number of third-rate quips in the Upper House yesterday, but ended with Senators approving a number of new dog control measures.

Government consulted concerned parties, ranging from the Kennel Club to the Government dog catcher and Magistrates, Sen. Wendell Hollis (UBP) said.

Opinions varied "depending on whether you are at the sharp end of the dog or not''.

One of the most significant changes makes the person "keeping'' a dog liable for its behaviour, and not just the person who owns the dog. In the past, Sen.

Hollis said, it was too easy for somebody whose dog was a nuisance or danger to simply say he did not own it.

It also makes requires that the holder of a dog licence be at least 18 years old -- though there is a grandfather clause allowing under-age dog owners to keep their licences for the rest of this licensing period.

The law for the first time lists the offences a dog can commit to be deemed "out of control''. These included soiling somebody's lawn without their consent, barking in a way that disturbs neighbours, injuring humans and livestock and damaging property and crops.

The definition of a dog was also expanded to include hybrid dogs -- typically a cross between a dog and a wolf or a dog and a coyote -- of which Mr. Hollis said there are several in Bermuda.

Sen. Ira Philip (PLP) said it was "generally a good act'' which the PLP supported. "Hopefully man will benefit: There will be greater protection of our lawns. And some of us hopefully will sleep better at night, (without the annoyance of barking),'' he said.

But when one considers the "mysterious bonding'' between man and his best friend, Sen. Philip said, the act becomes more complex that it seems on the surface.

He said his major concern was one of enforcement: Are the authorities properly equipped for the job -- and are there enough of them? And he chastised Sen.

Hollis for calling the dog warden a "dog catcher''.

He also wondered why there was no reference to cats. "Cats out of control I think are even more rampant than dogs,'' he said.

And he said an extensive public relations campaign would be needed to educate the public on the provisions of the new dog laws.

Sen. Maxwell Burgess (UBP) said it was clear the public is concerned about vicious dogs, and Police reported that dangerous dogs were regularly used to scare them away. The tighter laws were "much too late, in my view.'' Senate vice president the Hon. Norma Astwood agreed publicity was needed but said the public would welcome the changes. She wondered what sort of evidence was required to identify which dog soiled somebody's lawn.

Sen. Trevor Woolridge (PLP) suggested a brochure written in layman's terms be handed out with dog licenses. He shared Sen. Philip's concern about the "abundance'' of cats in Bermuda.

The time had also arrived, he said, "to address the problem of horses soiling our streets''. In Louisiana, he said, horses are required to wear a sort of diaper device and perhaps this could be considered here. At times the stench was almost unbearable.

Sen. Hollis said people in Hamilton Parish are frequently setting out bottles of water to deter dogs from soiling their lawns -- it was almost the norm, though he didn't know how it worked.

He said the dog warden, the warden's assistant, the Government vet and the Police all have powers under the dog laws, and they have good new equipment that should make their jobs easier.

He said a publicity campaign, complete with pamphlets, is being prepared on the new dog laws.

He told Sen. Astwood that DNA testing could genetic link between a dog and a soiled lawn. But it was highly expensive, and he suggested using a camera.

He said the convenience to the public of having horses wear diapers had to be balanced off against the inconvenience they would no doubt cause the horses.