PG Council Addresses Excessive Barking With Ordinance

GROVE — Mayor Sonny Hudson thanked a local resident last week for her feedback on amending the city’s animal control ordinance to strengthen it in the case of persistent problems with barking dogs.

“Your input on this has been very important,” Hudson told Mary Mathis at the council’s March 28 meeting.

Mathis, who lives on Elm Street, addressed Prairie Grove City Council in February asking for help from the excessive barking of her neighbor’s five dogs.

Mathis said the problem had been going on since September and she and other neighbors had made many calls to the police department about the noise. The barking, which would occur day and night, had greatly affected the residents’ quality of life, Mathis told council members.

The owner of the dogs, Joe Watson, has been cited several times now for violating the city’s ordinance on disturbing the peace. He has paid the fines for one of the citations. He has an April 5 arraignment in district court for three other citations.

The council discussed the neighbors’ situation in February and asked city attorney Steven Parker to bring an ordinance addressing the problems to the next council meeting.

The city council on March 28 unanimously voted to amend the city’s animal control ordinance in response to comments made by Mathis and others. The ordinance did not have an emergency clause and will take effect 60 days from its passage.

“I basically tried to put in what I was directed to at the last meeting,” said Parker, who attended the meeting remotely.

The animal control amendment extends the definition of the word, “abandon,” to also mean, “keeping animals at a location not regularly and routinely inhabited by humans shall be considered abandonment.”

This definition is a result of comments made by the residents in February. Mathis said it appeared that the owner of the dogs did not live at the house but would come in to take care of them in the mornings. She said he was not around to hear how much his dogs were barking.

Section 6.04.07 (h) of the ordinance states that it is unlawful to harbor or keep any animals which disturb the peace by loud noises at

any time of the day or night, with the exception of animals kept in agricultural zones.

The animal control officer has authority to take into custody animals that are considered abandoned or in conditions in violation of the amendment, and anyone wanting to redeem their animals would have to pay redemption fees as set forth in the ordinance.

A person found guilty of violating the ordinance can be fined $25 up to $100 for a first offense within a 12-month period, $50-$100 for a second offense within a 12-month period, $75-$100 for a third offense within a 12-month period, and $100 per offense for a fourth or subsequent offense within a 12-month period.

The ordinance gives the city the authority to impound the offending animals and place them for adoption outside the city limits for any person found in violation of Section 6.04.07 (h) for a fourth offense within a 12-month period.

Mathis said she thought the fines were not steep enough but it was noted the amended ordinance now has the harsher penalty of allowing the city to impound animals if the problem continues.

Council members had other questions and comments, and Hudson finally recommended the council adopt the ordinance and then make changes in the future if those become necessary.

“You can nitpick these things to death and never get anything done,” Hudson told council members.

Mathis said her advice is that, in the future, police officers respond quickly to complaints about excessive barking. She said she believes problems would be resolved more easily if owners are cited in the beginning instead of after multiple complaints.