The Observer, March 21, 2008
Volume XL, Issue 21
Students ask for pets to be allowed back on campus
click to enlarge
Students and faculty may soon see furry, four-legged friends trotting through campus if a new USG Resolution is adopted by Case administration and officials.
Earlier this semester, members of Case CARES, headed by junior Michelle Cehn, drafted a resolution that seeks to change the university's pet policy, last updated in 2003. At that time, Case's Faculty Senate passed a "pet ban" for the campus amid furious protests. Since that time, faculty and staff's furry friends have been prohibited from the quad and all campus buildings.
During the initial stages of the ban, pet-friendly faculty drafted a resolution passed by USG in 2002 that enumerated the benefits of having pets on campus, including the mental well-being of students on campus and the enhancement of a sense of community.
The resolution, however, did not deter the Faculty Senate, and pets remain banned on campus. CARES members hope the newly passed resolution to amend pet policy will change the minds of the administration and faculty on campus.
"I think the university made the decision to ban pets based on very good reasoning," said Sara Waller, faculty adviser of CARES and assistant professor of philosophy and cognitive science. "No one wants anyone to be injured on campus due to an animal reaction... No one wants anyone to suffer from phobic reactions or any other circumstances that might be brought about by pets running uncontrolled throughout classrooms or across campus. Pets that are watched over, cared for, on leashes, and/or controlled by their caretakers do not obviously present the concerns that brought about the current pet ban."
During the fall, CARES members noticed a general dissatisfaction among Case professors and staff about the current pet policy. The group then decided to send a survey to students, faculty and staff in order to better gauge general opinions about the policy.
"The results showed an overwhelming majority of the community is in support of reform in the policy to create a more animal-friendly campus," said Cehn.
Of the 800 people polled, 78 percent disagreed with the statement that "dogs should not be allowed on campus under any circumstance [with the exception of service dogs and dogs used in research]." Similarly, 84 percent agreed that "dogs kept on-leash should be allowed to walk through campus grounds [such as the Quad]."
With the survey data, CARES decided to pursue amendments to the current pet policy, which currently cannot be found on the Case website or listed in any handbook.
"The current pet policy is not enforced, nor is it publicized," said Cehn. "The resolution suggests implementing a less restrictive policy that would allow pets on campus grounds and enforcing a strict on-leash and waste disposal policy."
The policy would therefore allow faculty and staff to take animals to work and walk them through the Case campus. This resolution is, however, entirely separate from the residence hall pet restrictions.
In advertising for the resolution and attempting to get it passed, Cehn commented that she realized many students were not even aware that pet restrictions existed on campus. "The most difficult part was publicizing the situation to the campus – I found that many people were not even aware there was a pet ban on campus. However, once people found out, support for reform came readily and abundantly."
Some of the comments written by those surveyed read:
• "I believe dogs add warmth and richness to our community and help us to remember that CWRU is not just students in their 20s, but a diverse community. I recall many incidents in which I missed my dog at home and was comforted by a dog who was snuck onto campus. It helped me to feel at home and to refocus on my efforts on campus and in class."
• "The current policy seems to disregard the morale-increasing benefits of having such animals within close proximity. If the policy were to change to allow dogs on campus grounds and buildings, I feel as if CWRU's general atmosphere would become more positive. As long as they were kept on-leash and properly monitored, I do not see the negative consequences as being able to outweigh the benefits."
• "I believe that pets should be allowed on the university campus. It has been proven that petting animals can be therapeutic and a means of de-stressing. Considering how stressful life at this university can be, I believe we should give ourselves every opportunity to relax even the slightest bit."
In drafting the resolution, Cehn emphasized the benefits of having animals around campus, including the ways in which pets enhance a sense of community, create a welcoming environment, increase a level of safety for professors and staff who work late, and lower blood pressure and reduce stress.
"As a faculty member, I love dogs, and I think the people on campus would benefit from having canine companions (on leashes, with caretakers who pick up after them) welcome," said Waller. "I also believe visiting dogs will benefit from meeting friendly students, staff, and faculty who love to pet and play with them."
Waller also noted that many professors would love to take their animals to work: "I have often thought of bringing my cat Anyankha to class. She is very friendly and would enjoy meeting my students as much as they would enjoy meeting her. And I know several dog, cat, and rabbit owners who would bring pets to campus."
Cehn also noted that no other peer institution has bans on pets. In the resolution, Cehn includes the pet policies of Carnegie Mellon, Washington University in St. Louis, and University of Chicago–all of which allow pets on campus provided that they are leashed and under supervision.
After a presentation on the proposed changes, USG passed the resolution with 100 percent of the vote. But Cehn still isn't sure whether the recommendations will ever go into effect: "I am very pleased with the results. I was thrilled (but not surprised) that the resolution passed with 100 percent of the USG vote, but that is only a resolution, aka recommendation. I really hope the administration takes a careful look at the issue and seriously considers the desires of the Case community when making their decision."
