Lowell cat law about to be let out of the bag.

Byline: Karen McCowan The Register-Guard

LOWELL - The expression "herding cats" is equated with futility, but that isn't stopping this city of 900 from trying to rein in a pesky population of free-roaming felines.

The City Council will hold a hearing tonight on a proposed cat control ordinance. Among other provisions, it would require all cats roaming at large to be spayed or neutered and registered with the city. It would limit the number of "at large" cats to two per household. And it would allow property owners to capture "in a humane manner" any cat creating a nuisance on their property.

City Administrator Chuck Spies called the proposed ordinance a starting point for a discussion of the city's response to nuisance complaints about cats by more than 30 different residents.

The complaints range from cats "getting under houses and taking up residence" to using flower beds as litter boxes. The City Council asked him to draft an ordinance after discussing the matter off and on for more than six months.

Oregon League of Cities Executive Director Ken Strobeck wished Lowell luck, saying the city would need it.

"If you want to bring out controversy in a community, try to pass a cat ordinance," he said.

"It's a very emotional issue. It brings out both the cat lovers and the cat haters. So far, to my knowledge, no one has come up with a successful one."

As an example, he pointed to Albany. City officials there appointed a citizen task force, drafted a proposal and went through "weeks and weeks of hearings," only to conclude that cats - unlike dogs - were beyond city control.

"It's just a different animal," he said. "People don't put leashes on cats. They just roam around."

Spies said he consulted with Lane County Animal Regulation Authority in putting together the draft ordinance, and worked hard to protect cats, as well as property owners' rights. For instance, anyone trapping a cat with an identification tag is required to return it to its owner.

If there's no collar, they must release the feline "no more than 100 feet from the property where captured" or transport the cat to LCARA and pay impoundment fees if the cat's owner cannot be located by microchip identification or other means.

"We didn't want people trapping cats on their property and just driving them out of the community and dumping them," Spies said.

Although they have no proof, city officials believe that Lowell has a larger-than-average population of feral cats because the city lies at the outer fringe of the Eugene-Springfield area, and thus is an attractive place for people to dump unwanted animals "out in the country."

"We also have some residents who are very protective of feral cats and like to feed them," Spies said. "Under this ordinance, they would have to step up and take responsibility for them by registering them."

The proposed registration fees have not yet been set.

One troublesome aspect of the proposal is that it poses significant costs for cat owners, he acknowledged.

Because of that concern, he resisted including an LCARA recommendation of rabies shots for all roving cats.

"But the way it's written, it only impacts people who let their cats roam," he said.

PUBLIC HEARING

What: Proposed cat control ordinance

Where: Lowell City Hall, 107 E. Third St.

When: 7 p.m. tonight

Information: 937-2157