It’s no secret that a lot of Sweet Home residents are frustrated with dogs.
We’ve heard on numerous occasions, from all sides, how our police force spends way too much time dealing with wayward canines – and sometimes wayward owners.
Anybody who’s laid awake in the wee hours of the morning – on a work night, listening to some pooch down the street let the whole world know that life isn’t good, can feel some sympathy for the new nuisance ordinance approved by the City Council last week.
Described in our report starting on page 1, it basically gives the Municipal Court judge some power to deal with serious dog problems.
It might seem somewhat draconian to provide the judge with authority to order nuisance dogs – those that bark incessantly, that bite without provocation or try to, that chase cars, that get into other people’s garbage, that constantly escape – deported. But there’s a reason for this, and we think it’s valid.
Generally, governing bodies don’t sit around dreaming up ways they can make their constituents’ lives miserable. Most laws come about as a result of a genuine problem. We think that’s the case here.
Our police officers do spend an excessive amount of time dealing with dogs. As your newspaper, we pay close attention to what our public safety officials do and frankly, our cops are out a lot checking on reports of chronic barkers, dog bites, dogs running loose, dogs fighting, etc. It’s rare when our police don’t get at least one call a day to deal with a dog.
Of course, part of the problem isn’t just our furry friends. Recalcitrant owners don’t control their pets. They ignore the safety and comfort of their neighbors because they don’t want to deal with – or maybe they like – their canine’s bad habits. They don’t do what it takes to care for their pet and make sure it behaves properly.
Here’s the bottom line: If we all were above reproach as pet owners, we wouldn’t have this new law. So if we want Bowser or Fifi to continue to maintain residence in Sweet Home, we’re going to have to make sure we all behave.
This is a relatively small community and responsibility is generally rewarded with some measure of trust. If the dogs are in the back yard when a thunderstorm hits and the owner is at work, or the neighbor starts shooting off (illegal) bottle rockets or sparkler bombs and the family dog panics and jumps the fence (no one thought he could clear) to run for cover, well, we hope the authorities will be reasonable in such situations.
We do tend to agree with one critic who said the new ordinance’s restriction on kennels inside the city limits is an overreach. The standard should be to permit legitimate breeders, who can maintain proper care and conditions for their animals – and keep them quiet.
We’re also a little uncomfortable with the provision that anyone may impound a dog running at large, because some people are already overly zealous about rescuing “strays” who know very well how to get home. The law should specify that anyone who impounds a dog must contact the police or turn it in at the police station.
All in all, though, we think this ordinance largely puts the onus where it belongs: on us. If we own a dog, we need to be prepared to make sure it behaves. It’s part of being a responsible citizen.