Pet Policy Proposal

The following is a pet policy proposal which includes a detailed policy as well as persuasive arguments to convince administrative powers that be to implement the right for professional staff to own pets. Although submitted and revised at one time by me, the credit for the bulk of the work goes to staff members before me, and likely many before them - those I know are DeLane Duvall, Dave Kramer, Barb Jannsen and Rosie Smith -others are given credit at the conclusion. Without any further

ado:

Policy Proposal

Live-in Professional Staff Member

"Pet Ownership Allowance"

Respectfully Submitted by Michael Wilde

July 30, 1997

This proposal is intended to persuade readers to approve the ownership of non-aquatic pets by professional live-in staff. The rationale for such a proposal is multifaceted.

1. The Residence Hall Director apartment is the permanent residence of Residential Hall Directors.

2. Pet ownership is considered therapeutic and has been known to reduce stress, alleviate anxiety and lower blood pressure.

3. The responsibility placed on pet owners is one which not only is beneficial to the owner, but provides an opportunity for that owner to demonstrate responsibility and role model such positive behavior.

Professionals in full time positions, in most situations, are free to choose the setting in which they will live. Due to the unique format of the Residential Hall Director position, this luxury is not available. On campus apartments are provided for individuals in these positions to accommodate their needs. This proximity to the residents forces professional staff to live by regulations that would not be found in living in an off-campus setting. There are, however, very clear differences between the residences of the professional staff member and the student residents in each building. Apartments set professional staff members out from student residents with a few simple physical differences including air-conditioning, internet access, private bathrooms, and kitchenette areas. These physical variances

allow student residents to see a tangible difference between residence hall living and the living arrangements for professional staff. This difference establishes the Residential Hall Director Apartment as a permanent residence and, in turn, simplifies the allowance of other luxuries such as married living arrangements.

Requiring professional staff to live on-campus limits the parameters in which they must live. Establishing physical differences combined with simple policy variations for those holding such positions creates a recognizable difference in the living agreements between professional staff and student residents. Therefore, the allowance of professional live-in staff to own non-aquatic pets should be considered by campus administrators as a token of compensation for limited living arrangements, and yet be justified to residents as an extension of rights for professional staff.

Pet ownership is not simply an "added perk" to live-in staff, but also a therapeutic aid. In recent years several medical and psychiatric journals have reported the growing benefits of owning pets. Pets have

been known to help owners adapt to new situations, move through the stages of grief, and live physically healthy lives. In fact, the simple action of petting a dog or cat is a proven form of stress

relief.

The position of Residential Hall Director is often considered stressful, and often puts Directors in positions where confidence must be maintained. Given the above facts, and the near clich image of

individuals consulting their pets for advice, it seems logical that Residential Hall Directors be allowed to own such pets.

Allowance of pet ownership in a residence hall setting does not only effect the owner positively, but also the residents living in that building. Residents who witness their Director demonstrating responsible ownership and handling techniques will likely develop greater respect for the owner of the pet. Residents are aware of the care and commitment that must go into owning a pet, and seeing this on a frequent basis instills a positive outlook on the owner.

Although a pet should not become a hall "mascot," residents will likely see Hall Directors who own a pet as responsible, caring and kind. These attributes are essential to harmonious living in the residence halls, as residents will come in contact with their Director on a daily basis as well as during intense situations. The image created by responsible ownership is, therefore, beneficial to all students living in a given residence hall.

Pet ownership does not come without responsibility and limitations. Several considerations must be made when allowing pets into the residence halls. Some of these limitations include size considerations, sanitary procedures, and damage protection. Keeping these items in mind, the following regulations are proposed:

1. · Type of animal - The pet will be a "typical" household pet, including cats or small dogs. Additional requests must be approved by the Director of Residential Life.

2. · Pet Size - The pet will not exceed a breed standard maximum height of 24 inches and weight of 45 pounds.

3. · Pet Medicals - The pet must have all required vaccinations up to date and on file in the Office of Residential Life. Additionally, all precautions must be taken to avoid fleas and other diseases commonly carried by such animals.

4. · Licensing - The pet must be licensed with the local Humane Society and a copy of this licensing must be on file in the Office of Residential Life

5. · Restraints - The pet will be maintained under standard restraints such as a collar or leash when outdoors, in public areas, or in transit, and will be confined to the professional staff member's

apartment when not in transit.

6. · Sanitation - The pet's feces must be disposed of properly and will be the responsibility of the owner. Owners must dispose of waste directly to an outdoor garbage area. Pet urination and defecation should be confined to one area on campus to avoid disruption of activities.

7. · Transporting - The pet must be taken out of the building by way of the shortest and most direct path.

8. · Property Protection - The pet owner will take all reasonable precautions to protect the property of the university. This includes restraint use, as well as training aids prior to the animal becoming housebroken.

9. · Damage Deposit - A Pet Damage Deposit will be submitted upon approved allowance of pet ownership. This deposit will be equal to one month of rent at local apartment rates, will be paid within 30 days of pet arrival on campus and will be kept for actual damages incurred by the pet. This deposit will be refunded to the owner within 30 days after moving out. If this money is to be used for any damage costs, an itemized bill will be made available to the owner and the balance settled upon receipt of the itemized bill.

10. · Damage - Any damages incurred by the pet will be the responsibility of the owner. Charges will be assessed and collected from the Pet Damage Deposit (and the owner if necessary) upon repair,

at the termination of residency, or at such a time that the pet is permanently removed from the apartment.

11. · Insurance - All liability for actions of the pet will be the responsibility of the owner. Liability insurance for the pet is, therefore, strongly encouraged.

12. · Complaints - The owner must be receptive to complaints made by people, especially residents, in addition to formal grievances that may be filed. In the event a formal grievance is filed, it will be the decision of the Director of Residential Life whether to continue the allowance of pet ownership by the Residence Hall Director, based on the severity and validity of the complaint.

13. · Acknowledgment of Responsibility - Residence Hall Directors requesting an allowance of pet ownership must abide by these guidelines and record the agreement by signing a written contract.

The above information is based on current policies and proposals at other institutions and articles written regarding pet ownership. For detailed information on any portion of this proposal please contact me. The information I have researched has come from the following:

DePauw University

Health Magazine

Journal of the American Medical Association

Moorhead State University

Northwest Missouri State University

The New York Times (Various Articles)

Prevention Magazine

Readers' Digest

Social Work Journal

Southwest Missouri State University

St. Cloud State University