Dog Urine in Public Places Part I r 5,-c,.... &v *bC-,..2,-.;i
' VRP RAID ti 1ti R o f
� '2;14.g& , '''-'',.,...„,. .-'p ' i f ie °. 'N ild.bi ,s a a "t."90,119'.10 F 1 Y 1' A v.'; P F j•
� n w
r.i_ 1 ri d . n [& Mi hT'�L `'a
,�Yp 1 L W W�
-
n U azt 1 Ypry°A18n � A� s J ��
y. i10(.0 4 f Sp FVr a 9 a , aXk .: +t a w�o r v @� Yx �0'a 5°2 ' ° w u. r� ta �Fc n gk, 4,-,,(Iii".. .,i Y l '- lk. ; e ey AR , •
t :a a5e9 d s. a
.K J 4 M r t12e]jMa1n r a � + 0 agra � x C ,w �i m '>° a J� n ° 2 }S* � r ( a OT r '} ' n 4 la a a i nE° : r qy 3 F l rm .Y �uiIiujNliti�)z r r 4 l }rG °d 41ara l� 4t14 ' ' '''
Page I of I
Ernie Mathieu
From: Colleen Currie [currie @crocker.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 5:19 PM
To: Ernie Mathieu
Subject: Re:August 16 meeting
I read the Gazette article. Thank you. And thank you and the other Board members for serving and doing the
important work of public health.
Original Message
From: Ernie Mathieu
To: Colleen
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2007 3:03 PM
Subject: RE: August 16 meeting
Dear Ms. Currie,
The information printed on the card by Mr. Scheinman is totally inaccurate.The Board is not proposing any
rules of regulations for dogs or animals, nor a fire. The Board Meeting has been cancelled and the topic has
been dropped.
Sincerely,
Ernie Mathieu, Director
From: Colleen [mailto:currie @crocker.com]
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2007 12:26 PM
To: BOH
Subject: August 16 meeting
I have been advised that at the August 16 meeting the Board is scheduled to decide if dog urine in public places
is a public health nuisance, with a potential penalty of up to a$1000 fine.
If this is accurate information, I would appreciate knowing if there is a proposal for a city ordinance or some
other writing that I may receive via e-mail or fax in advance of the meeting in order to prepare to attend or to
write to the Board.
Thank you
Colleen C. Currie
currie @crocker.com
fax: (413)584-6605
8/16/2007
BOARD OF HEALTH
MEMBERS
ROSEMARIE KARPARIS,R.N.,MPH
XANTHI SCRIMGEOUR,MHEd,CHES
JAY FLEITMAN,M.D.
STAFF
Ernest J.Mathieu,R.S.,M.S.,C.H.O.
Director of Public Health
Richard Meczywor,R.S.,Sanitary Inspector
Patricia Abbott,R.N.,Public Health Nurse
October 29, 2007
Alan Scheinman, Esquire
7 Pleasant Street
Northampton, MA 01060
OFFICE OF THE
BOARD OF HEALTH
CITY OF NORTHAMPTON
MASSACHUSETTS 01060
212 MAIN STREET
NORTHAMPTON,MA 0106(
(413)587-1214
FAX(413)587-1221
RE: DOG URINATING ON THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK AND CURBING, IN FRONT
OF 7 PLEASANT STREET
Dear Attorney Scheinman:
At a regular Board of Health monthly meeting held in September, the Board of Health members
continued their discussion regarding the situation of your dog urinating on the side walk in front
of 9 Pleasant Street. Board member Ms. Xanthi Scrimgeour abstained from participating in any
of the decisions made regarding this issue.
The Board Members,Ms. Karparis and Dr. Fleitman have agreed that if you continue to apply
the neutralizing urine solution on the dog urine in all events that your dog urinates on the
sidewalk area, then the Board will find that this issue does not rise to the level of a public health
nuisance. It was also agreed that if you act in good faith to continue to exercise these efforts,
that no further action on this matter is required by this Board at this time.
We have also been informed that no further complaints related to your dog's urinating on the
sidewalk since complaint that led to your request to attend our meeting in June of 2007. We have
also received information that the situation has been much less frequent since our discussions
with you on this matter at our meeting.
The Board and I would like to take the time to thank you for the efforts you have made in
curbing this situation as well as your cooperation since meeting with you.
Sincerely,
Ernest J. Mathieu, R.S.,M.S., C.H.O.
Director of Public Health
EMAIL• emathieu@northamptonma.gov
cc: Board of Health Members (3)
i
I
Ye
p
I
1
it/ has 4-,)
Q 20 J o *w 7v2i4140°V0N
wis"ahFJ
vYa,^')9�J
o _An,C - c
C1 No wsMn � py s
�,_
zl "O1 u�
4-7-1117/Y/ -7 11
_ i1 co ) '-"^v s 1 n v z�w zv
-0
_ 017
-ac r�M
� �
(w" ( 4
'7fi) w --)1I9
C%' °P -t '^' D°
'11 -17 r"-"F'S nod 1� n d
t. , av41 Cyr (n Nra--("'m\-\
on : A nits 4s)i)
y/ ° w _'zfm"�
7
t o 1)
ThAlf do —
1) 1d e.r)5 n
w,A e � 12 V lau
•,,,h,� ) ) x'"''23 Yhw
1 A/al-5 — raYte) - � urns
OP CI ,n„ viY9 `11 5 • '_ I) mew
y)� t i �aun��S�J
pane c42 ' -c
o� w ++'44'9`0 � isvI San-? •-•-
4 -V;2chw . 5�✓'�
-1.-),TT 1--)w nron c�. r 'rvvn In —
(0
l io v�1 ? In 3 2-1WvLi)n irlfv —
1 ' hI u1 )-vrw-2 d"Y)
itrn n.0
7/I y ■4 ' P 1g-A
7v11f0 {°—`vo n-a
.002 '21 '-
Z 7)OIO ,
- a a ;, d n ,,, .r , w "-'Y
-dn r 4
zne'y- - -' , , /
oor nwvruccr-'' /
--0- -ter»
ityt-trwDap
40 - n - 2,
8/13/07
To Whom It May Concern:
I feel that taking your pets in public places is a right and a privilege that
should remain allowed. Although some people may view this as a nuisance,
domesticated dogs are still animals, and it's their natural routine to urinate
outside. Having animals in public places helps bring a community together
and also promotes the humanity of the animals themselves.
Please don't create a ban on the public urination of dogs.
Sincerely,
Katie Koti
14 Summer St
Northampton MA
August 13, 2007
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing to you regarding the proposed legislation on the board
of health's law on dog's urine stating it's a public nuisance. As a dog
owner I highly disagree with this. I think it is going a little over board.
Where are dogs going to urinate? Are we going to have to carry
around with us, dog training pads? This is ridiculous.
Rebecca J. doff
The news that there is a serious proposal to make it illegal for a dog to urinate outside its
owner's property in Northampton came as quite a shock to me. I assume that it will not
take a public hearing to reveal that this would be tantamount to outlawing the walking of
a dog in the city and making it impossible for people living in most apartments and
condominium to own a dog.
Such a proposal also raises a number of questions that the Board of Health should answer
before placing a burden on citizens to face this issue. What are the specific health risks
posed by dog urine and what is their magnitude? How many citizens of the city have
become ill as a consequence of exposure to dog urine? Are other health risks being
addressed as vigorously? What about the disgusting liquid that pours from the garbage
trucks that drive all over the city? Is the law that prohibits vehicles from idling more than
five minutes being enforced9 Are speed limits and other traffic laws that protect drivers
and pedestrians from injury and death being enforced? When will homeowners stop
receiving reports that their drinking water contains unhealthful chemicals?
If such a law were to be passed and enforced rigorously,the population of dogs in the city
would surely decline by a large percentage. Many businesses would be adversely
affected,those that sell dog food and other dog products,veterinarians' offices and
boarding kennels in particular. And the quality of life would be degraded for many dog
owners and even other citizens who enjoy seeing and meeting dogs in parks,nursing
homes, and elsewhere.
On the brighter side, civic matters must be in pretty good shape in Northampton for city
officials to have time for such a proposal .
eHGi2.0LAMe--
>.o Geova 4Nevos
tit 272/W7 ✓?�J�
)
L, 00 o ) iSQct
s y`- -oN 31 V SINS S I
sc\oZ1n (-7�(' ;f P >
1vg. vz] vas, �✓
LQ z 1 ,/
To whom it may concern;
You must be kidding me. How on earth can we stop a dog from relieving his or
herself? I totally agree with picking up poop but this urine thing is crazy.
I don't know of anyone who has gotten sick because a dog urinated on the ground.
Can we no longer walk our dogs? Every time we step off of our own property we are in a
public place.
I think that the Board of Health should concentrate on things that are really a health
hazard and leave our dogs alone.
Sincerely,
Barbara Southwick
Armand P. LaFleur
96 Lake Street
Florence, MA 01062
August 11, 2007
Northampton Board of Health
212 Main Street
Northampton, MA 01060
To whom it may concern:
I have just learned that the Board of Health is considering whether to make
dog urine in public places a public health nuisance (up to a $1,000.00 fine).
I have lived in Northampton my entire life, and have enjoyed walking my dog
in my neighborhood and in Look Park every day in the Spring, Summer, and
Fall months. T imagine that all of the places where I walk my dog are
considered public places, and will be quite upset if this regulation passes. It's
not possible to keep a dog from stopping occasionally to urinate outside.
"Therefore, this regulation would prohibit me from walking my dog in
Northampton.
Please do not enact this regulation.
Sincerely,
Armand P. LaFleur
James A. Benoit
111 Lake Street
Florence, MA 01062
August11, 2007
Northampton Board of Health
212 Main Street
Northampton, MA 01060
To whom it may concern:
I understand that the Board of Health wants to make dog urine in public places a
public health nuisance punishable by fines of up to$1,000.00.
This policy would essentially restrict dog owners from all public places, since one
cannot prevent a dog from urinating when outside. I assume that my street,where
I frequently walk my dog, is considered a public place. It seems unfair that, if this
ordinance is passed, I would not be allowed to walk my dog on my own street.
Where would I be allowed to walk my dog?
People who get their dogs all of the required shots and license their dogs with the
city should be allowed to walk them in public places without fear of unreasonable
fines.
As a Northampton resident my entire life, and as a responsible dog owner, I
request that you do not create this ordinance.
Sincerely,
James A. Benoit
Tina M. Benoit
48 Evergreen Road, 114
Leeds, MA 01053
August 11, 2007
Northampton Board of Health
212 Main Street
Northampton, MA 01060
To whom it may concern:
I gratefully received a notice today that your office is considering deeming dog urine in
public places a public health nuisance punishable by fines of up to $1,000.00. As a life-
long Northampton resident, and a responsible dog owner, I request that you consider my
concerns about instituting such an ordinance in our city.
Clearly, dog owners have no control over when or where our dogs find the need to
urinate. Therefore, should you vote to enact this ordinance, dog owners,who make up a
considerable and growing number of tax-paying consumers in our city, would be
restricted from all public places.
One of the wonderful things about Northampton has always been the many beautiful
areas where people can walk, for example, in Look Park, Childs Park, the bike path, or
along any of our beautiful city streets... and presumably these are all public places. If
such a restrictive ordinance is passed, where would dog owners be allowed to walk?
Also, I honestly fail to understand the need for such an ordinance at this point in our
city's history. Growing up in Northampton, I remember stray dogs visiting our
neighborhood on a regular basis. However, these days, I can't remember the last time I
saw a stray. It seems dog owners are more responsible now than ever. So, how is it that
dog urine in public places has become a pressing problem at this time?
I appreciate your office's efforts to reduce the many serious public health threats that our
community faces today. Frankly, the issue of dog urine is not as important to our
community as preparing for the possibility of a bird flu epidemic, acts of terrorism, and
natural disasters,or inspections of summer camps, septic system installations,restaurants,
and swimming areas or investigating possible outbreaks of disease. Please don't let the
issue of where my dog urinates take any of your time from these important issues.
With sincere appreciation,
,
Tina M. Benoit
August 13, 2007
Northampton Board of Health,
This letter is in reference to the scheduled Board of Health's meeting at City Hall on
August 16, 2007. Before you prohibit owners from walking their dogs in public places
because dog urine might present a health nuisance, consider the nuisance cats present and
the Board of Health's lack of restrictions placed on cat owners.
Cats roam free. They are allowed to trespass on private property and to roam at will on
public property. They defecate wherever they choose with no ordinance placed on owners
to clean up after them. How healthy is it for a small child to play in her sandbox or a
gardener to pull weeds only to come up with a handful of cat feces? Now, that is a
definite health concern to which the Board of Health pays no attention.
Cats spray their urine wherever and whenever they choose. Why does not the Board of
Health concern itself with the cat urine that frequently is sprayed on schools, stores,
churches, and private property? The smell alone warrants concern, whether or not the
urine carries with it a health hazard. Further, a cat bite contains more bacteria than a dog
bite yet cats are allowed to wander at will down Main Street.
We dog owners pay for licenses and pay more for our unneutered dogs and multiple dogs
in one household(kennel licensing). We are required to have our dogs on leashes and to
clean up after them. Dogs are restricted from many areas including playing fields,
cemeteries, and certain parks. Yet, cats roam free depositing their urine and feces at will.
Their owners do not pay for licensing, let alone higher licensing costs for unneutered cats.
Cat owners can have as many cats as they wish in one household and are not required to
clean up after them.
With the cat issue looming large, I do not understand why the Board of Health is seeking
to restrict even more areas where leashed dogs may walk. There are enough limits placed
on dogs! It's time the town concerns itself with a real health hazard and nuisance...cats.
Sing rely,
`tea
Dara Johnson
83 Front Street
PO Box 293
Leeds, MA 01053
ifirifir
',97 ,may r y17�/' or,6•Gg py
7K rice/2
-.ix- - ?f2 �r-F/- J� ' .7 arty,. nom(.
y-7w,v p ree 6.," S ' ,may,n7
efreletek O .,,
wsltrg/ ""(7'r J rC��/ v�li y� C''V' T
i
__DO OK r -"'yam —^1i778 '_-Y-- c r
/ Q yv/n • 6,4,, �r Qtdl�(Lea-6x
y 1,267y _ie ("z, eFeec/A-6,
two'Syyy� <»,/k d•oyS/
L a /E s.--rl rag'
Barbara Ahearn
139 Water Street
Leeds,MA 01053
413-584-9517
Northampton Board of Health
212 Main Street
Northampton, MA 01060
To Whom It May Concern:
I am sending you my opinion on the topic of dog urine in public places that you are about
to consider. I searched the internet looking for evidence that dog urine is a public health
nuisance and I could find no evidence that it is. I am open to reading any document that offers
proof that it is a public health nuisance, but at this time my opinion is that it is not a public health
nuisance.
Sincere
Ail
arbara Ahearn
/t4X 5` JI1/7/r/o ,4,,c4
cafcae c
41-f
or% 0/4
WE
ter-/' Zee 7
ACE Oa/
"fru y /arift74,:
6)o j a21/40`�f // roil
//
4,p 4cC eery J
fiv,L Y-74,. C /1n att
133 South Main St.
Florence, MA 01062
August 16, 2007
RE: Dog Urine Ordnance
I am writing to express our opinions of, and vociferous opposition to,the
proposed"dog urine" ordnance. It is unfortunate that a few self-important and obsessive
individuals can utilize the time and resources of a public entity to advance their pathetic
crusade. It is far more regrettable that this public agency,with so many other pressing
and important issues to consider,has provided a clique of busybodies with a forum.
To my knowledge,there has never been a public health crisis associated with dog
urine,even in such densely populated areas as New York City. On the other hand,there
is absolutely no question of the severe impacts of cat feces,and their contribution to birth
defects in human children: A full seventeen years ago, before the birth of my child,her
mother was expressly advised by her doctor against gardening or other yardwork, due to
the danger of birth defects caused by cat feces. Thus,the Board of Health has been
remiss, if not actually derelict, in failing to pass an ordnance prohibiting felines from
defecating outside within city limits long before considering such a capricious, infeasible
and ill-conceived proposal as is before you tonight: The perpetrators of this manifest
failure seem incapable of properly exercising the duties and responsibility they now hold
and should not attempt to expand them further.
teap
Again,we would suggest
Thomas M. F. Gerald
at reason be applied to quelling this"tempest-in-a-
e
Erin E. FitzGerald