Business owner fears law will signal his end
Howell Township Council rules that dogs are not considered to be livestock
BY TOYNETT HALL
Staff Writer

In an effort to be consistent with state law, the Howell Township Council has adopted an ordinance that amends the definition of agricultural uses and strikes out dogs from being considered as livestock.

The July 17 vote stirred mixed emotions among those who commented on the council's action. Some people said they believe dogs are an agricultural use.

Peter Campione, the owner of Kindred Souls, a dog-training facility on Brown Road, said the revision will eventually put him out of business. He said he will have to seek a use variance from the Zoning Board of Adjustment in order to continue operating. He said if he is not able to secure the use variance, he will be out of business.

Campione had to prove to the council why he believes dogs should be considered livestock under their agricultural use definition. According to Campione, "The face of agriculture is changing."

He said it is very seldom that anyone sees horses pulling a plow or doing agricultural work. Campione sought to prove that horses are now used as companion animals, and according to him, if officials allow one animal to fit in that category, they must allow another.

Lynn Stipick of Long Branch is a patron of Kindred Souls. She shared the same sentiment.

"I grew up in rural Pennsylvania and kept horses as companion animals," she said, attempting to compare the dogs to horses by saying, "Dogs have become what we need in order to teach our young people how to care for another living being; therefore, just like the horse, they are companion animals. I would like to say that we need to amend this ordinance to allow dog training, rather than to completely ban it."

Mayor Joseph DiBella said, "In Howell there are many people who are qualified as farmers who are operating farms because they raise or train horses. They don't necessarily have to be pulling a plow for them to be considered a component of farming the land. State law is clear that that is permissible.

"We cannot comment on why the state and their law has not included dogs in that determination. And that may be a decision the Legislature has to deal with. But just because a horse may not be pulling a plow does not mean they don't still qualify under the agricultural definition. In fact, what I may suggest to you is we have more horse farms than we do farms that grow agricultural products," DiBella said.

Don Smith, vice chairman of the Howell Environmental Commission, said, "I would agree that dogs have an agricultural use. They're sheep herders, but not livestock. The state does not recognize dogs as livestock and our ordinance is mirroring the state's Right to Farm law. If the state does not think dogs are livestock what makes us think they are?"

Resident Janet Coakley urged the council to adopt the revision to the ordinance. She said it is time for the Howell ordinance to be in line with state law.

"We need to bring ourselves in compliance with the law so that we do not have these issues constantly before us and constantly plaguing us. It is affecting the quality of life here in our agricultural areas and that is not acceptable," Coakley said.

June Noto, a principal of Kindred Souls, said amending the ordinance will put her business in jeopardy. She asked the council members to consider allowing dog training facilities within the ordinance and for her business to be considered as a pre-existing non-conforming use.

DiBella said, "We are not regulating out a certain kind of business. We have to comply with state law. We need our definition to hold up in local and state courts. If it is not consistent and we are challenged, we will not be completely protected. The governing body is working on an ordinance to address dog kennels and dog training facilities."