I'm Worried the State of Maine Could Fine Me $5,000 For My Dog's Barking

My dog Georgie is perfect. She’s smart. We joke that if she were human, she’d be the “Well, actually,” girl in her liberal arts college classes who corrects everyone but is, annoyingly, right. She’s beautiful. She has a spot on her side in the shape of a perfect Valentine’s Day heart, and her red fur is so shiny and gorgeous. I was legitimately afraid she’d show me up at my own wedding.

But Georgie is a screamer. (Or, as very-online dog parents might understand it, she loves to “screm.”) She’s a Red Heeler mix, which means she is a herding dog, and there is a strong instinct of vigilance within her. She alerts us when someone walks past our window on the street, when we are one minute past her dinnertime, or when she can’t find the bone she so desperately wants to chew. To her, this is just communicating. But the pitch at which she chooses to communicate is one that is so offensive to the ears I actually fear mine will fall off my body in protest.

Unfortunately for Georgie and for us, our home state of Maine has proposed a bill that would expand its dog nuisance law to fine people with dogs who “disturb the peace” with their barking, yelping, or howling.

So, what exactly is in this noise disturbance expansion proposal?

If passed, the law would allow police or animal control officers to fine pet parents for up to $5,000 for a civil violation. LD 133 (An Act to Amend the Laws Regarding Nuisance Dogs) is sponsored by Sen. Rick Bennett, R-Oxford, who introduced the bill to the Joint Standing Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry on Thursday. He said he was representing constituents who live next to a neighbor with more than 15 hunting dogs. Per the Portland Press Herald, Bennett cited current state law that exempts working dogs from barking-dog ordinances.

“I think a lot of these issues can be dealt with if there was some teeth in the law that would allow people to complain a little more than they can now,” he said.

Those who testified in support of the bill complained of being unable to “have a peaceful dinner on our patio with family and friends” and being unable to sleep because of “out-of-control barking dogs at all hours of the day and night, especially at two in the morning.” Now, that does sound excessive, and I would consider lack of sleep to be a problem, too. But is expanding the current law — which, as it stands, defines a “nuisance dog” as one who causes “bodily injury” to include language so broad the right approach? For one, as Rep. Mark Cooper, R-Windham, said during the hearing, it’s “tough to interpret.”

What one person considers an interruption or an excessive noise disturbance is subjective. For example, when Georgie barks, we use positive-reinforcement techniques to redirect her attention to something else or we figure out what she wants and appease her. There are some times, though, when we are in the middle of something (like a Zoom call), and it takes a little bit longer than usual for us to calm her down. More often than not, something is actually wrong, like she’s out of water or she can’t get past an obstacle, like a closed baby gate or a large piece of furniture.

What if one of our neighbors thought that was just slightly too long and called law enforcement? Turns out, by the time the cops or animal control folks get here, they meet a happy pup who’s just excited to make a new friend and has long since ceased barking. A visit to me wastes officials’ time dealing with serious problems or instances in which someone or another dog could actually get hurt.

This isn’t the right path to deal with barking disturbances.

As a Maine resident, I don’t think this is the way to handle this. I agree with Katie Lisnick, chair of the Animal Welfare Advisory Council, who said, “We sympathize absolutely with folks who are experiencing these excessive noise complaints, but there may be a better statute under which to (address this).”

She continued: “This is not the correct statute to be placing this in. There are a lot of unintended consequences of being declared a nuisance or dangerous dog that really don’t apply to barking.” When a dog is labeled a “nuisance” in this context, this also labels them as a potential physical danger to others, when that is not necessarily the case.

As The Sportsman Alliance stated in a post ahead of the hearing, this bill does not take into account too many circumstances in which dogs might bark:

“This poorly drafted bill does not define excessive, nor does it exempt dogs in the lawful activities of hunting, mushing or field trials, where barking occurs. It does not stop there; kennels are not taken into consideration. Have you been around a kennel when it is dinner time? The bill also does not recognize whether the barking, howling and yelping occurs in metropolitan areas or in the country. All of this could easily result in false claims wasting the time of law enforcement or animal control officers.”

So, could Maine really pass a law like this?

Unfortunately, there is precedent here. Tennessee law prohibits “frequent barking, whining, or howling” that would disturb the peace. And Delaware’s governor signed a law that will forbid dogs from barking continuously for more than 15 minutes, or more than 30 minutes in total in a day. This legislation will go into effect in October.

So, can Maine take a different path here? Right now, this is just a proposed bill. Here’s hoping my fellow Pine Tree State residents reconsider it, much like I hope they will reconsider this absolutely stunning updated state flag design. (Voting against a flag is a weird hill to die on, if you ask me, but OK).

Kinship has reached out to Lisnik and Reps. Bennett and Cooper for comment.