CASE STUDIES
Response to Dog Kennel Reports

 Group > Acoustics > Profile > Case Studies > Dog Kennel

 

A Commercial Dog Kennel and Cattery was proposed and its environmental noise impact was assessed by Consultant A. A residence approached Consultant B and CAMETS were asked by another residence to review these predictions. Council then approached Consultant D to review all reports, as the council had no expertise in this area. There were wide discrepencies between the predictions and a residence asked CAMETS to review all the reports by Consultants A, B, & D and compare the predictions to CAMETS own work. Council accepted the final report and predictions of CAMETS.

Table 1 shows the orginal predicted noise levels from each consultant for dogs barking within the kennels at a residential location.

Table 1 - Original Predicted Noise Values for Dog Kennels and Cattery
Day Time
Open Run 		Day Time
Closed Kennel 		Night Time
Closed Kennel
Consultant A 43 15 33
Consultant B 54 40 40
CAMETS 53 31 31
Consultant D 40 17 17
Council Criteria 43 43 33

Table 2 shows the recalculated noise levels for each consultant when the sound power level of a dog barking was normalised for each consultant. Also the effect of more than one dog barking at a time was included into the calculations for consultants A & B.

Table 2 - Recalculated Noise Impact with standard Dog Noise Level and adjustment for Multiple Dogs
Day Time
Open Run 		Day Time
Closed Kennel 		Night Time
Closed Kennel
New
Value 		Change
in Calc. 		Excess
over 'D' 		New
Value 		Change
in Calc. 		Excess
over 'D' 		New
Value 		Change
in Calc. 		Excess
over 'D'
Consultant A 64 +21 +21 36 +21 +29 36 +3 +19
Consultant B 67 +13 +27 53 +13 +36 53 +13 +36
CAMETS 55 +2 +15 34 +3 +17 34 +3 +17
Consultant D 40 17 17
Council Criteria 43 43 33

The noise levels predicted by the independant consultant, appointed by council, still varied greatly from the other consultants. In some cases the variations where over 30dB(A), or in other words more than three times quieter. This caused us some concern, so we analysed all aspects of the calculations. We found that if we altered the distance correction factor of predicted noise levels from Consultant D then noise level predictions from all consultants became more closely aligned. Table 3 includes the distance correction factor for Consultant D.

Table 3 - Comparison of Predicted Noise Impact when Consultant D's calculation is Distance Corrected
Day Time
Open Run 		Day Time
Closed Kennel 		Night Time
Closed Kennel
Consultant A 64 +4 36 -1 36 -1
Consultant B 67 +7 53 +16 53 +16
CAMETS 55 -5 34 -3 34 -3
Consultant D 60 37 37
Council Criteria 43 43 33



Put us to the test and ask for some free advice. For further information about Camets Acoustics please contact us.



Camets Group - Acoustics - Computing - Education
© The Camets Group 2003