Bruce Peterson called me after this story was published and wanted to clarify one issue: When the family first thought they might keep a third dog, they went to the city hall and an employee told them that they could have three dogs, Peterson said, so they got the wrong impression that since there are no complaints that they could keep Jack-Jack. They based their actions on the conversation they had had.

In response, Police Chief Bob Malz later said, "As harsh as it sounds, if they were given the wrong information, that doesn't give them the right to break the law."

(Mathias Baden is the editor of the Jordan Independent. He can be reached at editor@jordannews.com.)

I remember when the ordinace was first taken, I believe it was about 1982 or there about. The original reason was that there were multiple persons (of whom I personally know) that had multiple dogs (more than eight). They were medium to small breed dogs.
I believe at the time that there was a question on where to draw the line. There was discussion at that time and it was decided that two would be the number. I also know that the city, police and council did not intend to punish any particualar person that had three at that time, as nothing was done to enforce the number three. The original offenders did move from the area and there has not been any issues until this time. I can not speak for either the Persons nor the Police. I do however, believe that it should not have been elevated to the level it has reached.
I am a dog lover and can relate to the Persons. I have also witnessed the problems that the police face when dealing with issues of this sort and it is best not to elevate an issue. The facts are now that the ordinance is in effect. The Media will probably not let it go away, so the council will have to remove the ordinance which I don't see happening, or the Petersons will have to find a loving home for their cute puppy. I do not think that you could actually ask the officer who enforced the ordinance to not do his/her job to the best of their ability. You can also be assured the Petersons to be distraught over the issue.
I personally would love to here that the ordinance was pulled, however I am also certain that you would find homes with five then eight then ten dogs all kenneled in one small area and then you would see the rescue on the news. Sad fact is that a number was indeed needed and people will eventually take issues with the decision, it was enforced, it was brought to the news. Lines have been drawn and who is in the right?

My best wish to all involved, there are no winners in the case.