Opinion ID: 1188976
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The burden.

Text: Under the majority's construction of Civil Code section 1354, the pet restriction is unreasonable, and hence unenforceable, if the burdens [imposed] on the affected land ... are so disproportionate to the restriction's beneficial effects that the restriction should not be enforced. (Maj. opn., ante, at p. 382.) What, then, is the burden at issue here? Both recorded and unrecorded history bear witness to the domestication of animals as household pets. [5] Throughout the ages, dogs and cats have provided human beings with a variety of services in addition to their companionship  shepherding flocks, guarding life and property, hunting game, ridding the house and barn of vermin. Of course, the modern classic example is the assist dog, which facilitates a sense of independence and security for disabled persons by enabling them to navigate their environment, alerting them to important sounds, and bringing the world within their reach. [6] Emotionally, they allow a connection full of sensation and delicacy of feeling. Throughout the ages, art and literature, as well as mythology, depict humans in all walks of life and social strata with cats and dogs, illustrating their widespread acceptance in everyday life. [7] Some religions have even incorporated them into their worship. [8] Dogs and cats are also admired for the purity of their character traits. [9] Closer to home, our own culture is populated with examples of the well-established place pets have found in our hearts and homes. [10] In addition to these historical and cultural references, the value of pets in daily life is a matter of common knowledge and understanding as well as extensive documentation. People of all ages, but particularly the elderly and the young, enjoy their companionship. Those who suffer from serious disease or injury and are confined to their home or bed experience a therapeutic, even spiritual, benefit from their presence. [11] Animals provide comfort at the death of a family member or dear friend, and for the lonely can offer a reason for living when life seems to have lost its meaning. [12] In recognition of these benefits, both Congress and the state Legislature have expressly guaranteed that elderly and handicapped persons living in public-assistance housing cannot be deprived of their pets. (12 U.S.C. § 1701r-1; Health & Saf. Code, § 19901.) Not only have children and animals always been natural companions, children learn responsibility and discipline from pet ownership while developing an important sense of kindness and protection for animals. [13] Single adults may find certain pets can afford a feeling of security. Families benefit from the experience of sharing that having a pet encourages. While pet ownership may not be a fundamental right as such, unquestionably it is an integral aspect of our daily existence, which cannot be lightly dismissed and should not suffer unwarranted intrusion into its circle of privacy.