Animal Ordinance Changes
Update: March 3, 2026
The City Commission unanimously approved the passage of proposed Ordinance 771, thereby changing Chapter 3 of the municipal code.
Signed Ordinance
Update: December 18, 2025
During the December 17, 2025 City Commission meeting, officials announced a 30-day extension for public comment on proposed changes to Ordinance No. 771, which amends Chapter 3 of the Municipal Code. The ordinance, focused on animal regulations, has undergone two public meetings and two hearings, with recent feedback centered on livestock provisions. Officer Knull introduced revisions to clarify interactions with the livestock community, including guidance from the NM Livestock Board. Changes aim to “soften” enforcement on livestock running at large and shift from selling animals to rehoming them. The amended draft will be republished for review, as recommended by City Manager Gary Whitehead. Residents can view the most recent changes here:
Submit your comments and/or questions to Officer T. Knull or visit the Police Department at 507 McAdoo St, Truth or Consequences, NM 87901 to share your concerns in person.
Why Update the Ordinance? | What's Changing and Why it Matters | Benefits for the Community | Transparency and Public Input |
Dangerous & Vicious Animals | Wildlife Considerations | Looking Ahead | Frequently Asked Questions
Modernizing Animal Ordinances: A Thoughtful Step Toward Safer, Clearer, and More Humane Policies
The City of Truth or Consequences is revising its animal ordinances, a move that has generated public interest and questions. City officials want to assure residents that these updates are not only necessary but also approached with transparency, collaboration, and a strong commitment to community well-being.
The city’s Public Information Officer, Carrie Gaston, interviewed Officer Tyler Knull, City Clerk Angela Torres, and Animal Shelter Manager Tara Manning to clarify the reasoning and process behind the Animal Ordinance revisions.
The current animal ordinance, last significantly revised in 2022, has revealed several challenges in both enforcement and interpretation. When animal-related issues arise—such as dangerous behavior, unclear ownership, or licensing disputes, city staff often find that the existing ordinance lacks the specific guidance and legal structure needed to respond effectively.
Additionally, outdated terminology and vague definitions have led to confusion and inconsistent application. For instance, some responsibilities are still assigned to departments that no longer handle those duties, such as the police department’s former role in managing multi-animal site records. These gaps and inconsistencies prompted a thorough review and restructuring of the ordinance to better reflect current practices and community needs.
What's Changing and Why it Matters
The revised ordinance is not just a patchwork of fixes; it’s a complete reorganization designed to improve flow, clarity, and enforceability. Key changes include:
- Clearer Structure: The ordinance is now divided into logical sections—general provisions, administration, enforcement, and penalties—making it easier for residents and officials to understand and apply.
- Updated Definitions: Ambiguous terms have been clarified to prevent misinterpretation and ensure consistent enforcement.
- New Sections Introduced:
- Microchipping Requirement: A new mandate for companion animals to be microchipped will help reunite lost pets with their owners more efficiently.
- Unaltered Animal Permits: Residents with intact animals can now obtain permits or provide veterinary exemptions, helping the city track breeding animals without mandating sterilization.
- Guard Dog Regulations: A new section defines and regulates guard dogs, aligning with trends in other municipalities and preparing for future needs.
- Restitution Provisions: Courts will now have the authority to order restitution for property damage or injury caused by animals, offering a fairer, more restorative approach to enforcement.
Back to Top
Benefits for the Community
To help ease public concerns, city officials have emphasized that the ordinance revision process has been inclusive and driven by community needs. The goal is not to impose burdensome regulations, but to clarify existing rules, close enforcement gaps, and ensure the safety and well-being of both residents and animals. By incorporating feedback from multiple departments and stakeholders, the city is working to create a balanced ordinance that reflects current practices while preparing for future challenges. This revision is designed to:
- Protect public safety by addressing dangerous animals and improving enforcement tools.
- Support responsible pet ownership through clearer licensing and tracking systems.
- Ensure fairness by allowing courts to order restitution instead of just fines.
- Improve animal welfare by requiring microchipping and clarifying care standards.
Contrary to concerns about secrecy, staff highlighted that this process has been and will continue to be open and collaborative. As Torres noted, “We’ve had numerous meetings since the draft was posted, and changes have already been made based on feedback.” The ordinance was removed from a recent agenda to allow for further refinement, and it is now scheduled for presentation to the City Commission on August 13, 2025.
Knull added, “This was never meant to be a sneaky, under-the-radar revision. We totally want public input; from the shelter, the Clerk’s Office, and residents.”
If the Commission approves the ordinance for publication on the 13th, the Clerk’s office will create a public notice, publish the notice in the Sierra County Sentinel, on the noticeboard at 505 Sims Street, and on our city website, along with references to the notice on social media platforms. The Clerk’s office will not only publish the notice for the required 15 days but will extend the notice to 60 days to allow for a series of public workshops.
Dangerous & Vicious Animals: Understanding the Legal and Social Implications
Communities continue to grapple with the challenges posed by dangerous and vicious animals, prompting updates to local ordinances aimed at enhancing public safety and accountability. A key development is the introduction of restitution, which allows judges to require pet owners to compensate for property damage caused by their animals, such as repairing a neighbor’s fence, rather than simply imposing fines. The ordinance also clarifies the distinction between "dangerous" and "vicious" animals. A dog may be labeled dangerous after repeated non-severe bites, requiring the owner to follow strict containment protocols. However, if a dog inflicts a severe injury—such as muscle tears, disfiguring lacerations, or permanent disfigurement, it may be deemed vicious, a designation that can lead to euthanasia if the court determines the animal poses a continued threat.
Importantly, the ordinance does not discriminate by breed, emphasizing that responsibility lies with the owner, not the animal. As Knull stated, “This is meant to hold an owner accountable, not an animal.”
This focus on public safety is reinforced by a tragic event in the city’s past, when four dogs running at large fatally attacked a person. That incident remains a key reason for continuing to maintain and develop the dangerous and vicious animal sections of the ordinance. By clearly distinguishing between “dangerous” dogs—those requiring strict containment—and “vicious” dogs—those that have caused severe or repeated harm—the city aims to prevent future tragedies while ensuring that enforcement remains both proactive and protective of the community.
Back to Top
City representatives are reviewing the language of the current animal control ordinance amid concerns that it may be misinterpreted as requiring officers to respond to every stray vertebrate animal, including wildlife such as raccoons and skunks. It also includes clarifying the city’s actual practices and the limitations of its resources.
A recent social media post sparked concerns about feasibility, cost, and scope of enforcing proposed revisions to the Animal Control Ordinance, particularly regarding wildlife:
“it requires the animal control officer to pick up EVERY stray vertebrate animal (cats, raccoons, possums, etc.). This is not only silly but would be extremely expensive to enforce,” wrote the Facebook commenter.
Although the ordinance (3-26 and 3-29) includes broad language about impounding animals that pose a nuisance or are kept in violation of city code, representatives clarified that animal control does not routinely handle wildlife. In practice, the city does not mandate the capture or relocation of wild animals unless there is clear public health concern, such as suspected rabies.
However, Knull noted that while the ordinance provides broad authority, enforcement is discretionary. “We don’t have enforcement for it,” he said, referring specifically to wildlife like raccoons. “In the past, we have picked up and relocated raccoons, skunks, foxes as a public service, but we’re not mandated to do so.”
Over time, the city has moved away from direct wildlife handling due to staffing and resource constraints. With only two officers available, one of whom is primarily tasked with building code enforcement, responding to wildlife calls can significantly disrupt other essential duties. Officials noted that a single wildlife relocation can take over an hour, pulling staff away from city responsibilities and creating inefficiencies in service delivery.
Knull emphasized that this approach is not unique to Truth or Consequences. “Las Cruces city workers do not handle skunks or raccoons,” he said. The conversation also touched on the strain such duties place on limited resources. Knull recounted a particularly challenging day when he was called to relocate four skunks from separate traps—each one resulting in him being sprayed. The experience, he noted, underscored how unsustainable such wildlife responses can be.
To address this wildlife issue, the city animal shelter offers traps to residents, who are responsible for relocating the animals themselves. This approach, similar to policies in other municipalities such as Las Cruces, allows the city to focus its limited resources on domestic animal issues and code enforcement while providing residents with the tools to manage nuisance wildlife on their properties.
Manning noted that while the shelter does issue traps to residents, the responsibility for relocating the animals falls on the individuals. According to Knull, officers are prohibited from handling personal property such as privately owned traps. “If it’s your trap, it’s your responsibility,” he explained, citing department policy and directives from the Police Chief Tavizon.
The city is focusing on public education and prevention. Officials emphasized that the goal is not to ignore wildlife concerns but to promote responsible coexistence. Residents are encouraged to make their properties less hospitable to wildlife by securing trash, removing food sources, and other preventative measures rather than relying on animal removal. “We shouldn’t have to remove an animal from its natural habitat just because it’s a nuisance,” Knull said. “If it’s not posing a danger, we need to figure out how to exclude it.”
In cases where there is legitimate public health concern, such as suspected rabies, animal control will respond, often in coordination with state agencies like Game and Fish or the Department of Health. “At that point,” Knull noted, “it goes to the State.”
As the city continues to review its ordinance, officials are weighing how to balance public safety, fiscal responsibility, and humane treatment of wildlife in a rural setting.
Looking Ahead
Looking ahead, there is a strong commitment to ensuring that ordinances remain dynamic and responsive to change. As Manning noted, this is only the second review of the ordinances in over five years, highlighting the need for a more consistent and proactive approach. The goal is to treat these ordinances as a "living, breathing document," revisiting them annually to assess what has worked, what hasn’t, and what can be improved. This regular review process will involve multiple departments and perspectives, including those of the Animal Shelter, Code Compliance, the City Clerk’s Office, and, most importantly, the public. Torres and Knull underscored that public involvement will be a key part of this process, with workshops and public hearings providing opportunities for community members to share their input. By embedding public comment into each revision cycle, the city ensures that its ordinances evolve in step with the needs of its residents and the realities of a changing world.