So Simple a Child Could have Thought of It
Stephen J. Dubner and Steven D. Levitt, authors of the Freakonomics column in The New York Times Magazine consider a high-tech proposal to the address the urban nuisance of dog poop that was proposed by Lauren Mecka, a sixth-grader from Hoboken, NJ : DNA sampling ("Dog-Waste Management," October 2, 2005).
It's a good proposal. Both a video and the text of Ms. Mecka's address to the Hoboken City Council is archived online at edmecka.com, "The Hoboken Community Activist Website."
According to Dubner and Levitt, DNA sampling has been proposed for dog waste management independently by civic leaders in Vienna and Dresden, where, unlike Hoboken, it is under consideration.
It might cost about $30 million to establish a DNA sample for all the dogs of New York. If people stop violating the law, then New York has spent $30 million for cleaner streets; if not, the $30 million is seed money for a new revenue stream. Unfortunately, there's a big drawback to this plan. In order to match a pile of poop with its source, you will need to have every dog's DNA on file - and in 2003, the most recent year on record, only 102,004 dogs [estimated to be 10% of all dogs] in New York were licensed. Even though a license is legally required, costs a mere $8.50 a year and can be easily obtained by mail, most dog owners ignore the law, and with good reason: last year, only 68 summonses were issued in New York City for unlicensed dogs. So even if the DNA plan were enacted today, most offenders would still go unpunished.In fact, it stands to reason that the typical licensed dog is less likely to offend than the typical unlicensed dog, since the sort of owner who is responsible enough to license his dog is also most likely responsible enough to clean up after it. How, then, to get all of New York's dogs licensed?
How indeed? Mecka suggests
conducting an annual doggie- registration day, [which] could be sponsored by one or more of the major dog food companies held in the spring and promoted as a fun-filled day for pooches and owners alike.
Dubner and Levitt suggest paying people to license their dogs:
Instead of charging even a nominal fee, the city may want to pay people to license their dogs. And then, instead of treating the licensing law as optional, enforce it for real. Setting up random street checks for dog licenses may offend some New Yorkers, but it certainly dovetails nicely with the Giuliani-era ''broken windows'' approach to low-level crime.