Washington D.C.'s Animal Laws

[quincy]

Following are three links to the animal laws in Washington D.C.:

http://www.foxhallcommunity.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Brochure-Animal_Control_Laws.pdf

http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/committee-documents/YV5WVltZ20110721111421.pdf

http://www.dcbar.org/sections/environment-energy-and-natural-resources/pets.cfm

D.C. Code §8-1809 might be of some interest to those who read JoDa's thread. Section 8-1809 provides that "no one may own or keep 5 or more mammals, larger than a guinea pig and over the age of 4 months, without obtaining an animal hobby permit." (bolding added) JoDa is not only not required to license her premises as a kennel, she is not even required under the law to obtain an animal hobby permit.

DC Code §42-1903 gives condominium associations the power to fine violators. JoDa's condominium association has not fined her for having dogs.

Under DC law, Animal Control is authorized to remove pets in violation of the animal laws. Animal Control visited JoDa's residence and did not find a violation and did not remove her dog(s).

There is no indication, in other words, in either what was relayed in the thread by JoDa or in DC animal laws, that JoDa was operating a kennel or violating any animal law.

If JoDa finds the need to seek an order of harassment from the court to stop her neighbor from calling the police, she should not worry about being fined for "multiple civil code violations."

For some reason, I did not think to locate and provide links to the laws before JoDa's thread was closed (especially puzzling since I posted links to emergency numbers and to the DC Bar Association). Sorry.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

For some reason you seem to think the one to five animals applies to a business license for hire. To me that does not appear the correct interpretation as it would be in direct conflict with the kennel laws. This indicates it is for family pets, not pay.

 

[LdiJ]

For some reason you seem to think the one to five animals applies to a business license for hire. To me that does not appear the correct interpretation as it would be in direct conflict with the kennel laws. This indicates it is for family pets, not pay.

Will you please just give it up? I really do not understand why you do this kind of thing.

 

[CdwJava]

OHR, I couldn't even find the boarding laws you previously mentioned in the DC laws. The code numbers were off and even a search of the code failed to find the statutes or the terms involved.

It would seem an absurd stretch to argue that someone who watches a friend's pet for a few days while they are away must obtain a boarding license or kennel permit or some such thing! I know that government regulation often runs amok, but, that one would be ridiculous.

Here's the DC Code:

http://www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/dccode/

And, the simple version (though unofficial): http://dccode.org/simple/

Perhaps you'd care to point them out?

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Not going to continue this disagreement because it is obvious Miss M does not want it to be so. But to answer Carls statement, the new version is in the 800 section of this link. I am not going to dig up the other source and do not have it readily available as I did not short cut it.

http://ri.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrBT83rJMRU8GwAv1hXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTEzcW82c2cwBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMgRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDU1N18x/RV=2/RE=1422169452/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.dcregs.dc.gov%2fNotice%2fDownLoad.aspx%3fIssueFileID%3d52203/RK=0/RS=oMsYGSBBFiV.GpDVboOdIMjVlaQ-

 

[CdwJava]

The DC Register appears to be a published proposal of regulatory changes to zoning laws, but I still cannot find it in the DC Official Code. It would be important to determine what the definition of animal boarding might be ... but, as has repeatedly been mentioned, it is clear that neither the police nor animal control are concerned with someone watching a friend's dog. I cannot believe that such a temporary and sporadic watching of friends' pets would meet any rational person's definition of "boarding" such that it would be actionable under the law.

If it's a zoning issue, maybe that's a separate code. But, I doubt they would bother arguing that a dog-sitter is running a boarding operation. Now, maybe if he made a significant amount of money conducting the operation and the neighbors were all complaining about the smell and the ruckus ... but, this does not appear to be the case.

 

[quincy]

Here is a direct link to DC's Regulations: http://www.dcregs.dc.gov/

The (sort of) link that you provided, OHR, did not work for me - not that it matters. This thread was not started so that JoDa could be further misled by misinformation but rather to clear up the misinformation provided in the other thread. This is not to say I do not understand what you have been trying to make as an issue, OHR. I do. It is just not an issue for JoDa based on what was provided in the way of facts. She is not operating a commercial enterprise by sitting another's dog.

Zoning laws are covered under Chapter 11, sections 11-1 to 11-34. Animal Boarding is covered under Zoning's "Commercial Districts" section 11-7 (with boarding found under 11-735). The "800" referred to by OHR covers zoning regulations in industrial districts.

JoDa is considered the owner of the dogs (up to 4) that she has purchased or that she keeps at her residence under permanent custody or temporary custody. She is not considered a kennel. She is considered a dog owner. Period.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

It is nice that you take it upon yourself to interpret Federal tax law and DC laws for OP Quincy. I am sure the IRS would disagree and the judge in her harassment suit would take their determination of whether she is operating a business when interpreting local kennel statutes. If she continues to fly under the radar she will likely get away with it. Any lawyer worth his salt would tear her apart and turn her into the IRS to win his case in a harassment suit.

 

[quincy]

It is nice that you take it upon yourself to interpret Federal tax law and DC laws for OP Quincy. I am sure the IRS would disagree and the judge in her harassment suit would take their determination of whether she is operating a business when interpreting local kennel statutes. If she continues to fly under the radar she will likely get away with it. Any lawyer worth his salt would tear her apart and turn her into the IRS to win his case in a harassment suit.

Oh, brother. You just don't know when to stop, do you?

No one except you and the crazy harassing neighbor - not the police, Animal Control, her neighbors, her friends, the Condo Association, the attorney she has consulted, the laws of DC - thinks JoDa has violated any law.

Please give this, and your obviously-muddled brain, a rest, OHR.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Resorting to attacks because your interpretation is questioned in accordance with DC Code, IRS Regulations and a defense lawyer if she presses harassment charges? Very unlike you Quincy. As Ms M clearly did not want this thread to continue by locking the last and OP has received her advice, I am no longer going to comment. The facts are on the table OP can decide her course of action and live with the results.

 

[quincy]

Resorting to attacks because your interpretation is questioned in accordance with DC Code, IRS Regulations and a defense lawyer if she presses harassment charges? Very unlike you Quincy. As Ms M clearly did not want this thread to continue by locking the last and OP has received her advice, I am no longer going to comment. The facts are on the table OP can decide her course of action and live with the results.

You said you were no longer going to comment in this thread back in your post number 5. Should I actually believe you are serious this time?

The facts are, indeed, on the table, and all of your posts have confused these facts and have confused the law to the detriment of the original poster in the last thread.

The IRS does not make you report NO income (and JoDa had NO income from sitting - read her posts again) and the IRS does not make you report occasional and unpredicted dinners out offered as a "thanks" (and JoDa did not expect anything in return for watching her friends' dogs - read her posts again) and the DC Code does not say a pet sitter with 4 or less animals is a kennel (read the Code, pertinent parts have been linked for you) and the DC Code does not say that a license or even a permit is required to pet sit a dog (again, read the DC Code and not inapplicable sections of Municipal Regulations on zoning in commercial and industrial districts).

You seem to have read between the lines of the postings by JoDa an entire fictional novel and I fully expect the ending of this novel-in-your-head places JoDa somewhere on the grassy knoll.

 

[LdiJ]

Resorting to attacks because your interpretation is questioned in accordance with DC Code, IRS Regulations and a defense lawyer if she presses harassment charges? Very unlike you Quincy. As Ms M clearly did not want this thread to continue by locking the last and OP has received her advice, I am no longer going to comment. The facts are on the table OP can decide her course of action and live with the results.

It really may be time for you to take a rest. You have not been over the top like this in a while, but lately you are doing it again.

 

[JoDa]

Wow...I didn't expect a simple post to come to this level. I will make a few brief points:

(1) I could not find the laws you were referencing, except under different subheadings and relating to zoning variances for things like multi-dog boarding facilities and/or vet clinics wanting to board patients overnight. As far as I can tell, there is nothing in DC law that prevents me from owning a dog of my own NOR watching someone else's dog (and taking ownership responsibilities for that dog) overnight, so long as I (1) do not advertise boarding services for an established fee nor (2) have more than 5 mammalian pets in my house at one time. Since I own only one dog, no other pets, and will not watch more than one *other* dog (my home is small, more than 3, including me, is a crowd) for a friend or neighbor at a time, I think I meet those requirements amply.

(2) If you really feel that I can't help a friend or neighbor out by watching their dog occasionally, do you register your home as a "kennel," "childcare facility," or other such if you watch a neighbor's pet or kid? If your teenage daughter babysits, do you make her register her business, even if the parents bring the kid to your home?

(3) Even if I *were* a kennel, I meet most of the requirements posted. The dogs are largely inside, and only outside under direct supervision during reasonable hours. After that 8 PM cut-off, I respect my neighbors and, rather than have my dog or any other dog I'm in charge of, out in the yard, I walk them on leash. Even when I have them in the yard, I pick up their waste and properly dispose of it in our own trash cans, on private property and with proper lids, immediately. I do the same if I'm walking them on leash. Her complaints have generally come between 3 and 6 PM.

(4) Her complaints INCLUDE and are LARGELY when I have only my OWN dog in my OWN yard. You cannot argue that I need to have a kennel license to OWN a single dog, and allow him to use my own, fenced yard. The harassment complaint was a direct result of a complaint about only my OWN dog and MYSELF occupying my OWN private property.

Again, it's not like I have a dozen strange dogs in my house at all times. NO ONE in my condo association has complained about my dog OR the occasional neighbors' dogs, on the VERY RARE occasion I watch some other dog. I am simply too BUSY to run an actual kennel. Most days, I have to pay someone ELSE to walk my own dog because I have a million things going on and can't get him enough walks on my own. Over the holidays, I'm lucky, I have time off work, so I can help a brother out with their dog. I do it so that they'll take my dog when I make myself scarce in the middle of the summer and they gladly take my dog for me...

 

[quincy]

Wow...I didn't expect a simple post to come to this level. I will make a few brief points:

(1) I could not find the laws you were referencing, except under different subheadings and relating to zoning variances for things like multi-dog boarding facilities and/or vet clinics wanting to board patients overnight. As far as I can tell, there is nothing in DC law that prevents me from owning a dog of my own NOR watching someone else's dog (and taking ownership responsibilities for that dog) overnight, so long as I (1) do not advertise boarding services for an established fee nor (2) have more than 5 mammalian pets in my house at one time. Since I own only one dog, no other pets, and will not watch more than one *other* dog (my home is small, more than 3, including me, is a crowd) for a friend or neighbor at a time, I think I meet those requirements amply.

(2) If you really feel that I can't help a friend or neighbor out by watching their dog occasionally, do you register your home as a "kennel," "childcare facility," or other such if you watch a neighbor's pet or kid? If your teenage daughter babysits, do you make her register her business, even if the parents bring the kid to your home?

(3) Even if I *were* a kennel, I meet most of the requirements posted. The dogs are largely inside, and only outside under direct supervision during reasonable hours. After that 8 PM cut-off, I respect my neighbors and, rather than have my dog or any other dog I'm in charge of, out in the yard, I walk them on leash. Even when I have them in the yard, I pick up their waste and properly dispose of it in our own trash cans, on private property and with proper lids, immediately. I do the same if I'm walking them on leash. Her complaints have generally come between 3 and 6 PM.

(4) Her complaints INCLUDE and are LARGELY when I have only my OWN dog in my OWN yard. You cannot argue that I need to have a kennel license to OWN a single dog, and allow him to use my own, fenced yard. The harassment complaint was a direct result of a complaint about only my OWN dog and MYSELF occupying my OWN private property.

Again, it's not like I have a dozen strange dogs in my house at all times. NO ONE in my condo association has complained about my dog OR the occasional neighbors' dogs, on the VERY RARE occasion I watch some other dog. I am simply too BUSY to run an actual kennel. Most days, I have to pay someone ELSE to walk my own dog because I have a million things going on and can't get him enough walks on my own. Over the holidays, I'm lucky, I have time off work, so I can help a brother out with their dog. I do it so that they'll take my dog when I make myself scarce in the middle of the summer and they gladly take my dog for me...

I think it is understood by all now, JoDa.

The "kennel theory" that was introduced could not be supported by the laws of DC.

I hope you have had some luck getting your situation with your neighbor resolved.

 

[JoDa]

Although I will note that the IRS *might* have some complaint with me. Payment in kind, even as simple as a sitting exchange or a "thank you" dinner IS reportable. But so are tips, and so are a million other things that people don't usually report. If the *IRS* decides to track me down from my posts here, so be it. I will give them documentation of what I was gifted for watching friends/neighbors dogs as well as what I gifted for the same, and I will come out at zero, maybe even a little less than zero because I vacationed like a champ last year. I have full confidence that the IRS has no reasonable business to take up with me. I also know that DC police and animal control have no business with me, because I take good care of my dog, other dogs I am occasionally in charge of, and my property. Jeez, can we just focus on the B who wants the whole neighborhood to hate me for daring to have a dog, but had that backfire on her because everyone in the neighborhood *besides* her loves my dog?