LIHUE — When Josephine Steciuk and her husband, Michael, first moved to Kalaheo about six years ago, the couple said they were well aware about the area’s rural lifestyle. Even before they moved into their home, they heard the sounds
LIHUE — When Josephine Steciuk and her husband, Michael, first moved to Kalaheo about six years ago, the couple said they were well aware about the area’s rural lifestyle.
Even before they moved into their home, they heard the sounds of horses, cows and chickens that, like the people who also lived nearby, called the neighborhood their home.
But what they didn’t hear, Josephine said, were the nearly one dozen dogs from a neighboring home that bark and howl continuously throughout the day.
“I know Kauai is a special place, but I don’t believe we are this little backwater in the middle of the Wild West,” said Josephine, who explained that she and her husband have to keep the entire back of their home closed during the day because of the barking. “We’ve got to respect our neighbors and this is not respect.”
For as long as they have lived in their home, Josephine said they have reached out to the Kauai Humane Society and the Kauai Police Department to help find a solution, but to no avail.
Their hands were tied, she said, because there isn’t a law in the county’s books to deal with barking dogs.
That could change, though, if the County Council approves a bill aimed at curbing excessive barking complaints by educating dog owners and stepping up noise enforcement efforts.
But not everyone is on board.
On one hand some residents, like Steciuk, say the ordinance is needed to deal with a continual problem that has taken a toll on them over time. Others say the bill is subjective and may do more harm than good in some cases.
Before Wednesday’s County Council meeting, where a public hearing was held on the bill, a total of 35 residents submitted testimony on the barking ordinance — 29 of whom supported the measure and another three who opposed it. During the hearing, seven more people spoke up on the polarizing topic, including Josephine.
The proposed ordinance defines excessive barking as dog noises made during any time of the day or evening, regardless of whether it is made on private property, “continuously or incessantly for a period of 10 minutes” or “intermittently for a period of 20 minutes within a 30-minute period of time.”
Kauai Humane Society Executive Director Penny Cistaro said the organization will ask complainants to speak with the dog owner after the first complaint and encourage the complainants to maintain a log documenting future excessive barking.
The log sheets, she explained, act as a legal document that allows KHS to determine the severity of the problem and what can be done to correct the problem.
If a formal complaint is filed, the nonprofit will then send a nuisance letter, along with educational material, to the dog owner, notifying him or her about the problem and giving them 15 days to improve the barking.
If the dog owner or owners fail to correct it, the proposed law calls for a $50 fine for the first offense thereafter. A $100 fine shall be assessed for the second offense and a $200 to $500 for a third offense, if the offense occurs within 90 days of the second one.
But some people are not so sure.
In a Jan. 14 email to council members, Eleele resident Dora Sloger wrote that she is concerned that the log book process could add some fuel to feuds between neighbors.
“This will be misused and it will give KHS the power to harass citizens even more than they already do,” Sloger wrote. “Maybe we need to have laws addressing the people who keep their big dogs on a short chain or in a small cage all the time, just one of the reasons dogs bark continually.”
Kapaa resident Suzanne Woodruff, who was one of seven people who testified at the meeting, said she does not support the measure because the county, as well as dog owners, have several existing legal options available to them.
Some cases, she claimed, could fall into the state’s animal cruelty laws, while others can be applied to the state’s broad noise ordinance.
“How many layers of laws do we have to keep putting on this instead of taking realistic approaches,” Woodruff said.
Another concern, she said, is that neighboring homeowners may have unrealistic expectations about how to calm or control barking dogs that respond to a number of stimuluses and do so more often when their owners are not home.
“Dogs aren’t necessarily discerning — they do bark when people walk by the property,” Woodruff said. “Now, they can’t say, ‘Oh, that’s the kid next door. That’s not a trespasser.’ My dogs aren’t law school graduates and they’re not rocket scientists.”
Some who support the bill say the ordinance would, in some cases, give homeowners an extra push to address a deeper problem that goes beyond the dog’s barking.
“I love dogs, and above all, humane treatment for all animals and sentient creatures, but when you have a high energy dog tied up in the backyard and ignored … you will hear this dog bark day and night,” Puhi resident Danitza Galvan wrote in an email to the County Council in support of the bill. “She is virtually saying, ‘I’m here. Please notice me.’ How do you correct a situation like that?”
The council will take up the issue Feb. 19.
• Darin Moriki, county government reporter, can be reached at 245-0428 or dmoriki@thegardenisland.com. Follow him on Twitter at @darinmoriki.
