Dogs run loose. They make messes. They bark and howl.

So say residents who helped persuade Kanab's City Council to toughen its animal-control ordinance. Starting Feb. 1, residents can own up to four dogs if they are willing to pay $200 for two of them.

Mayor Kim Lawson vows stepped-up enforcement of the new rules - with the fee money funneling into the general fund.

"Whatever it takes to accomplish [enforcement], we'll do," Lawson says.

But Ruthie Itow, who has two dogs of her own and is tending to three others under "foster" care for Best Friends, and other Kanab residents complain that lax enforcement is what doomed the former ordinance.

"The problem has nothing to do with numbers; it's the nuisance and enforcement of the existing ordinance that's been the problem," says Itow, who runs the Love Knows No Limits Association, formed last year to fight limits on pets. "There are hundreds of families here that have multiple dogs."

It would be far more effective and efficient to enforce the law already on the books, says Itow, who was cited in July 2004 for having too many dogs.

More citations for more residents seem certain under Kanab's new statute, which the City Council approved in a 4-1 vote this week before a packed house at the 5th District Courthouse.

Under the revamped ordinance, residents can:

* Own two dogs per household (similar to the former cap).

* Have two additional dogs under an amnesty provision, provided they pay $100 a year for each of the two extra animals. The additional canines also must have a city-registered microchip.

The ordinance also permits animal-control officers to check any house once a month for compliance. Violations can result in a class C misdemeanor.

"It sounds like George Orwell's 1984," says Carol Sullivan, the lone council member to vote against the new statute.

Sullivan says the law may look good on paper, but warned that enforcement may prove impossible.

"We're unloading on the police and animal control that are already busy," she says.

But Councilman Anthony Chatterley notes cities have the right and a responsibility to enact ordinances to protect the public good.

Councils are "legally and morally obligated to set up a realistic limit on the numbers of pets," he says.

mhavnes@sltrib.com

Old ordinance

* Two dogs allowed at any residence.

-

New ordinance

* Two dogs allowable in a household.

* Two additional dogs can be kept in a house under an amnesty provision, provided the owner pays $100 a year for each of the two extra animals and has a city-registered microchip implanted in each dog. When the amnesty animals die, they cannot be replaced - which is the reason for the chip.

* Animal-control officers can check any house once a month for compliance.

* Noncompliance may result in a class C misdemeanor.