Colleton County council advances changes to animal-control enforcement

Colleton County Council on Oct. 6 gave second-reading approval to Ordinance 25-0-09, amending Title 6 (Animals) to give animal control officers broader enforcement discretion and to shorten a previously written enforcement time window.

The ordinance as presented replaces language in subsection (e) of section 6.04.050 to give officers more discretion when responding to running-at-large or nuisance incidents and to narrow the prior six-month enforcement window, officials said. The ordinance text identifying the new provision appears in the council packet under section 6.04.050, subsection (e).

The change was described during the meeting by an unnamed staff member as a wording adjustment intended to allow officers to exercise discretion rather than being constrained by mandatory warnings. Councilman Murdock urged further changes to the county code’s definitions, saying the county should expand the definition of “dangerous/vicious animal” to explicitly include harm to other animals as well as people. “Part of the problem … dangerous and vicious animals are not only attacking human beings, but they’re attacking other animals,” Murdock said, and he asked staff to return with suggested language and noted he would follow up by email.

A member of the public, identified in the record as Miss Harris, spoke during public comment about repeated instances of dogs running at large at the same property and said enforcement gaps and a six-month limitation in the code have made it difficult to hold repeat offenders accountable. “These are just a few of the examples of the time of the [events],” she said, and urged the council to close what she called a loophole.

Council members also discussed requiring seizure of animals in some cases and whether citations should be mandatory when officers encounter running-at-large animals, particularly if animals are designated vicious. A county official said staff is working with state authorities on whether the county can expand enforcement powers and classifications under state law.

A motion to approve second reading of Ordinance 25-0-09 passed on voice vote. Council members said a report addressing additional definitional and enforcement changes would be provided before third reading.

The discussion distinguished between the ordinance amendment that passed second reading (a formal action) and ongoing work by staff and council to consider further definitional and enforcement changes (direction and discussion).