Good news! Nuisance barking relief is on the way

Finally, people in situations like this in Unincorporated Sonoma County are going to get help....

For a long time, many people whose homes and well-being have been regularly intruded on by the stab stab piercing of nuisance barking have all reached the same dead end of trying every legal recourse and failing because the current law ties the hands of both Animal Control and the police to enforce the Section 5-126 noise ordinance, but confronting the law-breaking irresponsible person yourself for relief is considered harassment.

Many have found themselves with no other recourse but to visit or phone a neighbor to beg they please stop a dog's continuous barking especially after 10pm or even midnight.... and then get admonished for the unwelcome phone call plus a denial or hostile replies.

The brazen indifference of irresponsible dog owners for their repeated rudeness contrasts greatly with the far greater numbers of responsible owners you hardly ever notice, have no difficulty being considerate and share very similar perspectives of what crossing the line is. The factor of Nuisance Barking being controllable noise is about to be addressed much more directly and strongly in Unincorporated Sonoma County.

I attended an Animal Control meeting last April for the public to first discuss multiple new regulations being drafted. By far, barking relief was the most prevalent and heated topic and the primary reason many were there. The summary report termed the issue an 'epidemic'.

April 7, 2014 Public Workshop Agenda (pdf)
Animal Control Codes proposed revisions (pdf)
Summary of submitted comments (pdf)

Animal Control was already feeling big pressure to deal better with Nuisance Barking. Long overwhelmed with daily complaints, they were just as frustrated by a cumbersome and unfair complaint process, an inadequate verification process and very weak enforcement tools. For starters, a big improvement to Section 5-126 will be that the number of people/dwellings required to complain to begin strict enforcement will be changed from 2 to 1 because it's almost always true that others are suffering the virtual assault in silence than willing to fill out a complex legal form feeling the hostility already and in fear of retaliation.

Separating barking from other controllable noise issues like parties, leaf blowers, etc... is also being addressed and the definition of Nuisance Barking being considered is "Chronic, Unattended Repetitive Barking" to mean these differences:

--Responsible owner barking pattern: Random and short lived spurts of barking during reasonable hours with occasional exceptions as they do come up about which caring owners would typically be apologetic. The daily average pattern blends into the background and nobody stands out.

--Irresponsible owner/Nuisance Barking pattern: Repeatedly leaving dogs out and ignoring barking with no regard for what time of day or night is, combined with denial, hostility and indignant entitlement when confronted about it. Neighbors never know when the barking is going to end, but do know it won't be soon or due to any empathy the owner has for the well-being of neighbors OR the dog.

The neglect factor was strongly acknowledged as many attendees agreed they could hear the desperation in the dog's pleading/agitation and hoped the stricter laws would help relieve the animals as well.

The board encouraged further public opinion in writing and I submitted a follow up outline, proposal and implementation suggestions to Public Health Director Ellen Bauer that was very warmly welcomed and passed around to all concerned, including County Supervisors.

I have been personally invited to the next meeting after a new Animal Control Department head is named and want to bring as many additional comments and ideas from Sonoma County residents as I can to reflect public opinion.

You are invited to participate in the questionnaire in the next post.
Thank you,
Alex

These questions are regarding new guidelines currently being drafted jointly by the Sonoma County Health Department and Animal Control for Unincorporated Sonoma County to more clearly define and enforce the difference between nuisance barking and non-nuisance barking - the dividing line between the short lived sessions or random spurts of playful, greeting, warning or siren response barking patterns common to responsible owners.... compared to irresponsible owners who repeatedly ignore long sessions of their dogs barking from agitation, loneliness, hunger, hot, cold, begging to come in, etc... also being recognized as forms of neglect.

If you need a reminder of the noise prison nuisance barking puts people in, try answering these questions while playing this recording as if you have no ability to turn it down or off in your home and that it could be any time of day or night. https://picosong.com/4LXY

You are welcome to reply here online or use the 'reply privately' option below. I will keep all private responses confidential and post progress as the new law is drafted and enacted. I also know a lot more than there's room to explain, feel free to contact me to discuss any further concerns.

The barking law revision is on the table now. If you currently need relief or want to make sure it's available if you need it in the future, please participate in this questionnaire.
Thank you,
Alex

___________________________________________________
NUISANCE BARKING QUESTIONNAIRE
Additional comments welcome on any question.

1. Do you experience regular, occasional or no nuisance barking in your neighborhood?

2. Please describe what to you constitutes crossing the line from non-nuisance barking to nuisance barking.

3. For each of these segments of day, please suggest a time length for how long it's OK for owners to completely ignore their dog barking outside before it becomes nuisance barking. (it's understood that nuisance barking includes lapses as all dogs stop/start, but that it's still obviously continuous and unabated).

'Business hours' 7am - 5pm:

'Evening hours' 5pm-10pm:

'Retiring hours' 10pm-12mid:
(avg. letting dogs out last time/people first trying to fall asleep hours)

'Overnight hours' 12mid-7am:


4. Do you support a law for zero tolerance quiet hours from 10pm-7am? (exceptions for rare, short, random occurrance is understood. This is the current law, but only for vacation rentals.)

5. Should it be against the law for someone to ask a neighbor without threat or anger they stop nuisance barking when no other help is available? (currently the police will not respond to barking noise that breaks the law, but will to complaints about unwelcome phone ringing).

6. Do you support the enactment of a warning/ticketing system for instances of verified Nuisance Barking? (as recently enacted in Los Angeles).

7. Are you a resident of Unincorporated Sonoma County? If not, do you share similiar concerns wherever you are?

8. Please add any ideas, comments or concerns that you would like the Public Health Dept/Animal Control to take into consideration as terms of the new law are drafted.

I feel like this post was made personally for me. Over the past year we have been dealing with a next door neighbor who has routinely left dogs out at all hours of the day and night, where they bark at animals, noises and also to be let back in the house. This has gone on for periods ranging from 10 or 15 minutes to two or three hours, and from 8 a.m. until midnight.

Face to face encounters and phone calls have been met with indifference, feeble explanations, and hostility.

We had basically given up, as calls to authorities were passed off as the same old "there's nothing we can do" routine.

And so, I will now respond to your individual questions:

NUISANCE BARKING QUESTIONNAIRE
Additional comments welcome on any question.

1. Do you experience regular, occasional or no nuisance barking in your neighborhood? I hear nuisance barking on a daily basis.

2. Please describe what to you constitutes crossing the line from non-nuisance barking to nuisance barking. Long periods (more than ten minutes) of constant barking, particularly in the early morning and late evenings.

3. For each of these segments of day, please suggest a time length for how long it's OK for owners to completely ignore their dog barking outside before it becomes nuisance barking. (it's understood that nuisance barking includes lapses as all dogs stop/start, but that it's still obviously continuous and unabated).

'Business hours' 7am - 5pm: 5 minutes

'Evening hours' 5pm-10pm: 5 minutes

'Retiring hours' 10pm-12mid: 1 minute
(avg. letting dogs out last time/people first trying to fall asleep hours)

'Overnight hours' 12mid-7am: not at all


4. Do you support a law for zero tolerance quiet hours from 10pm-7am? (exceptions for rare, short, random occurrance is understood. This is the current law, but only for vacation rentals.) Yes, but I would expand the hours from 10pm until 8am.

5. Should it be against the law for someone to ask a neighbor without threat or anger they stop nuisance barking when no other help is available?(currently the police will not respond to barking noise that breaks the law, but will to complaints about unwelcome phone ringing). No!

6. Do you support the enactment of a warning/ticketing system for instances of verified Nuisance Barking? (as recently enacted in Los Angeles). Yes!

7. Are you a resident of Unincorporated Sonoma County? If not, do you share similiar concerns wherever you are? I am a resident of Unincorporated Sonoma County

8. Please add any ideas, comments or concerns that you would like the Public Health Dept/Animal Control to take into consideration as terms of the new law are drafted.

I personally think that the dogs should be removed from their owners after 3 infractions. Dogs are not the problem. People are. Barking dogs are underexercised, frustrated, anxious, lonely. They deserve better homes than they have. Perhaps the owners should be required to show proof of having completed at least one round of obedience school with their dogs. They should also be required to keep their dogs inside. And they should receive a stiff fine for each infraction.

Too many people regard dogs as cheap alternatives to alarm systems, a kind of patio furniture. They have no awareness of or regard for the animal's needs and well-being.

Grrrrr!

Coconino County in Arizona has a very effective ordinance regarding barking dogs and fines..
https://www.coconino.az.gov/DocumentCenter/View/441

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Alex:

For a long time, many people whose homes and well-being have been regularly intruded on by the stab stab piercing of nuisance barking have all reached the same dead end of trying every legal recourse and failing because the current law ties the hands of both Animal Control and the police to enforce the Section 5-126 noise ordinance, but confronting the law-breaking irresponsible person yourself for relief is considered harassment....

---

A friend recently had her (badly behaved) dog steal a potent ganja cookie from her purse. The dog was quiet and totally out of it for the rest of the day. Of course I would never advocate such an action, but having once lived next door to a REALLY ANNOYING 5:00 AM beagle, I can understand how tempting it could be to dose the dog.

Sure some dogs bark but so do some wacos / emotionally

Which woman are your referring to?

BTW, do you live with dogs?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by meherc:

Sure some dogs bark but so do some wacos / emotionally

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by wisewomn:

Which woman are your referring to?

---

Let's let this lie...please.:waccosun:

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by poetrytalks:

Coconino County in Arizona has a very effective ordinance regarding barking dogs and fines..
https://www.coconino.az.gov/DocumentCenter/View/441

---

I didn't think to research and compare ticketing systems in other cities besides LA. It appears this Coconino County law has been in force since 2011 and their tickets are oddly $25 to $750 per offense. I'm going to call them and find out how it's working and if they'd make any changes now. Thank you very much for posting this.

Thank you also to everyone who has responded mostly privately to the Questionnaire, the solidarity of opinion is very apparent, keep them coming. The opportunity is NOW to be heard as the specific terms and enforcement strength of new law is literally being rewritten now, and Animal Control is finally listening.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

Let's let this lie...please.:waccosun:

---

Like sleeping dogs? Big Smile

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dixon:

Like sleeping dogs? Big Smile

---

Precisely :waccosun:

You might find that in many instances your so-called solidarity of opinion is because the only people who respond are those who agree with you, the rest of us ignore it. I might also point out that many people are extremely sensitive to ANY noise. Arrest the coyotes when they howl at night. My own neighbor has mistaken coyotes for nuisance dogs. It depends on if you are used to living in the city or country. If the police and animal control agree that dogs bark occasionally and some people complain about people mistreating their greyhounds because they are underfed, maybe it is ignorance of regular animal looks and behavior that is part of the reason for complaints. (Greyhounds just LOOK like that). Animal control officers told me they have actually gotten complaints from people who have never seen the dog owners take bags of dog food out of their car therefore the owners must not be feeding the dogs. Nuisance to one person could be a bird chirping or a baby crying. My own dogs are very well behaved (service dog who has sat in court for a year without a yip or an accident.) But people still complain. What can you do? You can know that there are two sides to every story and remember that.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Alex:

...Thank you also to everyone who has responded mostly privately to the Questionnaire, the solidarity of opinion is very apparent, keep them coming. The opportunity is NOW to be heard as the specific terms and enforcement strength of new law is literally being rewritten now, and Animal Control is finally listening.

---

Amen! What entitlement. And for such a hip and progressive town, one that's all about "community" and "communication," I constantly marvel at how many are so afraid of talking to their neighbors about a situation, or render themselves a victim because of their total ineffectiveness when attempts have been made. I for one don't get it.

My 89 year-old neighbor just stopped by today, brought me some leftover ham, and we sat and had tea. Yesterday I was building an animal shelter with another neighbor. And it's my neighbors who watch and care for my animals when I leave town. And it's not just because I'm a good neighbor or a good animal owner, but because their good themselves. They get to know me and offer to help, which makes it easy for me to do the same. I'm just sayin'.... I can't help but wonder what kind of neighbor you might be that you live near neighbors who don't seem to give a damn, about you or their animals.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by meherc:

You might find that in many instances your so-called solidarity of opinion is because the only people who respond are those who agree with you, the rest of us ignore it.

---

There are people who don't treat their dogs like members of their family, and so leave them outside to bark all day and night. There are people who not only don't care about the mental health of their own dogs, but don't care about their neighbor's peace. Sound travels past property lines, over fences, across streets, and can be impossible to ignore. It is terrible to be constantly subjected to the sound of barking dogs. The only time I have ever called the police on a neighbor was after listening to their dog bark after years of hearing it and getting nowhere after a few friendly front door meetings in my pajamas. I won't go into the lengthy story, but suffice it to say, these people absolutely did not care if their dog disturbed the neighbors. In fact, the police said they had dog barking complaints back to when these people lived in another house. Barking dogs isn't about neighbors not communicating with each other, it is largely about one neighbor not caring about their neighbors or their own dogs.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by nancypreb:

Amen! What entitlement. And for such a hip and progressive town, one that's all about "community" and "communication," I constantly marvel at how many are so afraid of talking to their neighbors about a situation, or render themselves a victim because of their total ineffectiveness when attempts have been made. I for one don't get it.

---

What is constructive about declaring 'you know what everyone who didn't fill out the questionnaire is thinking' but being unwilling to give your own answers? How about telling us your own opinion about how long it takes for barking to turn into nuisance barking at the different times of day? 'Well-behaved dogs' don't motivate neighbors to say they want to kill you over their barking.



Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by meherc:

I went to every neighbor and asked them if my dogs were bothering them.... Only one person said he'd like to kill me... 
(From the 1-16-13 thread: What Is Your Interpretation Of The Noise Ordinance Regarding Barking)

---

Because the terms of the barking law are being revised right now, the point of this thread is for constructive conversation of the terms the law should be changed to, which will also then to do a better job of weeding out invalid complaints. Unprovable declarations and personal diatribes of unfair victimhood serve no constructive purpose to the stated point.

Expecting these diversionary tactics again however, I am armed to the teeth this time having had to prepare to disprove my nuisance barking neighbor's denials in civil court if necessary with countless videos I've now made of the 100's of long sessions of clearly nuisance barking over the last 2 years, frequently between 10pm and 2am, and even after 2am, 4am. The files were so big after trying my laptop, android and phone I even bought a GoPro for it. The same dog I've recorded over and over is obviously not a coyote.

I have no desire to lie, mischaracterize or exaggerate and want no more than simple Code 5-126 rights where barking and the dog's needs are conscientiously responded to. Guess I've been lucky until now, I never thought twice about any dog barking at 25+ other residences. This awakening has been very, very rude.

As I said, Animal Control welcomed my follow-up written proposal to the April 7 meeting and I am following through on their invitation for myself and for all the other valid callers. The point is that every valid nuisance barking situation means there is an dog owner in denial of being responsible for allowing it.

The valid terms are definable, not the infinite invalid. The point of this thread is to help define clear guidelines that will serve to filter both valid nuisance barking and invalid complaints.

Aaaaannnnndddd it might, just might, also be true that there are actually people with dogs who are either ignorant of or willfully disregarding any impact their dogs barking might have on their neighbors. I know the difference between the howl of a coyote and the barking of a 15 pound terrier outside my bedroom window, having seen the dog barking on numerous occasions. I've lived in the city, small towns and the country, and unincorporated Sonoma County is the ONLY placed I've encountered this problem.

I know the owners take care of and love their dog. They just don't give a shit about their neighbors.

I suppose that at least with the new ordinances complainants will be allowed to present evidence of the violations and have a judge decide. That would weed out most of the delicate flowers you mention.

:Yinyangv::wink::heart:

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by meherc:

You might find that in many instances your so-called solidarity of opinion is because the only people who respond are those who agree with you, the rest of us ignore it...

---

>>>I can't help but wonder what kind of neighbor you might be that you live near neighbors who don't seem to give a damn, about you or their animals.

The down-side of passing any law is that coercion is often not the best way to handle things, much less produce friendly, helpful neighbors. And because we as individualistic Americans are accustomed to bending any law that’s not rigidly enforced we’ll tend to insist on our personal rights & property lines as sacred. For many of us, no, that’s not the way we do things. For others, they’ll scream if you bump their bumper when parking, and you’re lucky if you don’t get shot.

All which is to say, I’d like to agree with you that “communication” is better than calling the cops, but it doesn’t always work. If you saw concrete evidence that your neighbors were beating their kids — I don’t mean spanking, I mean damage — you might indeed be courageous enough to go next door and give them some gentle advice or tough love or direct threat, but most of us wouldn’t risk it. We’d either ignore it or call for investigation.

Sadly, there are many people who are shut tight against intrusion on their “rights,” be it over their dog, their car, or their kid. That, for me, makes such laws necessary.

That said, it seems to me that any such proposed law should be framed so that calling the cops is a choice of last resort, not the first knee-jerk out of the box. But I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know how that would be done. Putting up with a severely neurotic dog on one side and 5 a.m. rooster across the street, we manage okay with jokes and meditation, but I can't prescribe that for everyone.

-Conrad

Sounds lovely on your planet, Nancy. Here on earth, however, we apparently attract asshole neighbors through some power that we are ignorant of (though I'm sure you'd be happy to explain in excruciating detail). In my case, I suppose my number came up on your big wheel, because up until last year I'd never had a problem with an incessantly barking dog outside my windows. If only I had had you to scold me and point out my shortcomings this problem would never have happened. Where were YOU, Nancy? I blame YOU for all of this, because, because...well, I'm sure you know.

You always do.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by nancypreb:

.. I can't help but wonder what kind of neighbor you might be that you live near neighbors who don't seem to give a damn, about you or their animals.

---

:heart::Yinyangv::dogdance:

I'm right here, Ted.... excuse me, I mean "Apollo Stonebuscuits" (really, Barry?!...what happened to your strict rules of identity disclosure?!). I'd be happy to come over and give you my assessment. I can say your first mistake is blaming me. (Sorry to state the obvious, but its a good place to start!) Tell me where the annoying yapper resides and I'd be happy to try and help. See.... I'm helpful.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Ted Pole:

... If only I had had you to scold me and point out my shortcomings this problem would never have happened. Where were YOU, Nancy? I blame YOU for all of this, because, because...well, I'm sure you know...

---

Barry...I'm answering the survey. The survey asks for descriptions and suggestions. Please don't edit just because you don't like my answers.

NUISANCE BARKING QUESTIONNAIRE
Additional comments welcome on any question.

1. Do you experience regular, occasional or no nuisance barking in your neighborhood?
"Nuisance" is defined (merriam-webster) as "one that is annoying, unpleasant or obnoxious." The term itself is so incredibly subjective, one could say daily life is a nuisance. So I find it to be a bit of a set-up to ask if one experiences "nuisance." I experience "nuisance" by my own dogs if (as has been suggested) barking for more than 5 minutes is a "nuisance." I experience nuisance by people talking loudly as they walk home from downtown late at night. I experience nuisance from city or construction workers simply doing their job. I think this is an invalid question designed to demonstrate how many people get annoyed by unpleasantness in their life. I think your questionnaire would be best served starting with question #2.

2. Please describe what to you constitutes crossing the line from non-nuisance barking to nuisance barking. That the emotional and physical health, and over-all well-being of an animal is jeopardized. If an animal is experiencing constant stress or physical neglect, that should be evident and reasonable to address. It should not be about the subjective inconvenience of the human, but the well-being of the animal that is the measure by which intervention is justified. Dogs don't bark for no reason. If it is understood that "nuisance barking includes lapses as all dogs stop/start, but that it's still obviously continuous and unabated," then no dogs should be allowed outside during "dog walking hours" as one of the most common impetuses for barking are other dogs walking by. But that would be ludicrous. Yet, according to your definition, one could very easily consider it a "nuisance with lapses." And dogs don't have to be kept indoors. I grew up with with dogs that were perfectly happy being "outdoor" dogs. They were no less part of the family. I have an indoor dog now that would much prefer to be an outdoor dog. To impose "indoor confinement" upon dog owners is as imposing as insisting that all cats must be kept indoors (which would never happen!).

3. For each of these segments of day, please suggest a time length for how long it's OK for owners to completely ignore their dog barking outside before it becomes nuisance barking. (it's understood that nuisance barking includes lapses as all dogs stop/start, but that it's still obviously continuous and unabated).

It's never ok for a dog owner to "completely ignore" their barking dog. That would be detrimental to the well-being of the animal. With that said, the training process is not always a quick fix and can take some time. There are dogs that are well-cared for and loved, and yet, they bark at anything that moves for whatever reason (usually insecurity or an instinctual need to protect their dwelling). I am thinking of a friend of mine who has a lovely German Shepherd that annoys me on a daily basis with her barking, whether indoors or out. To think that 1 complaint of this dog barking for more than 5 or 10 minutes, with lapses, could result in the dog having to be relocated (or worse, put down) is heart-wrenching as it has a very loving home with a very conscientious owner, but the dog clearly has some issues that it came with, making it believe that it's necessary to bark at anything that moves. Thank goodness my friend has lovely neighbors who are as flexible and communicative as she is attentive, despite the dog's impulse to bark.

'Business hours' 7am - 5pm:

'Evening hours' 5pm-10pm:

'Retiring hours' 10pm-12mid:
(avg. letting dogs out last time/people first trying to fall asleep hours)

'Overnight hours' 12mid-7am:


4. Do you support a law for zero tolerance quiet hours from 10pm-7am? (exceptions for rare, short, random occurrance is understood. This is the current law, but only for vacation rentals.) Again, a totally flawed question (and if this is the law, a totally flawed law). "Zero-tolerance" by definition implies no "exceptions." How is this not obvious?! And "Zero-tolerance" policies on subjective matters are a very slippery slope. I've watched it happen with "zero-tolerance" when it comes to children "bullying." Yes, there is "bullying" which needs to be seriously addressed, and then there is the totally normal "children being cruel" that is simply part of growing up and learning to cope with a "less-than-nice" world. So no, I do not support a "zero-tolerance" anything, simply because I do not support "totalitarianism" in any fashion!

5. Should it be against the law for someone to ask a neighbor without threat or anger they stop nuisance barking when no other help is available? (currently the police will not respond to barking noise that breaks the law, but will to complaints about unwelcome phone ringing). Another ludicrous and pointed question. Why bother answering?

6. Do you support the enactment of a warning/ticketing system for instances of verified Nuisance Barking? (as recently enacted in Los Angeles). Only if the "system" is based on a measurement of the well-being of an animal, not the subjective annoyance of a human.

7. Are you a resident of Unincorporated Sonoma County? If not, do you share similiar concerns wherever you are? No. No.

8. Please add any ideas, comments or concerns that you would like the Public Health Dept/Animal Control to take into consideration as terms of the new law are drafted.​
The complaint of 1 is not sufficient. If "it's almost always true that others are suffering the virtual assault in silence than willing to fill out a complex legal form feeling the hostility already and in fear of retaliation," then make the legal form less complex! Nothing can ever protect anyone from their own fears. Unlawfulness is unlawful, period... including "retaliation." Nobody should have to suffer in silence, but self-confidence is not a guarantee in life or law. I actually think that it should take 3 official complaints before ensuring "strict enforcement" if we're talking about "nuisance barking." If we're talking about "animal welfare," then I could concede to 2. Bottom line, I don't think the world is full of ass-holes who don't give a damn about their neighbors. I think we live in a privileged and entitled community that is as hypocritical as it is lazy and forgetful when it comes to learning/knowing how to "get along."

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by carolynlb:

There are people who don't treat their dogs like members of their family, and so leave them outside to bark all day and night. .

---

dogs aren't really members of their family, except in a metaphorical sense and not all of us buy that metaphor. We may someday reach the stage where "we" feel the same about ownership of animals as we do now about the ownership of people, but I don't expect to live in that enlightened world myself. And I really wouldn't want to...

(btw that doesn't imply they can bark while they're out in the dark with their other animal buddies).

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

dogs aren't really members of their family, except in a metaphorical sense and not all of us buy that metaphor. We may someday reach the stage where "we" feel the same about ownership of animals as we do now about the ownership of people, but I don't expect to live in that enlightened world myself. And I really wouldn't want to...

(btw that doesn't imply they can bark while they're out in the dark with their other animal buddies).

---

Dogs are pack animals and they see the family/people they live with as their pack. When they are left alone and outside, away from the other members of their pack, they become bored, depressed, anxious, sad,... Dogs are meant to live in a community in order to be mentally and physically well. Just as humans evolved to live in groups, so did dogs. The barking dogs that I have experience with just happen to be the ones who are not let indoors, or have limited indoor time, and who's owners take no notice of their barking, or just don't care.

I take issue with the victim blaming aspect of the discussion. Instead of talking about the real issue of nuisance noise from dogs, the shift has been to blame the person subjected to the barking for not being a decent enough neighbor. Communities are made of all kinds of people from all kinds of backgrounds. There really are nice people who have tried to engage in honest, thoughtful conversation with the owner of a barking dogs, to no avail. There really are some people who just don't care if their dog barks and disturbs their neighbor. Regarding the dog that barked in my neighborhood, after a police officer went to their house to confirm the dog was indeed barking, he said he could hear it a half mile away. Sometimes the bad neighbors are the ones with the barking dogs.

Dixon.... I just want to reiterate that the scenario you describe clearly depicts a neglected animal. I'm only trying to draw a parallel between a neglected animal and a veritable "nuisance," as the term "nuisance," in of itself, is completely subjective. If an owner simply doesn't care about their animal (in which case the animal is suffering as much as, if not more than, the neighbor who is irritated), then that should be evident, paramount, and the measure by which action is dictated, as oppose to the relative and subjective interpretation of "annoyance, unpleasantness, and/or obnoxiousness."

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by nancypreb:

Dixon.... I just want to reiterate that the scenario you describe clearly depicts a neglected animal.

---

Whaaa...? I haven't described any scenario. The only post I've contributed to this thread was a three-word joke (post #11). Somehow, you're attributing someone else's comment to me.

Quote:

---

...the term "nuisance," in of itself, is completely subjective.

---

Now that you've drawn me into the discussion, I'll just say that I can't agree that "nuisance" is inherently completely subjective--at least not in every case, not in the sense of being either imaginary or arbitrary. There is a huge objective difference between, on the one hand, the occasional yip or yap and, on the other hand, extended barking which is so intrusive that virtually anyone would be grossly distracted and unable to sleep. Noise pollution of whatever type has objectively measurable effects, both psychological and physical, due to the unrelenting triggering of the stress response, among other things. I would not necessarily disagree with your apparent assumption that the dog's suffering is more than the neighbors' suffering, but that seems irrelevant to the validity of the neighbors' complaints, and I am concerned that you seem a bit dismissive of the needs of the neighbors who are bothered by the barking--or am I misinterpreting you?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by carolynlb:

Dogs are pack animals and they see the family/people they live with as their pack. When they are left alone and outside, away from the other members of their pack, they become bored, depressed, anxious, sad,...

---

that's not necessarily untrue, but it's way oversimplified. Dogs are no longer wolves. And just because they're social animals doesn't mean they need to sleep on the bed.

Quote:

---

I take issue with the victim blaming aspect of the discussion. .

---

.. but owner-shaming is cool... that's what drew my attention, the implication that if we just treated our dogs as little people all would be well and the problem lies in those who don't.

If anything, I lean toward the shut-the-hounds-up crowd, though. It's indeed sad that people often won't confront their neighbors, but it's even sadder that the dog owners quite frequently have little or no interest in dealing with it. I do notice that there's a missing contingent here: where are those saying dogs have no place in an urban environment? Be thankful that we're talking about milder solutions than that. I don't see why there's actually any controversy about issuing fines for excessive-noise violations. I can't chain-saw my stumps into bears after midnight (I don't think??) so why should my critter be barking without penalty?

You're right Dixon, I'm so sorry. I was responding to Carolynlb and have no idea how I confused it with you. :hmmm: I must have been distracted by the barking dogs outside :dunno:.

In my mind, something being subjective does not make it imaginary or arbitrary. I believe that the perceived annoyance or nuisance is very real for the bothered neighbor.... perception is reality. I'm interested in the "measurement" of it all. First, we can control 99% of "noise pollution" factors... the volume on a radio, the direction of the speakers, whether a diesel engine is running or not... but when we're talking about living creatures with minds and voice boxes all their own, it's incomparable to other "noise pollution" you reference.

Here, we're talking about making laws and how to enforce laws, which at this point, are measured by nothing more than the complaint of a bothered neighbor. We're talking about devising "Zero-tolerance" policy, of moving from a 2-complaint policy to a 1-complaint policy because affected neighbors can't be bothered to fill out a form or are too afraid. We're talking about being able to single-handedly, repeatedly, and seemingly anonymously, fine our neighbors without any requirement to address the problem directly. We're talking about possibly displacing "nuisance" dogs, which (it would stand to reason) could/would lead to surrendering if new placement can't be found.

I'm not dismissive of the needs of bothered neighbors, and certainly, incessant barking all night long that prevents sleep is a problem. But everyone's lifestyle is different, just like tolerance levels are different. If we simply measure by means of "I am bothered, therefore, you are the offender," without any requirement of attempted resolution or substantiated support for a complaint, I think it's a thin and slippery slope and completely antithetical to the idea of "community" and "communication" that we profess. Too often people are willing to complain before they're willing to be helpful!!! Especially when we make laws that too easily accommodate that m.o. This is why I believe that if the focus is shifted more on the animal's well-being (stress and/or neglect), we're able to be more objective about the measurement by which action is taken.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dixon:

...Now that you've drawn me into the discussion, I'll just say that I can't agree that "nuisance" is inherently completely subjective--at least not in every case, not in the sense of being either imaginary or arbitrary. ...

---

Yay for the new ordinances. Many people think more highly of their dogs than they do of other human beings.

Robert

I just want to preface this questionnaire by saying that I live in the hills of Forestville overlooking a beautiful canyon. As 40 year West Sonoma County resident I have seen lots of changes. There used to be a few dogs in and around the canyon, but now most families have not one, but two or more. With dog ownership comes responsibility. The situation with barking has become so prevalent here that a couple of neighbors have dubbed it Kennel Canyon. On a typical day, it starts around 8-8:30, although it has been known to start earlier. I'm talking about multiple dogs exciting each other from their respective prisons. Yes, I said prisons, because almost all the animals here have no yards to run in. They are placed on small decks all day long. Indeed, many of these dogs seem to get little or no attention from their owners. There are quite a few who never leave their decks. Only a handful ever get walked.

Dogs are social animals. When they hear other dogs barking, they too bark. It is not uncommon to hear a cacophony of as many as 9 dogs for 15 minutes to 2 hours at a time during the day here. Night barking has been a problem as well. For a while there was one neighbor who let his two dogs go off at all hours of the night. I tried to speak with him. I wrote polite notes. Finally he told me I was the neighborhood nuisance. This from a guy who has had two roosters on his deck facing the canyon (now gone, thank God,) let his kids shoot rifles into the canyon and blasted loud music into the canyon (which acts as a kind of amplifier,) on a regular basis. I let all these things go, but when trying to explain I need my sleep and night barking is where I draw the line, I got blasted for being a neighborhood nuisance. You gotta love it when dog owners call those of us who are courageous enough to speak out "entitled." Talk about entitlement! Geesh...

And that's only one neighbor. I don't know how some of you people get off saying that all you have to do is talk to your neighbors. What kind of Disney namby pamby fantasy world are you living in? I have tried to be polite in approaching several neighbors about this issue. Most of the time I am met with hostility and denial. A neighbor left two dogs on his deck last summer for 5 days while he went on vacation. The only time they had any human contact was when someone came to feed them. I recorded 4-5 hours (!) of night barking every night the dude was gone. When I mailed him a CD (I was done being insulted in person at this point,) in which I verbally time stamped each incident, he wrote me, denying these were his dogs (as if he didn't recognize his own dogs signature bark-right...) and accused me of just taking the recordings off of YouTube.

We have a big problem here in west county and unless something is done about it, it's not going away. Or, maybe I am! I've come to the point where I'm thinking of moving, but really, is that fair? I'm not asking for silence. Honestly. Just for dog owners to take responsibility for their animals and for a reasonable amount of barking.

1. Do you experience regular, occasional or no nuisance barking in your neighborhood?

Regular nuisance barking

2. Please describe what to you constitutes crossing the line from non-nuisance barking to nuisance barking.

Non nuisance barking is occasional barking, no longer than a few minutes at a time. After about 5-10 minutes, I've had enough.


3. For each of these segments of day, please suggest a time length for how long it's OK for owners to completely ignore their dog barking outside before it becomes nuisance barking. (it's understood that nuisance barking includes lapses as all dogs stop/start, but that it's still obviously continuous and unabated).



'Business hours' 7am - 5pm:

10-15 minutes max - of course the problem is, most people are at work, meaning they leave their dogs out on their decks unattended. A real drag for those of us who work at home. Of course, bark collars are an effective means of controlling barking when the owners aren't at home. Contrary to what most people think, they do not administer an electric shock to the animal, just a vibration when they bark. They are effective-and many veterinarians recommend them. Yet most dog owners wouldn't dream of curtailing their dogs freedom of expression.

'Evening hours' 5pm-10pm:
5 minutes- if they're home, dog owners should be able to respond that quickly. The problem is, most of them don't seem to hear their own dogs.


'Retiring hours' 10pm-12mid:
(avg. letting dogs out last time/people first trying to fall asleep hours)

Really zero, but I'll say 5 minutes.
'Overnight hours' 12mid-7am:

This is where I draw the line. Anything beyond an occasional yip is too much.
If I were a dog owner, I'd jump out of bed to make sure Fido doesn't disturb my neighbors.

4. Do you support a law for zero tolerance quiet hours from 10pm-7am? (exceptions for rare, short, random occurrance is understood. This is the current law, but only for vacation rentals.)
Absolutely. Not talking about the occasional short occurrence. Sleep is a fundamental cornerstone for health. No one has a right to mess with it. I consider prolonged night barking to be nothing short of anti social behavior on the part of the dog owner.

5. Should it be against the law for someone to ask a neighbor without threat or anger they stop nuisance barking when no other help is available? (currently the police will not respond to barking noise that breaks the law, but will to complaints about unwelcome phone ringing).

No. People should be able to ask their neighbors. That should be the first thing people do before involving the county. The problem with this entitlement dog owners seem to exhibit is, they fail to understand how prolonged dog barking can affect others peace of mind, yet when asked to do something about it, they tend to become defensive and hostile. The victim becomes the one in the wrong. No wonder most people don't want to confront their neighbors!

6. Do you support the enactment of a warning/ticketing system for instances of verified Nuisance Barking?(as recently enacted in Los Angeles).
Definitely. Unfortunately a fine is the only thing some people understand.

7. Are you a resident of Unincorporated Sonoma County? If not, do you share similiar concerns wherever you are?

Yes. I think the problem is, many people move to west county thinking they will have the freedom to do whatever the fuck they want out here. (Like the neighbor across the street who had 25 goats in a 450sq ft pen-illegal and stunk up the neighborhood so badly no one could entertain on their decks all summer-took over a year to shut him down.) here's the thing: west county isn't really the country anymore. Where I live most people live on one or two lots- houses are very close to one another. It's more like suburban living only with more trees. I find it ironic that it's Far quieter when I visit my mom in the heart of LA!

8. Please add any ideas, comments or concerns that you would like the Public Health Dept/Animal Control to take into consideration as terms of the new law are drafted.
I do think a fine should be implemented for dog owners who don't take responsibility for their dogs. Something like that in LA: two warnings and then a fat fine for the 3rd infraction with no exceptions. As I mentioned, this is unfortunately the only thing that will probably make an impact.

I am so over blaming the victim of continuous dog barking.

Noise, in any form over prolonged periods can lead to stress and even serious health problems. I know two very sweet older neighbors who after years of having to listen to their neighbors dogs barking, felt the stress was putting a strain on their marriage. Yes, it can get that bad. Yet dog owners seem to repeatedly attack neighbors for speaking out against their dogs incessant barking. I get it: it isn't the dogs fault. It's the owners who are responsible. Period. Unfortunately due to the laws of physics, , sound isn't something that stops at a neighbors fence. From years of observing many dog owners unconcerned behavior regarding neighbors who are being continually subjected to barking at all hours of the day and night, I can only conclude that we need tougher ordinances that include stiff fines for repeat offenders.

Responding as an owner of previously (hopefully) barking dogs - I have some input here.

My one lovely dog never barked. We live on 2 acres outside city limits and have had emu and chickens that our dog protected and only barked at mountain lions, foxes and raccoons trying to get to our other animals.

We acquired a second dog - still no barking - until we kept a friends dog for a few weeks who went overseas.
The visiting dog taught our dogs to bark and as long as we were home, we sushed them and it stopped.

Apparently, they began barking while we were away during the day and some evenings when we were out.
Not randomly, but as people and dog walkers passed our home. It took a neighbor to let us know this, and at first, it was hard for us to believe as we had taught them quite stricktly. However, we took measures: first bark collars which did not work well, then settled on bark houses that attached to our fence. It took a little while, but we are in control of that.

A second neighbor accosted us in the back yard, possibly altered, screaming and yelling that our dogs barked all night long in the back acre. We keep our dogs in at night (via locked doggie door) and we know the periods of time that were in question were not our dogs. This abuse from that gentlemen went on for some time and we KNEW it was not our dogs at that point.

We recently had a couple of notes in our mailbox about our dogs barking at night. I don't know if it was the same gentleman or not - but I have no one to contact about dates/times etc.

We are doing everything possible to eleviate the barking - however if there is a time we don't know about - we need to be informed, not accosted.

Personally, if for any reason my dogs were barking day or early evening and I don't hear it - please call me.
Leave me your number so I can give you mine. I want to be a good dog owner - but without proper feedback, it is truly sometimes hard to know if your dogs behave with you.

My first neighbor has my email and phone so he can contact me in daytime if there ever is a problem. We check in to make sure all is good.

I understand that complainers may be met with hostilty - but we are not all that way - but we do need to know the when and why our normally well behaved pets are barking.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by nancypreb:

You're right Dixon, I'm so sorry.

---

No apology is necessary. No harm done. We all make little mistakes like that.

Quote:

---

...when we're talking about living creatures with minds and voice boxes all their own, it's incomparable to other "noise pollution" you reference.

---

Not true! When the quality of someone's life is degraded by noise pollution, the problem is essentially the same whether the noise source is leaf blowers, jackhammers, over-loud music, or barking dogs. And, while I acknowledge that some level of compromise is desirable and that it's possible for a complainant to be over-sensitive, and I also acknowledge that reasonable people may disagree where to draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable levels of noise, I must insist that dog noise (like some other canine behaviors) is often at unacceptable levels by any reasonable standard, and the solution requires the dog owner to either bring the behavior under better control, get rid of the dog, or move to some more remote place where people won't be subjected to the problem.

Quote:

---

I'm not dismissive of the needs of bothered neighbors...

---

Looking back over all your posts on this thread, I must insist that, consciously or not, you have tended to be dismissive of the needs of those bothered by dog noise. Focusing on the subjective nature of "nuisance" while mostly evading discussion of the dog-owner's responsibility to solve the problem; suggesting that the suffering of the dog is more important than the suffering of the aggrieved neighbor; attempting to exempt dog noise from the same standards of civility that we apply to other sources of noise pollution; suggesting--outrageously--that someone's having inconsiderate neighbors somehow reflects negatively on the complainant (which someone earlier in this thread rightly labeled victim-blaming); minimizing or ignoring the fact that many dog owners are hostile, threatening or just uncaring when approached politely about the issue; focusing instead on your perception that much of the problem lies with the complainant being "unhelpful" (as if it's his or her responsibility rather than the responsibility of the dog owner to solve the problem)--all of these responses are dismissive, disrespectful, irresponsible, and nonconstructive.

Much of what you and some other dog owners say reminds me of stuff I've heard from, e.g., inconsiderate smokers who dismiss complaints as just oversensitivity in order to evade their responsibility to change their behavior. To use a word you've been slinging around, they feel "entitled" to impose their smoke on those around them, just as many dog owners feel entitled to impose their dogs' barking, feces, aggression, and obnoxious behavior on those around them. Since you brought up the concept of entitlement, let me suggest:

If you think your presumed right to own dogs trumps the rights of those around you to peace and quiet, you are afflicted with an attitude of entitlement.

If you think those around you should be willing to accept any substantial amount of hassle so that you can have a dog, you are afflicted with an attitude of entitlement.

If you think your neighbors have any responsibility to be "helpful" in solving your dog's behavioral problems (apart from notifying you that the problem exists), you are afflicted with an attitude of entitlement.

The decision to own a dog carries with it acceptance of total responsibility for the dog's barking, pooping, aggression, and other behaviors. Responding to these very real issues with evasion, minimization, or shifting the responsibility for change onto the aggrieved parties is the sort of behavior that gives dog owners a bad name.

In my experience, neglected noisy dogs and rude inconsiderate neighbors are part and parcel of the same package. Certain breeds (i.e. beagles) are highly prone to barking, but, ultimately, the owners are to blame. Some people just are not qualified to own dogs.

Just sayin'

Richard

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dixon:

...When the quality of someone's life is degraded by noise pollution, the problem is essentially the same whether the noise source is leaf blowers, jackhammers, over-loud music, or barking dogs. And, ...

---

Thank you Dixon for so eloquently articulating my thoughts and feelings on this subject. This is exactly how I feel. I honestly couldn't have said it my better. bravo!

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dixon:

And, while I acknowledge that some level of compromise is desirable and that it's possible for a complainant to be over-sensitive, and I also acknowledge that reasonable people may disagree where to draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable levels of noise...

---

See, we TOTALLY AGREE! This is exactly what I'm saying. And so far, what I hear suggested is 5-10 minutes of barking (including lapses) during the middle of the day makes it a "nuisance," and one complaint is sufficient for fining your neighbor several hundreds of dollars. You want a suggestion?

Here:
To declare a barking dog a "nuisance," one must first document that notification has been presented in writing to the dog owner, stating the duration and time of day of the offense, after which the dog owner has 30 days to remedy the situation before an official complaint can be filed. There after, it should require either three independent complaints, or two additional complaints from the same individual at no less than 15 day intervals, before any fines are imposed. With each filed complaint, the owner should receive notification that their dog is being reported as a "nuisance." A dog owner should also be able to appeal any complaint with evidence that their dog is not the offending animal.

Furthermore, if the baseline measurement of an offensive and finable act is that "the quality of someone's life is degraded," then I think we should fine people who wear petrulli oil or exude body odor when in public spaces, people who's "medicine" permeates the air, all cell-phone carriers and wi-fi users (you're welcome, Linda), people who don't control their screaming children, and all outdoor concerts. NOT! I guess I'm just old-school. I won't tell you what religion you should or should not practice, who you can and can not marry, what you can or can not do to your body, what you can or can not eat, how many children you can or can not have, or what pets you can or can not have. I'm resigned to the fact that whether its radioactive waves from cell phones, exhaust from cars, smoke from tobacco, or the stress caused from hearing you talk psycho-babble to your screaming child as I suffer in silence, we are all in the process of dying and that life is as easy or stressful as we choose it to be. There is no guarantee to a "quiet and peaceful" life. Rather, you role with the punches, try to get along, learn to tune things out, try to be helpful, meditate, get all sorts of "one" with it all, yin-yang the hell out it, and know that nobody WANTS to be an asshole.

I guess I just think we should ensure that dog owners are given a chance before getting all "Big Brother" about it.

Nameste
:Yinyangv:

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by nancypreb:

See, we TOTALLY AGREE! This is exactly what I'm saying. And so far, what I hear suggested is 5-10 minutes of barking (including lapses) during the middle of the day makes it a "nuisance," and one complaint is sufficient for fining your neighbor several hundreds of dollars.

---

This isn't the correct intention/interpretation. The operative word in the new definition and justification for a fine is 'chronic' meaning repeating violations. The difference is that only 1 person will be required to report the repeating pattern of the offender to begin the strongest enforcement, it's never about '1 instance'.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by nancypreb:

You want a suggestion? Here:
To declare a barking dog a "nuisance," one must first document that notification has been presented in writing to the dog owner, stating the duration and time of day of the offense, after which the dog owner has 30 days to remedy the situation before an official complaint can be filed. There after, it should require either three independent complaints, or two additional complaints from the same individual at no less than 15 day intervals, before any fines are imposed. With each filed complaint, the owner should receive notification that their dog is being reported as a "nuisance." A dog owner should also be able to appeal any complaint with evidence that their dog is not the offending animal.

---

Thank you for this constructive suggestion, the terms and process are exactly what Animal Control is trying to figure out now. I hope a couple other factors are kept in mind. Since responsible owners rarely allow their dogs to slip into the nuisance territory it means that 3 or more documented long day or late night sessions by someone obviously so rudely not caring really is a high indication they do it over and over. Whether the offender responds with denial/indignance or apology/interest in abating is also a big clue of confirmation.

I absolutely agree with starting by giving the offender clear terms to abide by and a chance to comply. It would also make everyone's job much easier if Animal Control accepted video recordings. They are nearly at everyone's fingertips these days, he said/she said can be totally avoided and very quick examples can be created with date/time stamps that can't be altered. The complainer can't lie, the dog owner can't deny.

Because of the volume of complaints, Animal Control is considering hiring someone to only deal with barking complaints to streamline the proof and process factor. The point is, the law changes are only meant to clamp down on offenders who repeat and repeat, and the process both can be and needs to be much quicker than it is now, and does not have to be complex like now to have proof of violation and be fair to both parties.

IMHO, the solution/process is much simpler.

For those of us in the Greater Metropolitan Sebastopol Area (where our neighbors are usually feet away, rather than acres), it works like when there is very loud music being played. Assuming the complainant has asked the offenders nicely to please turn it down and they haven't, the police are called. They come to the house in question and make a judgement call as to whether or not it is loud. Perhaps they use a device to record decibel levels. If yes (and often even, no), they knock on the door and mention that there has been a complaint and could you please turn your dog down. Sorry, turn your music down. Most reasonable neighbors will respond appropriately (which is, they turn the music down, not start screaming that their rights as a citizen have been violated). If the noisy folks turn the music back up an hour later, or a day later, then the police return and remind them that they are in violation of local noise ordinances. One more occurrence and they are fined, etc.

In the case that the people in question are NOT in violation of the noise ordinance, the police can tell the complainant that in their judgment/scientific testing, the noise is not too loud.

You don't have to wait two months for any action to be taken*.

Most reasonable people in what is generally considered a neighborhood know how to behave in civilization, and also know the difference between public and private space. They know that residential areas are generally quiet. They know that moving next to a lumber mill will expose them to the sounds of a lumber mill. It isn't that hard.

On the other hand, every once in awhile an asshole moves in next door. They know they are assholes. Hell, they take pride in the fact that they're assholes. It doesn't take long to figure that out, and avoid them. It's not about being a "victim". It's about knowing that at some point you cut your losses and work around them.

To think that some people don't want to be assholes is disproven by the vast majority of prison inmates and front page headlines.

:pant::console: :heart:

* Here is a fun experiment you can try at home: take a dog and stake him outside your bedroom, living room or office window. Make him bark repeatedly the way agitated doggies do, let's say once every two seconds with occasional breaks, so that it is averaging 25 barks a minute at 70 to 100 decibels, which is the generally acknowledged volume of a dog's bark. If you don't have a dog, have a friend go out and stand in the same position and hit a metal saucepan with a spoon.

Repeat this procedure for one hour. Three times a day. Five days a week.

Heck, do it for five minutes and get back to me.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Ted Pole:

To think that some people don't want to be assholes is disproven by the vast majority of prison inmates and front page headlines.

---

True that.

and for some of us, it's a situational call...

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Ted Pole:

IMHO, the solution/process is much simpler....

---

I like to say, how would be if instead of a dog, a human stood outside your window shouting "Hey!" every few seconds for hours on end, would that be ok? ...And of course it wouldn't be. And that wouldn't be tolerated for very long, would it? And really, what's the difference whether it's animal or human? The only difference is, we can't blame the dog. So it's the owners responsibilty. When a neighbor tells me they are quiet, but their dog isn't, it cracks me up. To me, the dog is an extension of the owner. Regardless of how they may view themselves or their neighbors, it comes down to this: how they control theor dogs barking reflects directly on how they show up in the neighborhood.

Secondly, I'd like to believe that there are no real assholes in the world. That would be nice... But just look at the world situation: it's obvious there are assholes. Yes, theoretically all humans are redeemable at heart, I get that, but that doesn't mean humans don't act like assholes. And really, what's the difference what motivates people to engage in selfish antisocial behaviors? They still have to be corrected or the world goes to shit.

I have a neighbor who has had as many as 30 goats in his front yard, not taking care of them, keeping the grounds clean etc, even letting one lay dead on the ground for a week. (Yup, he really did that.) when a goat was observed escaping and living in my yard for a week, he denied it was his and made no effort to retrieve it. Eventually it disappeared, probably became a coyotes dinner. He has had as many as 7 dogs that he doesn't interact with ever except to feed them. He had an illegal metal recycling business in his yard that got to the point where he had a semi truck sized dumpster in his yard which was completely cluttered with junk. He regularly threw old washing machines, stoves etc into this giant metal dumpster, usually @ around 9-10 at night. Man that was loud-It sounded like bombs going off! This in a residential neighborhood. Even though it was illegal, it took over a year to shut him down. He retaliated against his neighbors by placing 900 watt halogens in the trees, pointing them directly at their homes, in one case shooting light into a little girl's bedroom. Roosters, dog barking, stinky illegal farm animals that weren't properly cared for, loud music blaring, and unsightly masses of junk. Even neighbors who were sympathetic to the dude eventually got disgusted by his behavior. He alienated literally everybody in the neighborhood. Is he an asshole? A sociopath? Or just a libertarian expressing his belief in personal freedom?

Personally, I think there are assholes in the world. And if people allow petty tyrants to go their merry way, they will walk all over you and the quality of life in the community goes down. Rather than one poster's new age advice to "go with the flow, meditate and let it go" rationale (once again subtly implying the compliant isn't "spiritually evolved enough" to not let a nuiscance get under their skin,) it sometimes does take real world action to make positive change, even in just your own neighborhood, much less the world.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Ted Pole:

They know they are assholes. Hell, they take pride in the fact that they're assholes...To think that some people don't want to be assholes is disproven by the vast majority of prison inmates and front page headlines.

---

All of us have been thought to be assholes by someone or other at some time or other, but most of us don't want to be assholes. Even if we use fair, objective, reasonable criteria to decide who we'd label an asshole, most of those whose behavior is so obnoxious as to earn the title do not, I think, see themselves as assholes. Often they see those who seek to constrain their obnoxious behavior as assholes (a form of the ad hominem fallacy). When we're in a polarized situation wherein both parties see the other as an asshole, being open to recognizing possible assholey tendencies in ourselves rather than projecting assholiness onto the other can be the biggest challenge--and the best chance for a positive outcome.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Dixon:

All of us have been thought to be assholes by someone or other at some time or other, but most of us don't want to be assholes. Even if we use fair, objective, reasonable criteria to decide who we'd label an asshole, most of those whose behavior is so obnoxious as to earn the title do not, I think, see themselves as assholes. Often they see those who seek to constrain their obnoxious behavior as assholes (a form of the ad hominem fallacy). When we're in a polarized situation wherein both parties see the other as an asshole, being open to recognizing possible assholey tendencies in ourselves rather than projecting assholiness onto the other can be the biggest challenge--and the best chance for a positive outcome.

---

My experience is true assholes never think they are assholes, ( because they are unconscious of being an asshole,) but tend to project their assholeness on everyone around them. As for the reverse, meh, not buying it. My inner asshole rarely rears its head because I know my shadow intimately. When you do the inner work of personal inquiry, you learn not to let your inner asshole become your outer persona.

Case in point, the guy I referred to would never have changed. The only thing that mAde him a better neighbor was involving the authorities. After he was slapped with stiff fines, he came into compliance.

One way to define a sociopath, is a person with no empathy; ie; they don't care at all about how you feel. If you care about others, you may have an "inner asshole"; ie: "shadow", but, imo, you are not an overt assh@le, by definition.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by MalletKatMandu:

My experience is true assholes never think they are assholes, ( because they are unconscious of being an asshole,) but tend to project their assholeness on everyone around them. As for the reverse, meh, not buying it. My inner asshole rarely rears its head because I know my shadow intimately. When you do the inner work of personal inquiry, you learn not to let your inner asshole become your outer persona.

Case in point, the guy I referred to would never have changed. The only thing that mAde him a better neighbor was involving the authorities. After he was slapped with stiff fines, he came into compliance.

---

Exactly! And the book "The Sociopath Next Door" reports that 4% of all people are born with no conscience, and that they're really good at disguising this fact.....

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by hales:

One way to define a sociopath, is a person with no empathy; ie; they don't care at all about how you feel. If you care about others, you may have an "inner asshole"; ie: "shadow", but, imo, you are not an overt assh@le, by definition.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by MalletKatMandu:

I have a neighbor who has had as many as 30 goats in his front yard, not taking care of them, keeping the grounds clean etc, even letting one lay dead on the ground for a week. (Yup, he really did that.) when a goat was observed escaping and living in my yard for a week, he denied it was his and made no effort to retrieve it. Eventually it disappeared, probably became a coyotes dinner. He has had as many as 7 dogs that he doesn't interact with ever except to feed them. He had an illegal metal recycling business in his yard that got to the point where he had a semi truck sized dumpster in his yard which was completely cluttered with junk. He regularly threw old washing machines, stoves etc into this giant metal dumpster, usually @ around 9-10 at night. Man that was loud-It sounded like bombs going off! This in a residential neighborhood. Even though it was illegal, it took over a year to shut him down. He retaliated against his neighbors by placing 900 watt halogens in the trees, pointing them directly at their homes, in one case shooting light into a little girl's bedroom. Roosters, dog barking, stinky illegal farm animals that weren't properly cared for, loud music blaring, and unsightly masses of junk. Even neighbors who were sympathetic to the dude eventually got disgusted by his behavior. He alienated literally everybody in the neighborhood. Is he an asshole? A sociopath? Or just a libertarian expressing his belief in personal freedom?

---

Yep, this is what what some people regard as their inalienable Constitutional rights. Others might call it "self-actualization." I've always been fascinated with what glitch in Google Maps got them from being the cute suckling babe to blubber-headed boob they've wound up as. I gues that's why I write fiction, to try to understand reality.
-Conrad

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by MalletKatMandu:

He retaliated against his neighbors by placing 900 watt halogens in the trees, pointing them directly at their homes, in one case shooting light into a little girl's bedroom.

---

A pellet gun would take care of the lights. You would be totally justified.

Richard

To answer your question, I would say that, technically, "asshole" is the correct term. Let's hope he doesn't join the Police Department. (Gee, what if he already has?) Seriously, it's a safe bet that he was tortured as a child. On that ground one can have sympathy, but you've still got a right not to be his victim.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by theindependenteye:

Yep, this is what what some people regard as their inalienable Constitutional rights. Others might call it "self-actualization." I've always been fascinated with what glitch in Google Maps got them from being the cute suckling babe to blubber-headed boob they've wound up as. I gues that's why I write fiction, to try to understand reality.
-Conrad

---

Of course dogs bark, but when the barking becomes repetitive and constant, something else is going on.......and more than likely the animal is stressed, lonely and unhappy. That is not good for the animal's health and well being and it certainly can be annoying, stressful and impact neighbors.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by meherc:

Sure some dogs bark but so do some wacos / emotionally

---