A tale of dogs and bars

[TribalRats]

By Jack Hilovsky
02/07/2007


Over the last two weeks, both Seattle dailies reported on a canine development in Olympia, one that could alter current laws governing health and safety in public bars and dining establishments that have a liquor license.

If Washington state Senator Ken Jacobsen and other canine-loving legislators succeed, a state law - the first of its kind in the nation - might soon allow well-behaved, leashed dogs to pony up to the neighborhood bar with their masters. The proposed measure received a public hearing before the Senate Labor, Commerce, and Research Development Committee in late January.

Reflecting the local mood regarding the proposed legislation, managers of one pub and several coffee shops reacted positively, yet cautiously, to the news. Both at the Six Arms Pub, on East Pine Street, and at Victrola, on 15th Avenue East, proprieters indicated they have a policy prohibiting pets from coming indoors. But both welcome customers to tie up their furry friends outside while ordering a coffee or sitting down for a meal or a quick nightcap.

"Some people bring lap dogs and secretly tuck them inside their coats," said Josh Dawson at Six Arms. "But if we see a dog, we must direct them outside."

Danae DeBree, manager of Victrola, agreed.

"Now and then customers will arrive at the counter to place an order with their dog scooped in their arms. If they plan to stay, we let them know only service animals are allowed," she said.

Last fall a minor furor emerged when a columnist for this paper expressed disappointment when a local coffee shop was forced to post a "no dogs allowed" sign after a disgruntled patron called the health department reporting lax enforcement by the café's owner. The columnist, while not a dog owner, enjoyed the social opportunity to visit with neighbors and their pets each time he dropped by for his morning joe. He felt the experience built a strong sense of community and allowed him to get to know fellow residents in his Capitol Hill enclave. People were friendlier and more open when accompanied by their pups.

According to Sen. Jacobsen, who also doesn't own a dog, this is the exact reason to sponsor the bill. In the Seattle-PI, he recently recounted his regular visits during the legislative session to a brewpub in downtown Olympia, where he saw all the dogs forlornly sitting in the cold and rain while their owners were warm inside.

Under the proposed measure, establishments wouldn't be required to allow dogs unless they are service animals, which suits many business owners just fine, and reflects current law. However, if the measure became law, the owner would now have legal backing to allow accompanied, leashed canines into the premises.

"If it's a law, I'll follow it," said Victrola's DeBree, but her preference is not to have dogs inside. "It may offend some customers. We'd like to respect the rights of everyone since some people may be allergic or grossed out by it. We may lose some customers, but like the smoking law, people deal with it."

Dawson at Six Arms isn't concerned about the sanitation issue. "If a dog has fleas, that could be a problem, but it's not like they are near food preparation," he said.

He suggested the greater problem might arise when food is delivered to the tables on a night when 10 hungry dogs are visiting. "It could get chaotic."

Predictably, issues surrounding contamination drive the concerns of health departments because of the different bacteria and parasites that dogs can carry. A stricter focus on cleaning requirements to ward off potential exposure to fecal matter or urine would become an essential priority to meet food codes.

Some dog advocates argue that canines are cleaner and better-behaved than children accompanying their family into dining establishments. Unsupervised, kids can provide as much disruption and mess as a barking, begging pooch.

Liability is another issue both business owners and the legislature will likely need to address. How are private establishments protected against lawsuits if Fido gets a bit aggressive and takes a bite out of someone's behind? Who would be at fault: the shop owner or the dog's keeper? How are law-abiding property owners protected from unruly pets and their adoring owners? And will certain breeds become victims of discrimination based on someone's bias?

One café owner, who wished to remain anonymous, said owners need to take responsibility for their pet's behavior, much like parents need to take responsibility for their children's. He supports the measure, but thinks society makes too many laws and would benefit from a reasonable, more common sense policy that didn't necessarily involve changing the law.