Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Welfare topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Forsyth County commissioners keep current tethering rule after public outcry
Summary
After multiple public speakers urged the board to retain the county's anti-tethering language, the Forsyth County Board of Commissioners voted to deny a proposed amendment that would have allowed owners to observe tethered dogs from inside their homes.
Forsyth County commissioners voted 5-2 on Jan. 30 to reject a proposed change to the county's tethering rule, preserving the existing requirement that an owner or keeper be physically outside when a dog is tethered.
The proposed amendment was brought forward by the Animal Services Advisory Board and would have allowed owners to maintain visual contact with a tethered dog from inside a residence rather than being physically outside. Commissioners debated whether the change would materially improve animal welfare or simply make enforcement harder.
The public session included multiple speakers urging the board not to loosen the current ordinance. Jennifer Tierney, who identified herself as an animal-welfare advocate, told commissioners the 2011 ordinance reduced injuries and aggression associated with long-term tethering and asked them to "please leave this in place." Laurie Sears, a former manager of the Forsyth Humane Society, and other volunteers described higher numbers of maltreated and neglected animals and said the 2011 restriction helped reduce those cases.
Major Van Loveland of the Forsyth County Sheriff's Office provided enforcement data showing tethering complaints are a small share of animal-services calls: in 2023, about 2.08% of animal-service calls were logged as tethering-related, and officers issued roughly 17 citations on those calls; in 2024, tethering calls were about 2.16% of animal-service calls with 22 citations issued. He said most field contacts result in education and referrals to welfare groups rather than immediate citations.
Commissioners who opposed the amendment said the current rule serves as an educational tool and that changing it would make enforcement more difficult and could allow animals to suffer while an owner remains inside. Commissioners who spoke in favor of changing the language said it could accommodate elderly or mobility-limited pet owners who can observe animals from inside but cannot remain outdoors.
The board's motion to deny the proposed code change was made by Commissioner Wilson and seconded by Commissioner McDaniel. The motion carried 5-2, leaving the county code's Chapter 6 requirement that an owner be outside with a tethered dog unchanged.
The county attorney and animal-services staff said they would continue to prioritize education during field contacts and pursue enforcement when dogs are clearly left unattended and in distress.
The board did not adopt any new time limits or additional substantive changes to the tethering provisions during the meeting.
