Catcalls, Not Curtain Calls, for Cat Outlaws

[XLFD]

Here is the recently passed Ordinance 235-11 that the City Council burdened us with on September 12, 2011.  Ironically, ten years and a day after an event which led to a lot of restrictions on personal freedoms by the government, not all warranted.

 

 

"Visit Ludington" and a variety of tourist-centered websites, advertise that Ludington is a pet-friendly city.  That's awesome, if I bring my pet to Ludington they'll be friendly and accomodating.

http://www.visitludington.com/stories/pet_friendly_places_in_ludington

After all they say, "We love our pets, and more of us are bringing them along when we travel. With all the wide open space here in the West Michigan area, your dog or cat should feel right at home."   They then say that the following lodgings in the City of Ludington allow you to bring your pet:

Parkview Cottages (By the Lake)

Candlelight Inn B&B

Lighthouse Motel

Nader's LakeshoreLodge

 

They won't tell you in this site that if you do decide to bring your cat on a visit to Ludington, and stay in one of these establishments, or if you stay at a friends or family's residence in Ludington that:

1) Visiting cats cannot legally be fed in the City Of Ludington:  Read the first part of section e.  All cats can only be fed (or provided with water) in the feeding person's residence.  You bring your cat to Ludington with you at one of these pet-friendly places, and you risk a municipal civil infraction every time you feed it.  For the locals, if you feed your cat in your backyard, expect a ticket.  Walk the cat around town on a leash and let it take a drink from a puddle, get a ticket.  Put your cat in your shed to catch mice, another ticket. 

 

This link also says that Ludington City Park (near House of Flavors) and Stearn's Park also allows pets on leashes as long as they are not nuisances.  Stearn's Park does have more limitations, but it advertises that:  "The half-mile walk out to the lighthouse is popular among couples, families, and fishermen."  Oops, not now

2)  Fishing on the pier is outlawed:  Now that it is illegal to "intentionally make food available for other wildlife in the city parks, marinas and beaches" you won't be able to fish off the pier with live (or once-live) bait legally.  You say the pier is not City of Ludington property; I say the fish are eating that food you intentionally thrown to them in City of Ludington property.

 

And what about that program we recently discussed wherein this problem may have originated:

3) Dog Bowl Program is Unlawful:  The DDA's Dog Bowl Program of 2010 which put bowls of water outside downtown businesses 24/7/365 is now declared illegal.  These bowls have intentionally been made available to wandering cats on public property and/or private areas that are not residences of the person providing the bowls.  An infraction.

In defense of the business owner you could say that they didn't intend to have cats drink from them.  If you accept that, then why can't I put a bowl of cat food somewhere if I 'intend' to have another noble purpose for it rather than for some cat to eat it.  Hmmm?

 

If you can't keep a law simple, there is probably no reason to have the law in the first place.  In this case, it looks as if a couple of citizens griped to the Mayor about a problem that could well have been handled without three months of navel-gazing and the creation of incredibly stupid legislation by a committee that is supposed to be considering public safety policy rather than issues that really have nothing to do with the public safety. 

The section of law has had its title changed to "Animals creating disturbances or nuisances".  Truth is, those cats, those birds, and the other wildlife mentioned in this ordinance are not creating disturbances or nuisances.  The City Council is doing that, and they look very well fed.  Now if we could only neuter their ridiculous encroachment of the rights of us and our furry friends.

[Marty Redman]

It makes you wonder.  Snow fence up two days after Labor Day.  Laws like this one that restricts what you can do with your pets and at the beach.  That other law they made earlier this summer with new beach-park rules.  The beach cops on golf carts replacing lifeguards. 

It looks like the City lawmakers are trying to sabotage the beach tourism.  But why?

[XLFD]

Why, indeed?  Good points, Marty.

[Willy]

Well thought out post X. All the situations you cited about feeding animals would be violations of the new ordinance. I like the one about fishermen feeding the fish. This type of ordinance only proves that the City Council meets way to often. I'm thinking that once every month or every other month would be more appropriate. Meeting to often means to many oppurtunities to dream up laws that limit citizens rights. If they only met once a month then they would have more time in between meetings to consider what damage their legislation might do to the voters who put them in office.

[AQUAMAN]

They used to meet at CH about once a month, seems like it's every 2 weeks or so nowadays. How about meeting just 8 times a year, about every 6 weeks, unless some emergency situation arises? Could cut down on a lot of extraordinary ordinances that are wasting time and causing more damage than good, and maybe just cut back on their payroll to CC members getting almost $4grand a year, instead of about $1grand, which is more in line with good governing for less $$$.

[XLFD]

Less meetings are fine with me; for $50 a year I shouldn't be inconvenienced too often should I 'luck' out, LOL.  It would give me a lot more time to get some miles on my bike and some initiative petitions started.