Finally, bars in New York are being prohibited from allowing animals to be on the premises:
The health department issued 469 violations for live animals in food-service sites from July 1, 2010, to June 30, 2011, though the agency did not provide a breakdown of the different kinds of offending animals. During inspections, many owners said they were surprised to learn that dogs were not allowed even in outdoor seating areas. Neither does a bar’s dearth of actual food products provide any cover. “Beer, wine and spirits have always been classified as food,” a department spokeswoman wrote in an e-mail. Only service dogs are permitted in spaces that serve food or drink of any kind.
The idea that smelly, panting dogs who shed hair and are likely to assault customers at any time should be imposed on paying patrons just because of the selfishness of a few “dog-lovers” always seemed strange to me. As usual, these “doggie-parents” are equally cruel to other humans and to their own animals. Can you imagine a dog who’d actually want to be stuck in a bar rather than run around in a park?
Since bars have outlawed smoking on the premises for health reasons, it made no sense to keep allowing animals in. Each of us surely has their own vision of whether it’s more exasperating to have a smoker or a dog hanging around while you are trying to relax. I passionately dislike dogs and have a dog-phobia, so my answer is clear. For those who don’t hate dogs, a smoker’s presence can be a lot more annoying. Smoke makes one’s hair and clothes stink and can aggravate existing health conditions, such as asthma and others.
In terms of health, however, the damage inflicted by second-hand smoke is cumulative. A dog (or any other animal) can spread germs or assault a customer instantly. This is why I believe that if you ban smoking in bars to make the environment more customer-friendly, it makes no sense whatsoever to let the dogs in.
Clarissa's Blog 
Leave a comment