[Dailydrool] interesting hole in township pet ordinance

[Karrie Kuecker]

Okay, I have run into a unique situation, then end result of which I hope
can be used to help other groups & individuals.

6 mos. ago, I moved to MI with Joey hound. I live in an apartment complex
that is VERY pet friendly! We have our own dog park on the complex grounds
for the residents to use, and many of the management staff have dogs
themselves. They do need to meet w/every dog, and do a "temperament test"
which consists of "you're right, this isn't a dog that will involve our
insurance rates being increased, and they are very friendly, here pup, have
a biscuit." (They didn't even complain when one of my hounds drooled on one
of the ladies in the office!) The only thing that they do require is that we
register the dog with the township, and that they have the registration
number on file. It's only $6 per year, and I don't think that this is
unreasonable at all.

Around the holidays, I saw that MBR was looking for foster home, so I
applied to be one. They said that's fine, and I hope to get my first foster
soon, as soon as they get some medical issues sorted out with him. In the
meantime, I talked to my complex management about it, and they are 110% for
it!

So, today I went to register Joey for the 2010 calendar year, and I asked
about the rules for registering foster dogs, since the complex requires them
to be registered. I got a blank stare, and was told to talk to someone in
ordinances.

The problem is this: I register a dog, no problem. That dog is adopted, and
I then go register another one, no problem. BUT once I hit 4 dogs in a
calendar year, aside from paying all the fees for registering, if I try to
register a 5th dog, they would require a kennel license, which I couldn't
get due to being in an apartment, wouldn't have the funds to pay for, and
wouldn't have the previous registered dogs in my possession, as adopters
could very easily be from the other side of the state.... Needless to say,
there's a problem with this...

After about an hr. and talking w/3 people, I got lucky. The person who needs
to contact the township lawyers is not only a very understanding individual,
but is also the owner of a rescue dog! He said that the law, as it's
currently written, doesn't take into account a temporary owning situation,
and that they would MUCH rather work with their lawyers to change the laws,
than to have rescues & foster homes excluded from them!! So, I'm hoping to
hear back from them early next week (the lawyers were not answering their
phones, it's a Friday afternoon, I can't say I would want to deal with it
either!!) about how they plan to reconcile the discrepancy. They said that
they are sure that a change will be made, they just need to see how to word
it, and what would be the most advantageous to the township, foster homes &
rescues involved. And, hopefully this will set a precedent, and encourage
more dogs registered (cats don't need licenses), and NOT punish the rescue
groups or the individuals at all, by charging them multiple fees, etc.

Have any other foster homes or rescue groups come upon issues like these? If
so, what sorts of changes were made in order to rectify the oversight? I
will let everyone know what the township decides, and what sort of solution
they come up with.

Joey sends drool to all those who need it.

-- 
-Karrie, momma to Joey & Slater (ATB), Aunty to Checkers, Domino & Crispin
(wb)

Joey's dogster page: http://www.dogster.com/dogs/637473
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.dailydrool.org/pipermail/dailydrool-dailydrool.org/attachments/20100122/fa582f71/attachment-0002.htm>