Meeting the Standards in Coweta Co

After the recent story about Coweta Co AC allowing a seriously ill dog to suffer instead of caring for him, I was not surprised to read the county is considering major changes to its animal control laws.  But I was surprised to learn the changes have nothing to do with improving conditions at the shelter.  The ordinances being considered include an anti-tethering measure, revisions to the “dangerous dogs” rules, and regulations on how dogs can ride in the bed of pick-ups.

Then there’s this:

Additionally, the proposed amendments require business licenses for commercial animal establishments, humane societies and rescue groups.

As a condition of the license, all commercial establishments, humane societies and rescue groups must grant animal control officers permission to inspect their facilities to ensure all animals meet the standards set forth in the animal control ordinance.

Humane societies and rescue groups, such as the one who rescued the suffering dog from Coweta Co AC recently, would be subject to inspection by the ACOs who apparently think suffering is A-OK.  And they presumably will have to pay a licensing fee for the privilege.  I’m thinking if I ran a shelter in Coweta Co, I would aim for not meeting the “standards” of local AC.  Because I actually care about pets and stuff.

4 thoughts on “Meeting the Standards in Coweta Co

  1. This just makes me sick. Call me a pessimist, but life for the animals in Coweta County is NOT going to get better.
    The power-hungry folk at Animal Control are going to “stick it” to the rescues for making them look bad, and it will be the animals that suffer.
    Anti-tethering laws mean that Animal Control can confiscate any animal found tied. So guess what? Those responsible owners who want their pet to be safe while they run into the store will have to buy their dog back.
    Would you rather turn your dog loose to fend for itself, or risk it being “confiscated” by these people? Or, would you just not bother to have a pet…

    1. The timing of these issues, especially the licensing fee for rescues & inspections by ACOs, seems very much like payback. The county may well have had these things on the agenda for awhile but to bring them to the fore NOW is, at the very least, poor timing.

  2. I do agree that humane societies and rescue groups should be subject to inspections, but by a group or individual that actually cares about animals, not the AC in this case. I run a rescue and have nothing to hide and would never object to an inspection at any time. On the other hand, I also worked at our local “humane” society and pleaded with the city and the OSPCA to conduct an investigation of this place as they routinely left animals to suffer without veterinary care.

  3. We pay a yearly fee to the city for a kennel license- they give us a little certificate to post so everyone knows we’re certified. Then the state inspects us once a year- unannounced. Basically they just count how many animals are in each room and mostly look for overcrowding. Though maybe they loom for cleanliness and health- we keep a clean shelter, so it’s hard to say what they’d do if it wasn’t

Leave a Reply