City seeks to simplify at-large animal rules

Amendments to the city’s animal-at-large ordinance aims to make the law more clear for pet owners in Green River.

The updated ordinance was introduced last week during the April 5 Green River City Council meeting and specifically bans animals not leashed or in a kennel when not at their owner’s property, excluding areas deemed off-leash areas by Green River City Administrator Reed Clevenger. On their owner’s property, animals need to be fenced in to prevent them from escaping, restrained with a tether or under the owner’s direct supervision.

Tom Jarvie, the city’s chief of police, said the changes impact city ordinances 6-1 and 6-21 and aim to consolidate language found in the two ordinances. Ordinance 6-1 contains definitions for terms including “at large” and “restraint,” while 6-21 specifically addresses when an animal would be considered at large and in violation of city ordinance.

“The proposed changes would remove the terms ‘at large’ and ‘restraint’ from 6-1, with the proposed language in 6-21 then incorporating those principles in the wording of the ordinance, so someone looking at what the law requires would not have to bounce between the definition ordinance (6-1) and citing ordinance (6-21) to understand what would constitute a violation,” Jarvie wrote in an email to the Star.

The proposal was written by City Prosecutor Bobby Pineda with input from residents who had issues with unleashed animals. Jarvie said the Council asked for a revision after residents approached Council members with complaints about the current ordinance and reported incidents involving pets that were not leashed to their owners in public spaces.

“These complaints have ranged from dogs off leash aggressively approaching them and/or their pets to dogs off leash jumping up on them in a more friendly manner,” Jarvie wrote.

The Council approved the ordinance on first reading. Changes may be made to the ordinance when it is presented during its second reading Tuesday as Councilwoman Sherry Bushman said she wants to propose different wording to clarify the ordinance further. Additionally, the Council is divided on if the changes are necessary, with Council members George Jost, Ron Williams and Gary Killpack voicing opposition to the new ordinance.

“I think what we have works,” Councilman George Jost said. “I can’t see putting any more restrictions or rules on people for the dog owners who can’t take care of their dogs.”