Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Question of the day

Posted in:

Illinois

First, the setup…

If Chicago’s dog-loving aldermen are determined to let dogs accompany their owners to sidewalk cafes, patrons could be forced to use hand sanitizers and dine with plastic utensils.

That’s the recommendation of Frances Guichard, director of food protection for the Chicago Department of Public Health.

On Wednesday, Guichard painted an unappetizing picture of allowing Fido to dine alfresco. She was testifying before a City Council committee considering whether to allow it now that the Legislature has opened the door.

Guichard talked about the danger of the spread of bacteria and parasites if dog hair and saliva got on tables, chairs and silverware. The same could happen if cafe employees touch dogs, then handle food.

Question: Should dogs be allowed at outdoor cafes? Explain.

posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 9:39 am

Comments

Working dogs only.

If you want to eat with your dog at the table, eat at home.

– SCAM

Comment by so-called "Austin Mayor" Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 9:43 am
No dogs, what about people who are alergic to them?

Comment by He makes Ryan look like a saint Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 9:54 am
The Yuppies who fuss over their dogs as if they were actual human beings can do so at home.

Comment by Tom Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 10:00 am
I just as soon not eat with Pecker Gnats. Working dogs…yes. All other dogs…no.

Comment by Justice Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 10:09 am
If the cafe proprietor wishes to allow them, then who is the City Council to tell them otherwise? When did it become the government’s job to ensure a pleasant dining experience for everyone at any establishment in the city?

That being said, in response to SCAM’s comment, if you don’t want to eat at a cafe that allows dogs, then eat at home (or a cafe that doesn’t allow them).

Comment by grand old partisan Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 10:10 am
Let the busines owners decide. Its none of the government’s business. Except for people with allergies, being in the same outdoor area with a dog will not necessarily hurt anybody. I note that the smoking ordinances allow businesses to allow smoking at outdoor cafes. If they can give off smoke, my dog can give off dander.

Miller left out an interesting note to this:

Alderman Reilly got a lot of support in 42 from dog owners. He came through for them immediately, co-sponsoring the ordinance. It was a great way to start. It is what government should be doing — responding to the ward, and at the same time, being pro-business. Nice work, Alderman Reilly. The 42nd Ward noticed. Our Alderman actually listened to us. That is the first time in over thirty years.

SCAM — What about a “working dog” who is not on duty? I could support that. German Sheps, Belg. Malinois, Dobermans, and the occasional Lab only. Not a working lines dog? Go elsewhere. An outdoor cafe filled with high-drive GSDs and a bunch of owners barking the ocassional “PLOTZ!”. What a nice place that would be. If it was in the 42nd, I would drop by for a drink every night.

Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 10:19 am
let the owners decide. The hypothetical contamination is just as likely from unbathed people passing by, contact with homeless, and cafe workers who do not wash their hands.

Besides, dog bacteria is generally benign to humans. Your more at risk from bacteria on another human. http://www.nsnews.com/issues98/w110998/mouth.html if this is the fear, we need cafes which prohibit human interaction. Hand sanitizer and plasticwear would protect us more from each other then from a dog, so why is public health not already demanding these? Looks like some kind of scare tactic or extreme exagertaion from public health.

Comment by Ghost Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 10:23 am
Dogs are not people.
Regardless of how much we heap affection on them.
Lets keep our priorities in order.
Public restaurants are for people.
Working dogs excepted.

Now Ferrets! That would enliven a cafe!

Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 10:25 am
Chicago’s health department inspects for mice and insects in restaurant kitchens, whether or not restaurants welcome the presence of inspectors. It’s not a matter of choice. If they determine that having dogs around food is unsanitary then dogs should be banned, except of course for seeing-eye dogs.

Comment by Tom Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 10:28 am
No Dogs Allowed! Pets should eat at home. This ain’t Paris…

Comment by pickles!! Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 10:35 am
Tom, the dogs are not back in the kitchen preparing the food. BTW it is legal for a restraunt owner to keep his own dog in the restraunt, but I digress. These are dogs that would be outside at tables. They also inspect restraunts for workers washing theri hands….but yet they do not test/swab workers hands to see how clean they are etc. Saying the health dept has made a determinat

Comment by Ghost Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 10:36 am
Tom,

Could you flesh that idea out a bit?

If, as you say, dogs are unsanitary around food, why allow seeing eye dogs? Are they somehow cleaner than other dogs?

If we are all going to get a terrible illness from these animals, shouldn’t it be a complete ban? Why the partial ban?

Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 10:36 am
Allowing seeing eyes dogs is a matter of practicality. I’m no attorney but I believe banning them would violate the ADA.

Comment by Tom Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 10:40 am
Practicality?

Are you telling me that the ADA requires me to get violently ill just so somebody else can enjoy a meal? I thought the ADA just required a reasonable accomodation. A restaurant certainly could bar a client with typhoid, couldn’t it?

If the situation is as bad as you say it is, it is perfectly reasonable to bar all dogs and in doing so, prevent an outbreak of disease.

Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 10:44 am
As a dog lover, I still say keep the animals at home. They are pets, not fashion accessories. I’m of the mindset that any working dog should be allowed anywhere. At that point, they’re not pets, they’re a lifeline.
I’m also not worried about getting some atrocious and deadly dog-flu.
I think the best part about this is that it would prevent some of the uber-trendy Chicago fashonistas (sp?) from bringing their little purse-dogs to the hip outdoor cafe and setting them on the table and giving it little bits of foie gras while they talk about their new Gucci sweater or whatever.
In related news, Paris Hilton is supposedly out of jail. Perhaps she’ll come to Chicago for a fun lunch with her little rat dog.

Comment by Guy Montag Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 10:49 am
NO,NO and in case there is any doubt about my answer…NO DOGS OR ANY OTHER ANIMALS WHERE WE EAT!

Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 11:17 am
Biologists have long-stated that pigeons pose a greater health threat than dogs in outdoor cafes.

Birds take dumps on cafe tables every day, and no one seems to care.

As for whether dogs should be allowed in streetside cafes in Chicago, I think that’s ultimately up to each business owner.

And it ain’t just about Paris, pickles!!

Dogs are allowed INSIDE every pub in Great Britain, Ireland. They’re common place in street cafes in Greece.

Their also permitted in outdoor cafes in New York City, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Denver, Miami, Atlanta, New Orleans, Boston, St. Louis and Las Vegas. Even Salt Lake City, Pittsburgh and Indianapolis allow dogs in their street side cafes.

Do we really want to be stuck behind Salt Lake City, Pittsburgh and Indianapolis?

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 11:17 am
Guy Montag - sounds like you need to stop going to hip cafes.

BTW, the “hip cafes” that used to allow dogs in their outdoor cafes included Wishbone, Corner Bakery, Costello’s Sandwich on Lincoln, and Parline’s in Ravenswood. In St. Louis, you can bring your dog to the very chic Quizno’s.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 11:22 am
Working dogs are highly trained animals who should be allowed anywhere. The family Fido should not. I have had it people who inflict their ill-mannered, obnoxious children on me when I pay to go out to eat, to a movie, and more. If they can’t, or won’t, teach their children discipline and manners in public why should I believe they taught their dog?

Comment by Belle Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 11:32 am
“Let the busines owners decide. Its none of the government’s business.”

My God, I’m actually in agreement with Skeeter on something! I need a drink.

Comment by Ken in Aurora Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 11:41 am
Before last summer (when business began being ticketed) I could bring my dog to any outdoor cafe…in fact, I still can (as long as the city doesn’t find out). It should be up to the restaurant owners. The owners of my local restaurants were upset when the city told them dogs were not allowed.

Plus when you think about it, people with dogs will most likely only visit their local restaurants with their dogs. They are not going to bring their dogs all across town. This means more people will spend money in their own neighborhood.

I’m guessing that people who bring their dogs to dinner, generally have well groomed dogs. I wonder how many people don’t wash their hands after the restroom, which spreads much more disease than fido.

Comment by BLAH Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 11:48 am
YDD–in some civlized countries they actually eat dogs. “My Hot dog as a first name, it’s F-I-D-O…” Boy, that’s tasty.

Comment by Potty Mouth Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 11:49 am
What human diseases do dogs carry besides rabies?

Keep in mind that it’s not like restaurants are like sanitary wards in hospitals. We already allow large mammals in restaurants that do carry human diseases (Homo sapiens). And it’s policy not to deny diseased Homo sapiens in restaurants.

So, I’m having a hard time buying that allowing dogs in restaurants provides significant new disease vectors that don’t already exist.

It seems like this is largely an aesthetic issue. Therefore, I’m inclined to support allowing the restaurant owners to establish their preferred aesthetics at their restaurants.

Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 11:49 am
Oh, waiter!
That guy’s dog just bit me!
Yeah, that one. The one that is fighting and barking with that other one at table 7.
Watch out!
Don’t trip over that leash!
Hey!
Who brought the Ferret?!

Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 11:58 am
Leave it up to the business owner. I wouldn’t take my dog because she would turn her nose up if someone other than family offered her food.

Comment by i d Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 12:03 pm
No. Dogs are inherently unpredictable, unsanitary and dangerous. “Every dog gets one bite?” If that was you or your child permanently disfigured from that bite you would think differently. Feed your dogs at home. And eat out of their bowl if you think they are better than or more valuable than humans.

Comment by Snoopy Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 12:16 pm
“Dogs are inherently unpredictable, unsanitary and dangerous.”

You just described people.

Things I’d rather see banned:

Children under 12 in movie theatres for showtimes starting after 8 pm.

Cell phones in restaurants.

Cell phones in Wrigley.

Bulk mail.

“Dibs” on shoveled parking spots.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 1:02 pm
YDD: There is a safety aspect with regard to dogs that maybe I did not emphasize enough. You are correct about the movies, but there are also “adults” that do not know how to behave in a theatre and never will. Try watching a movie in a theatre in Hillside or North Riverside. (Thank you, DVD industry.) Belle is correct. I will add that I have seen parents completely non-discipline their kids, especially on the North Shore. They are all Democrats too; I wish I was kidding about that.

Comment by Snoopy Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 1:16 pm
You’re right YDD - we already banned foi gras to the amusement of the rest of the free world (and poor Hot Doug’s) -why don’t we start with banning everything else. Meanwhile, let’s just forget about things that matter…like the ummm - budget, property taxes, schools, pensions, CTA!!

Comment by BLAH Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 1:16 pm
Safety aspect to dogs?

I’ve been taking my Germ. Shep. to cafes for three years and have never had the slightest problem (although the dog did once start crying very loudly one day when my wife walked away for a minute — luckily the high pitched screech didn’t do any lasting harm).

Humans are a different matter. In those years I’ve seen plenty of dangerous drunks. Better to ban all alcohol than to ban dogs.

What’s great about dogs in cafes — for those of you not luckily enough to live in an area with them — is the social aspect. People sit outside with their dogs and talk to neighbors as they walk by. There is a real sense of community, and the dogs play an important role. Without the dogs a lot of the people would never have met.

Bottom line: Don’t like dogs? Find another cafe. If you are that uptight we probably don’t want you hanging around near us anyway.

Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 1:24 pm
Only if the dog is on the menu. Mmmmm, German Shepard pie…aaaaaaaahhhhh.

Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 1:36 pm
Yes. This obsession with cleanliness is causing huge increases in allergies and various other health problems. Bacteria are vital. You cannot live in a bubble. You eat in the homes of people who have dogs. You walk past dogs on the street. What is the big deal with this? Dogs are not people. Dogs are dogs. However, people and dogs have coexisted peacefully for a very long time. There is no reason to make a huge issue of it. Dogs are everywhere anyway and they are at sidewalk cafes all across Europe. In years of patronizing these places I have never fallen ill or had any problems.

Comment by Way Northsider Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 1:51 pm
Our wee widdle poopsie wouldn’t hurt a fly. If you meanies won’t let us eat with our little baby doll, then you aren’t good enough to be with us.

So there!

Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 2:16 pm
Isn’t this a tempest in a teapot? If you have a problem with outdoor cafes that allow dogs, DON’T EAT AT THOSE CAFES. This isn’t an ordinance, so far as I know, that mandates every outdoor cafe accept dogs - so some will, some won’t. Can’t we all get along?

Comment by ZC Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 2:29 pm
No dogs. I’ve seen enough large, unruly dogs at cafe’s to know that they shouldn’t be at a cafe. The last time I went out for brunch, the dog at the next table kept sneaking under the fence to try to get at my bacon. His owner had to keep jumping up and dragging him back around. Yes, the dog was leashed, but the leash was long enough for it to make a move toward my table. And that’s far from the first time I’ve seen an unruly dog at an outdoor cafe.

Don’t get me wrong, I love dogs (I wish I had a big enough apartment to get a Boxer), but they are not appropriate at a dining establishment. Too many dogs aren’t trained well enough to resist the temptation to get at food.

Plus, dogs occasionally get in fights with one another, even well behaved ones. There’s a risk of bites as well. Not to mention urine and feces.

And yes, were it possible, I’d be more than happy to have pigeons banned from outdoor cafes. Pigeons are nastier than dogs. But at least a pigeon isn’t likely to go after your food or start a fight with another pigeon.

Restaurants are for people. If a restaurant wants to have a pole away from the dining area for people to tether their dogs to, that’s fine. But not in the seating area.

Comment by Jerry Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 2:31 pm
every one just simmer down. if the gov signs the enabling state bill the city of chicago needed to do this, it doesnt become effective until jan 1, when outdoor cafes are closed anyway. much a-woof about nothing.

Comment by anonymiss Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 2:40 pm
Why not? Only idiots, the same ones who let their small children who run around restaurants, would bring their dog to a public area if it was unruly.

This is just another example of anal, puritanical American mentality. Topless beaches? Oh no! That will turn everybody into rapists and molesters. Dogs in outdoor cafes or pubs. Oh my God! I might be bothered by Fido lying quietly under a table.

I would rather eat next to someones dog than ride public transportation in Chicago. Morons sneezing on the back of your head, or in your face, yahoo’s coughing up loogies and spewing God knows what.

I would rather lick a toilet seat than a hand rail on the CTA.

Sorry for digressing.

Comment by Papa Legba Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 2:56 pm
Rikes! Rapa Regba is Risgusting!

Comment by Scooby Doo Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 3:46 pm
YES, YES, YES!!! Ultimately, let the business owner decide — We take our dog/s everywhere they’re welcome, and they’re MUCH cleaner, better behaved, and sociable than most children.

You should try going to White Sox Dog Day sometime — Granted, you need to sign a zillion wavers that your dog won’t hurt anyone, you won’t sue the Sox if something happens, etc. I’ve been going for 8 years and have never seen an incident, and that’s with 600 dogs in one place. Thank god they’ve stopped the fireworks for that game though!

Don’t want a well-behaved dog near you in a cafe? Go somewhere else. YOU can eat at home!

AND Don’t start dissing us ‘yuppies’. If it wasn’t for us, Chicago would be a ghost town. Who do you think has helped bring back this city so the tourists and suburbanites can visit safely? Not the Stepford-ville residents with their ‘precious babies’ that try to act ’street’ the second Mommy + Daddy aren’t looking. If it wasn’t for Yuppies helping revive the city, Illinois would be Iowa.

We dine out a lot, and always ask for the ‘non-shrieking’ section — I can’t tell you how many times my dinner has been ruined by some obnoxious, pampered snot-nosed brat that mommy + daddy can’t control.

Now if they would only ban the obnoxious children, homeless people and pigeons from the outdoor spots, life would be good.

Arg!

Comment by 312 Yuppie Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 4:14 pm
And its not just a ‘Chicago thing’ for the dogs. I’ve lived downstate (10+ years) the burbs and downtown Chicago — and took our well-behaved pooches everywhere we could.

And if they were not behaving in public, we took them home, which more parents SHOULD do.

Comment by 312 Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 4:18 pm
I would much rather be eating at a table next to Fido, than put up with an undisciplined child and its irresponsible parents who think everything their kid does is “cute.” Heck, I might even make room for Fido at my table and buy him a drink!

Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 5:01 pm
Have you folks ever taken a good look at the kitchens, cooks and servers in many restaurants and fast food places???? I’d rather have the dog serve my meal!!!

Comment by Disgusted Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 5:39 pm
No. It’s disgusting and unsanitary. Would you like to eat food that’s just come off a counter that a cat was laying on?

Comment by NI80 Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 6:42 pm
Next, dogs will be voting in the 42nd ward.

Comment by Loyal Whig Thursday, Jun 7, 07 @ 11:18 pm
If they can ban smoking, they can ban dogs too. People don’t control their dogs at sidewalk cafes in the city. It’s a joke. When you ask them to control their dog, they look at you like you just asked them to get undressed.

They should pass a law like they have in Europe, all dogs in public places have to wear a muzzle.

Comment by John S. Friday, Jun 8, 07 @ 8:43 am
interesting

Comment by Eleni Thursday, Jun 21, 07 @ 3:35 am

Add a comment

Sorry, comments are closed at this time.

Previous Post: Overtime in Hell - Governor’s schedule edition
Next Post: This just in…

Last 10 posts:

It’s just a bill (05-01)
Get The Facts On The Illinois Prescription Drug Board (05-01)
Open thread (05-01)
Isabel’s morning briefing (05-01)
SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password) (05-01)
Live coverage (05-01)
Isabel’s afternoon roundup (04-30)
Get The Facts On The Illinois Prescription Drug Board (04-30)
Today's quotable (04-30)
Question of the day (04-30)