboring counties, this ordinance contains absolutely no mention of spay and neuter requirements. So it can be expected that tens of thousands of dogs and cats will still roam the streets and alleys looking for something to eat.
But at least it's something. At least it gives animal control officers the tools they need to assist in the most dreadful cases of cruelty and neglect.
Sadly, the reception by the candidates for County Commission was luke-warm. But then, they've been tarred and feathered for addressing this issue before.
Candidates were asked about the issue recently by The McDowell News.
Andy Webb said "Animal owner responsibility and respect for your neighbor should always be a priority," but added that he could never support a spay/neuter requirement. But since this ordinance contains nothing of the sort, he presumably can be relied upon to support the measure.
Barry McPeters said, "We as pet owners need to be responsible owners and to attempt to be good neighbors. I would encourage pet owners to have their pets spayed or neutered to prevent over population or the abuse of neglected stray animals."
He added that a law to that effect would not likely pass.
Pat Reel seems to get it. She said that when a pet owner fails to care for their animal the responsibility falls onto their neighbors. And, I might add, onto the tax-payers.
They disagree with me and some animal rescue groups about the spay/neuter need, but they are necessarily pragmatic. It's a good thing, then, that the ordinance draft leaves the issue of spay/neuter alone.
There's no good reason not to get behind the ordinance, and a million good reasons to pass it right away.
Some of the nicest people in the community bear a massive expense and work load, caring for the sick, abandoned, abused and injured animals we, as a community, allow to procreate. They are motivated by a compassion and gentleness they cannot ignore. These are motivations we would all do well to emulate; to be unable to ignore suffering.
To have gentleness and mercy in your soul makes you a better person. To have them in our law makes us a better society.