City Council Votes To Restrict Residents To 3 Dog Per Household Limit

[matcom]

<snip>

OAKLAND, Calif. -- Here's a law about barks that packs quite a bite.

The City Council has voted to restrict residents to three dogs per household. The restriction, which takes effect in 60 days, will cut down on noise and odor complaints, members said.

The measure, which passed by a 7-1 vote Tuesday, also requires owners to implant microchips in their dogs, which council members said will help identify violent pets and track animals in a natural disaster.

Violators could be charged with a misdemeanor and fined up to $500.

The law comes as a relief to people like Oakland resident Mike Hoolihan, who says he once had a neighbor with as many as twenty dogs.

"These poor dogs were fighting other dogs and attacking them. I mean, it literally sounded like a child was being mauled."

Opponents argued that the measure would discourage volunteers from fostering strays.

The move brings Oakland in line with three-dog limits in other cities, including San Francisco, Alameda, Sacramento and Los Angeles, said City Councilman Larry Reid, who sponsored the resolution.

Current owners of more than three dogs can get an exemption if their pets are neutered and inspectors determine they have enough space for the animals.

http://www.wftv.com/irresistible/5065171/detail.html

[LynneSin]

1. I'd have to agree with this law and they have an exemption

I mean, for those that have more than 3 it's like fricking 'Sophie's Choice' deciding which dogs stay and which go.

[DanCa]

2. I would agree my sister has five dogs at her house the mess and noise

is horrible. Not too mention the air quality.

[zanne]

7. My sister has five kids.

Talk about messes and noise!

[DanCa]

9. can we mix and match :D (nt)

[flvegan]

3. Might put an end to a number of rescue organizations

and foster homes for same in the city. Council should've considered an exemption outside of the "enough space" one.

[RebelOne]

4. That's exactly what I was thinking.

[LostinVA]

5. Yup -- good law

[zanne]

8. What if somebody told you to limit the # of kids you want--

To three?

[philosophie_en_rose]

6. I'm sure rescue organizations will be excused.

I think the key issue is to prevent hoarding of animals beyond one's capacity to care for the animals. Rescue and foster groups usually don't take more animals than they can care for -- or they have the skills to adjust to the space, making whatever space there is "enough space."

[miss_kitty]

10. I think Seattle has had that law forever

you want more than 3 dogs or cats? I believe you need a kennel/cattery license. Don't have the statute at hand, and too lazy to look it up or call the animal control people, but I had friends over 30 years ago w/ 5 cats in town and a cattery permit.

[C_eh_N_eh_D_eh]

11. This is stupid.

The degree of noise and odor has more to do with how the dogs are being raised and what conditions they live in, than with how many there are.

The case mentioned in the article is an extreme. Nobody living in the suburbs should have 20 dogs, simply because it's not possible to care for them properly in such crowded conditions. But in a rural area, with lots of space for them to run around in, there'd be no problem as long as they were being raised responsibly.

I understand the principle behind this law, and I agree that the city should enforce some standards regarding noise and pollution (whether due to pets or children). But a blanket legislation banning ownership of more than three dogs is the wrong way to go about it. A single ill-behaved dog can and will wreak more havoc than a half-dozen who have been properly trained.

[ProfessorGAC]

12. We Have Such An Ordinance In Our Small Town

It's 4 cats AND 2 dogs limit or 5 cats OR 3 dogs. I don't think there's any provisions for more if they're neutered or spayed. Might be. Not sure.
The Professor