Debating nuisance, other provisions of new dog law

[TribalRats]

Debating nuisance, other provisions of new dog law

Handler defends law

… Now the purebred cat and dog clubs are essentially using economic extortion by canceling some events in order to enlist the Greater Louisville Convention and Visitors Bureau to take their side.

Money sometimes needs to take a back seat to doing the right thing.



It's easy to see how much the excessive breeding of purebred dogs contributes to the pet overpopulation problem.

Simply consider that there are generally about 100 advertisements in The Courier-Journal's classifieds every day offering purebred cats, dogs and puppies for sale, representing several hundred animals in need of good homes.

The breeders can easily cover the $300 license fee through the sale of just one or two pet-quality puppies or kittens.

Then throw in all of the randomly bred dogs and cats that further exacerbate the problem….

The four-foot leash requirement is not as unreasonable as it may seem.

I belong to a volunteer group that provides well-trained, obedience- and aptitude-tested dogs for animal-assisted therapy and activities at hospitals, nursing homes, rehabilitation centers, etc.

Each individual animal/handler team carries $1 million in liability insurance.

Our local group requires that our nationally registered therapy dogs be on a four-foot leash while visiting because it gives the handler much better control than longer leashes, and even well-trained dogs are still dogs.

I'll bet the animal control officers at Metro Animal Services have no desire to seize the bunnies at the American Rabbit Breeders Convention in 2008. Surely the ordinance will be revised to resolve whatever provision is generating that concern.

Kudos to the Kentucky Humane Society for their new eye-catching and thought-provoking spay-neuter campaign.

DIANA M. COOK

Louisville 40223
Unfair to barking dog

Last Monday's "Anti-dog law" letter couldn't be closer to the truth. That is exactly how it is turning out.

Saturday night around 10 p.m., a cop showed up at my door because my neighbors had complained about my barking dog. And the cop was mad at me!

My dog had been out for only a few minutes. My neighbors failed to tell the cop that they taunt my dog, have thrown bones over to my dog, and their 5-year-old kid teases him. How fair is that?

Maybe we need an ordinance against neighbors who taunt and feed their neighbors' dog. That is the reason my dog barks now. He thinks if he barks, they will throw over some food.

I do not have children, so my dog is my kid. I keep my dog in all day while I am at work, and he also stays in at night.

So he only gets a total of three to four hours outside to run in his backyard.

Telling a dog he can't bark is like telling a human he can't speak. Maybe Louisville needs to tell people they are not allowed to have dogs.

This is not just a "dangerous dog" ordinance anymore; it has turned into "not allowed to have a dog that barks ordinance."

DEANA HESTER

Louisville 40215
Curbing 'incessant racket'

I felt compelled to respond to the letter submitted by someone complaining about the nuisance dog provision of the new dog ordinance…

As a responsible dog owner, I am not threatened in the least by this provision.

It is unfortunate that such a provision is necessary, but it was needed exactly because of reasoning like that expressed by the writer.

I found it quite laughable this person would complain about a provision that will prevent owners from allowing their dogs to bark incessantly.

This provision addresses prolonged, unprovoked barking. Suggesting that this is merely an "irritant" and, as such, surrounding neighbors should just live with it is ridiculous.

Why is it unreasonable to require dog owners to control behavior that intrudes on their neighbors' enjoyment of their homes?

Whether it's loud music, a constantly barking dog or junk cars in the front yard, they all are indicative of an inconsiderate, overbearing attitude that must be addressed.

Prior to enactment of this ordinance, complaining about a barking dog would get a weary and overworked animal control officer issuing a citation… The owners just snubbed their noses and the barking continued.

If this nuisance provision is truly enforced, it will be a great benefit to those who like to enjoy a quiet summer evening on their deck or backyard.

Your dog is not our dog, and we shouldn't have to put up with the incessant racket that a maladjusted dog (or owner) creates.

STEVEN THOMPSON