OCR Text |
Show The control of dogs In the United States, thousands thou-sands of postal workers can attest at-test to the fact that a dog's bark is not worse than its bite. During Dur-ing the first seven months of this year, 3,986 postal workers were bitten by man's supposed best friend. While the U.S. Postal Post-al Service has been most resourceful re-sourceful in trying to fend off dog . attacks using pepper, umbrellas and simply refusing to deliver mail at houses where dogs are running loose that doesn't protect the rest of us, nor does it obviate the fact that neither mail carriers nor anyone any-one else should have to rely on such tactics. Animal control laws should be strict enough to help reduce animal attacks. The Postal Service is urging cities to adopt more stringent laws which would require all dogs to be leashed when off private pri-vate property. Under present law, voice control is considered adequate restraint in most communities. com-munities. So far (probably), so good. Problems arise, however, with the Postal Service's request for an expansion of the "vicious dog" rule. Currently, a dog is considered vicious only after it bites someone and only if the attack takes place off the proposal, a dog could be found vicious even if it doesn't bite, but simply threatens to harm someone. In such a case, the dog would be impounded. To get the pet back, the owner would have to provide a written guarantee of the dog's behavior that it would be restrained while on private property and that it would be leashed and muzzled when off. Additionally, the owner would have to post a $10,000 bond. The question is to determine the meaning of what constitutes a threat of harm. Is it a Dober-man Dober-man baring its teeth? A poodle nipping at someone's heels? A Chihuahua barking in the night? Absent more specific definitions, defini-tions, the matter of threatening canine behavior is too vague for such a prohibition. The request of the Postal Service, Ser-vice, nonetheless, deserves consideration, con-sideration, not only for the benefit bene-fit of the proverbial postman, but for the sake of everyone else. Most dogs are well-controlled and harmless, but the minority that aren't is large enough to cause legitimate concern. con-cern. (Reprinted by Permission of Trip CanramanrA Rp |