Having more than 3 cats now requires a license

[BloodEclipse]

Nov 3, 2009

Having more than 3 cats now requires a license



DUDLEY — Voters last night added language to a town bylaw that will make it illegal to own more than three cats without a kennel license, though Selectman Steven Sullivan said housing three felines was already a violation.

The article came after a neighborhood feud over cats owned by Mary Ellen Richards of Kennedy Drive.

Some of Mrs. Richards’ 15 cats are allowed outside, and one neighbor said the cats have ruined his yard.

The discussion at town meeting last night had Mrs. Richards warning residents that the $100 per day fines being imposed on her could also be imposed on them if they fail to get kennel licenses for their pets.

She has put her home up for sale and plans to move to a “more cat-friendly community,” but vowed to fight the fines.

— Kim Ring

Oh I'm so glad I left the People's Republic of Massachusetts.

[tv1217]

[rich8483]

i dont have to worry about it. ill never get that much *****

[hornadylnl]

If they still allowed property owners to shoot nuisance animals on their property, government wouldn't have to be involved in this. Isn't it a felony to shoot pets in Indiana now?

[evansvillethompsongunner]

Originally Posted by hornadylnl

If they still allowed property owners to shoot nuisance animals on their property, government wouldn't have to be involved in this. Isn't it a felony to shoot pets in Indiana now?

Yes, apparently it is.

Wild animals might be okay, but unless you can prove endangerment of livestock or harm to property, looks as though it's Class D felony....

Let me find the IC on this..... {{searching....}}:


Indiana Code 35-46-3

(Titles of Chapters bolded in original, otherwise emphasis mine.)

IC 35-46-3-12
Torture or mutilation of a vertebrate animal; killing a domestic animal
Sec. 12. (a) This section does not apply to a person who euthanizes an injured, a sick, a homeless, or an unwanted domestic animal if:
(1) the person is employed by a humane society, an animal control agency, or a governmental entity operating an animal shelter or other animal impounding facility; and
(2) the person euthanizes the domestic animal in accordance with guidelines adopted by the humane society, animal control agency, or governmental entity operating the animal shelter or other animal impounding facility.
(b) A person who knowingly or intentionally beats a vertebrate animal commits cruelty to an animal, a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if:
(1) the person has a previous, unrelated conviction under this section; or
(2) the person committed the offense with the intent to threaten, intimidate, coerce, harass, or terrorize a family or household member.
(c) A person who knowingly or intentionally tortures or mutilates a vertebrate animal commits torturing or mutilating a vertebrate animal, a Class D felony.
(d) As used in this subsection, "domestic animal" means an animal that is not wild. The term is limited to:
(1) cattle, calves, horses, mules, swine, sheep, goats, dogs, cats, poultry, ostriches, rhea, and emus; and
(2) an animal of the bovine, equine, ovine, caprine, porcine, canine, feline, camelid, cervidae, or bison species.
A person who knowingly or intentionally kills a domestic animal without the consent of the owner of the domestic animal commits killing a domestic animal, a Class D felony.
(e) It is a defense to a prosecution under this section that the accused person:
(1) reasonably believes the conduct was necessary to:
(A) prevent injury to the accused person or another person;
(B) protect the property of the accused person from destruction or substantial damage; or
(C) prevent a seriously injured vertebrate animal from prolonged suffering; or (2) engaged in a reasonable and recognized act of training, handling, or disciplining the vertebrate animal.
(f) When a court imposes a sentence or enters a dispositional decree under this section, the court:
(1) shall consider requiring:
(A) a person convicted of an offense under this section; or
(B) a child adjudicated a delinquent child for committing an act that would be a crime under this section if committed by an adult;
to receive psychological, behavioral, or other counseling as a part of the sentence or dispositional decree; and
(2) may order an individual described in subdivision (1) to receive psychological, behavioral, or other counseling as a part of the sentence or dispositional decree.


"IC 35-46-3-5
Exceptions from chapter; electrocution
Sec. 5. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) through (c), this chapter does not apply to the following:
(1) Fishing, hunting, trapping, or other conduct authorized under IC 14-22.
(2) Conduct authorized under IC 15-20-2.
(3) Veterinary practices authorized by standards adopted under IC 25-38.1-2-14.
(4) Conduct authorized by a local ordinance.
(5) Acceptable farm management practices.
(6) Conduct authorized by IC 15-17, and rules adopted under IC 15-17 for state or federally inspected livestock slaughtering facilities and state or federal animal disease control programs.
(7) A research facility registered with the United States Department of Agriculture under the federal Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.).
(8) Destruction of a vertebrate defined as a pest under IC 15-16-5-24.
(9) Destruction of or injury to a fish.
(10) Destruction of a vertebrate animal that is:
(A) endangering, harassing, or threatening livestock or a domestic animal; or
(B) destroying or damaging a person's property.
(11) Destruction of an animal by an animal control program, including an animal control facility, an animal shelter, or a humane society.
(12) Destruction of an injured or ill animal by an individual to prevent the animal from prolonged suffering.
(13) Conduct not resulting in serious injury or illness to the animal that is incidental to exhibiting an animal for show, competition, or display, or that is incidental to transporting the animal for show, competition, or display.
(14) Parking an animal.
(15) Humane destruction of an animal that the person owns.
(b) Section 1 of this chapter applies to conduct described in subsection (a).
(c) Destruction of an animal by electrocution is authorized under this section only if it is conducted by a person who is engaged in an acceptable farm management practice, by a research facility registered with the United States Department of Agriculture under the Animal Welfare Act, or for the animal disease diagnostic laboratory established under IC 21-46-3-1, a research facility licensed by the United States Department of Agriculture, a college, or a university.

[hornadylnl]

That's crap. If the animal drops on your property, it should be a good shoot. I shouldn't have to worry about someone else's animal harming me or my family. Keep you effin animals on your property and you won't have anything to worry about. This is another step to taking away our property rights. I have 2 dogs and I can count on 1 hand the number of times they've gotten off of our property in 10 years. Yes, animals get loose ocasionally and I don't have a problem with that. When your dog is running the effin town on a daily basis using my yard as it's litter box, I should have the right to shoot it.

[evansvillethompsongunner]

Originally Posted by hornadylnl

That's crap. If the animal drops on your property, it should be a good shoot. I shouldn't have to worry about someone else's animal harming me or my family. Keep you effin animals on your property and you won't have anything to worry about. This is another step to taking away our property rights. I have 2 dogs and I can count on 1 hand the number of times they've gotten off of our property in 10 years. Yes, animals get loose ocasionally and I don't have a problem with that. When your dog is running the effin town on a daily basis using my yard as it's litter box, I should have the right to shoot it.

Hey, didn't say I agreed with it, just quoting State statute, good sir.

I'm not for the slaughter of family pets, but nor am I for the loose running of vicious or diseased animals. I'm pretty ambivalent about the entire issue.

However, the fact that you have Dale Gribble/Rusty Shackleford the noted pest exterminator as your avatar, well, the irony is thick and I laughed for about twenty seconds.

[hornadylnl]

Sorry, my rant wasn't directed at you. I love animals to and have shot very few. I hated it when I did but I'm not going to be a prisoner on my own property to anyone else's dogs. The only way to prove that you were in danger is if you have a piece of flesh missing from that dog. If not, it is purely subjective and depends on what side the responding LEO wants to believe. Back when common sense ruled the day, the pet owner would chalk it up to needing to keep better control of their animals.

[fpd9317]

Not that I disagree that this is BS because it is.......my house=my rules including how many pets I have.

But as a side note......have you ever been inside a house with lots of cats? I've been in plenty that you could smell the cat piss from the street. Not to mention the ones with feces all over the floor. How the hell can some people live that way???

[hornadylnl]

Originally Posted by fpd9317

Not that I disagree that this is BS because it is.......my house=my rules including how many pets I have.

But as a side note......have you ever been inside a house with lots of cats? I've been in plenty that you could smell the cat piss from the street. Not to mention the ones with feces all over the floor. How the hell can some people live that way???

I have family members who waller in their own garbage and rotten food on dirty dishes everywhere with no pets. That's just as bad as cat piss and feces.