Leash law goes to the dogs

Iolans will be permitted to tether their dogs outdoors, but only for an hour at a time.
City Council members adopted new animal control ordinances that greatly limit the amount of time pet owners can keep their dogs tethered outdoors to fixed objects.
The new ordinance came about after former Mayor Bill Maness approached the city about concerns he had for a neighbor’s dog that has been left outdoors on a chain for months at a time. The only time the animal was not tethered, he said, was when he broke the chain and roamed about briefly.
Code enforcement officer Shonda Jefferis said Iolans can keep their animals tethered up to an hour at a time, every three hours.
“How in the world can you monitor this?” Councilman Steve French asked.
Jefferis said city employees can drive by a residence and make note of the time they see an animal tethered, then return to see if the animal has been removed within the hour.
The ordinance is similar to one adopted in other communities across the state, Jefferis said.
The city had briefly considered an outright ban on all outdoor tethering, but decided against it.
“I know a lot of responsible pet owners who have to tether their dogs,” Councilman Jon Wells noted.
For example, a pet owner with a fenced-in yard might still tether his dog on days he knows the city’s meter reader will visit the property.
Wells called the city’s new policy a “common sense” approach with enough flexibility so that the city can target egregious violators.
He also noted some Iolans might not be able to afford a suitable fence for their animals, noting a chain link or wooden fence could cost hundreds or thousands of dollars.

COUNCIL members tabled further discussion on hiring a private contractor to handle wild animals in the city because the city’s current policy might put some Iolans who trap fur-bearing animals in violation of state or federal law.
French expressed concern that the traps the city allows Iolans to use to capture some animals — foxes, for example — puts the burden of removing the animals on the residents.
Problem is, if the resident then kills the animal, he may be violating fur-bearing laws.
He asked Slaugh to clarify if such a practice were permissible.

IN A RELATED matter, council members again discussed ways to rid the city of starlings, considered nuisance birds capable of spreading diseases, such as E. coli.
The issue was brought to the council in August by Iolan Mark Kauth, who said hundreds of the birds roost in one of his trees daily, deluging his lawn and vehicles with bird droppings.
Jeanne Creitz, who lives near Kauth, said the birds were an issue for her family when she lived years ago in suburban Baltimore, Md. The starlings were linked to several cases of histoplasmosis, which caused blindness in one family friend. Others suffered from various diseases affecting their lungs.
“It’s something we need to address now and not let it go further,” she said.
Council members discussed how to answer the problem, noting the lack of consensus among wildlife experts.
Councilwoman Nancy Ford suggested the city buy noise-makers that can be launched into the trees to scare off the birds, and consider other means to ensure the starlings don’t simply move to another location in town.
The Council voted, 7-0, to buy the necessary “banger” and have police officers deploy the noise-makers after notifying neighbors of their intention.