閱讀理解 實(shí)戰(zhàn)演練 二

（二）Who (Doesn't) Let the Dogs Bark?

For the past year, Cornelia Czarnecki said, the barking of her neighbor's German shepherd has awakened her repeatedly at 4 a. m. The dog often barks for hours at a time, said Mrs. Czarnecki, a Clifton resident.

That dog is out there barking day and night, and we don't know what to do anymore, she said.

Mrs. Czarnecki became so upset about the dog that she filed a municipal complaint against him under the town's general noise ordinance. The case is set to be heard in municipal court on August 6. Complaints like the ones Mrs. Czarnecki lodged with the police and city officials led the Clifton City Council to draft an ordinance that could result in fines for residents whose dogs are "barking, howling, crying" or making any other loud noises for more than 30 minutes in an hour.

I can't wait, Mrs. Czarnecki said. The council took up the ordinance for a first reading on Tuesday; a final vote is scheduled on August 8.

It's a quality of life issue, said Councilman Frank C. Fusco, who introduced the measure. Clifton is far from alone in seeking to silence noisy dogs. At least 144 of New Jersey's municipalities have laws that address whining and barking, according to a municipal ordinance database online at www.generalcode.com.

In New York, at least 30 towns in Nassau and Suffolk Counties have similar laws, as do about 25 towns in Westchester County. Connecticut has a statewide law barring dogs that are a "nuisance" because of "excessive barking or other disturbance."

Many of the ordinances in the region are general prohibitions against excessive whining or barking. In Westchester, the City of New Rochelle ran into trouble with its law in 1997 after a resident challenged a citation. A city judge ruled that the ordinance was unconstitutionally vague because it did not include details about time of day and duration of barking, and the city changed the law in 1998.

Many of these ordinances go back to the 1800s, said the New Rochelle corporation counsel, Bernis Shapiro. "They're just carried forward and they don't get changed until an issue comes up."

In May 2006, Hillsborough Township in Somerset County passed an ordinance to specifically address barking, but no complaints have been filed since then, said Lt. Bill Geary of the Hillsborough Police Department. Other New Jersey towns, including Bloomsbury in Hunterdon County and Manville in Somerset, considered such ordinances but withdrew them after residents complained that they would be unenforceable.

As for those who contend that a barking dog should be a low priority, Councilman Fusco said, "If the dog was next to your house, you'd sing a different song."

Mr. Fusco said he was confident that the ordinance proposed in Clifton would be supported by his fellow council members. At the same time, he knows that some residents may object.

But David Axelrod, a groomer at Furrs N' Purrs LLC on Valley Road, said he did not think the measure was tough enough.

Thirty minutes is extremely generous, he said. "There is no reason why a dog should be barking that long."

The ordinance says barking must be sustained to be illegal, and it bans excessive barking only from 10 p. m. to 7 a. m.

Under the ordinance, a resident complains to the City Health Department, which sends a warning note. If the barking continues, the resident takes the complaint to municipal court, where fines can start at $250. Before a court date, the city would most likely try to resolve the matter through mediation, said the city attorney, Matthew T. Priore.

Last year about a dozen warning letters were sent to residents about their barking dogs, Clifton officials said.

Currently, residents can complain about barking under the city's general noise ordinance, but they have to essentially prosecute the case in municipal court themselves, Mr. Fusco said. Under the proposed ordinance, residents would appear as a witness in a case presented by the municipal prosecutor.

The new ordinance has some bite to it, Mr. Fusco said. Eric M. Zwerling, director of the Rutgers University Noise Technical Assistance Center, trains police officers on noise complaints and writes municipal noise codes.

One of the things I say to the officers I train is that if people were fundamentally civil to each other, we'd all be out of work, he said.

Mr. Zwerling, the owner of a chocolate Labrador named Bosco, said he had his own appreciation of the barking problem.

A dog is barking for one of two reasons—either it needs attention or it is trying to alert you to something, he said. "In either case, you should be attending to it."

1. What's the reaction of Mrs. Czarnecki when she was annoyed by the barking of her neighbor's dog?

A. She went to her neighbor's door to complain about it.

B. She wrote to the local government and suggested that a law should be made to prohibit the dogs from barking.

C. She lodged a complaint against the dog with the municipality.

D. She became so upset and telephoned the police.

2. In the city of Clifton, a legislative bill that addresses whining and barking was introduced by________.

A. David Axelrod

B. Frank C. Fusco

C. Matthew T. Priore

D. Eric M. Zwerling

3. Which of the following statements is true according to the passage?

A. Mrs. Czarnecki's complaint made the city officials decide to introduce the general noise ordinance.

B. Clifton is the first city in New Jersey that seeks to silence noisy dogs.

C. The general noise ordinance in Clifton is contradictory to the Constitution so that it was changed in 1998.

D. At present, Clifton residents who complain about the noisy dogs can not employ a lawyer to prosecute the case in municipal court.

4. Which of the following statements about the proposed ordinance is true?

A. Clifton City Council finally passed it on Tuesday, August 8.

B. Under the ordinance, whenever a dog barks over 30 minutes in an hour, its master will get fined.

C. All the residents in Clifton hope that the ordinance can be reinforced as soon as possible because it is a quality of life issue.

D. People who complain about the disturbance by noisy dogs do not need to prosecute the case in municipal court themselves according to the proposed ordinance.

5. Which of the following statements is Mr. Zwerling's own appreciation of the barking problem?

A. The ordinance is not tough enough since it allows a dog bark for 30 minutes.

B. The problem can only be solved if people are civil enough to each other.

C. Financial punishment is the best way to ban dogs from barking.

D. The city should try its best to resolve the matter through mediation.

［答案解析］

1．C。［解析］參見文章第三段第一句話。

2．B。［解析］參見文章第五段，市議會(huì)議員Frank C. Fusco提出了新的法案。

3．D。［解析］參見文章第十七段，按照現(xiàn)行的法案，遇到受犬吠聲騷擾的案件時(shí)，只能由受害者本人親自到庭指控。

4．D。［解析］由文章第十七段末句可推斷出新法案允許受害者作為證人，由律師代為控訴。

5．B。［解析］參見文章第十九段。