Pity a dog's life in Boston. What was once thought to be man's best friend is treated, at least by some Boston officials, as little more than an unwelcome pest.

Dog owners around the city are now engaged in a furtive cat-and-mouse game (if you'll pardon the metaphor) that every day pits them against the city's dog police. Every dog owner has a story. Here's one.

A man was out with his dog on the Boston Common's parade grounds, sans leash. A park ranger approached him, demanding the dog be restrained.

After a somewhat acrimonious exchange, the exasperated ranger said: ``Look, I love dogs. But they tell me I have to do this. If I see a dog off leash, I have to give you a ticket.''

He paused for a moment.

``Of course,'' the ranger allowed, pointing towards a slight hill just to their northeast, ``If you go over there, I won't be able to see you.''

Comprehension dawned in the man's eyes. He walked in the direction indicated and spent a half-hour watching his dog run with other dogs, all of whose owners had figured out that, for that evening at least, one portion of the Common was safe.

On other days, less sympathetic dog police gleefully hand out tickets. Dog owners feel like outlaws.

It wasn't always like this.

Boston has for many years had a leash law, an ordinance that in the past was widely ignored and almost never enforced. There was good reason for this. The fact is, dogs need exercise. They like to run, chase balls and play with other dogs. Leash laws may make sense when walking along a crowded city street. They don't make sense in other circumstances.

In many of Boston's outlying communities, of course, leash laws were almost irrelevant, particularly in residential areas with detached homes and nice yards.

But in the denser parts of the city, where pavement substitutes for grass and no one has a yard, dog owners would find places, such as the Arboretum or the Common or a nearby park. There they would gather, letting their dogs off leash. For the most part city officials, with a wink and a nod, would let them get away with it.

No more.

The once toothless Animal Control Department, led by a director who is decidedly not a caninophile, now has fangs. Over the last four years, its budget has more than doubled, to just under $1 million. In1998 it issued fewer than 2,000 tickets; this year it hopes to issue a staggering 11,000.

Animal Control justifies its newly aggressive approach by citing complaints it gets from residents. It is sad, but true, that a solid minority of people despises dogs. These are, of course, the same people who oppose motherhood and apple pie. Unfortunately, there are some at City Hall who share their views.

So the city has become a bully, ticketing wherever it can. We're not talking about raised-to-kill pit bulls here; we're talking about well-behaved pets. Dog owners find themselves caught between the legitimate needs of their animals and the hyper-enforced rules of the city. Many have little choice but to violate the law, treating dog tickets the same way most people treat parking tickets - as a hazard of city life.

For years dog owners begged city officials to work with them to create dog runs or to designate certain areas as leash-free zones.Dog owners in many neighborhoods, including South Boston, Beacon Hill, the South End and Jamaica Plain, put together organizations advocating for places where their pets can run free.

The result? The city has precisely one, Peters Park in the South End. (A second, a hard-to-reach run off the Harvard Bridge near the Esplanade, was created by the state.)

It's hardly sufficient. But instead of helping to create more, the city has been strangely uncooperative.

A case in point. In March 1998 a group of dog owners met with the parks commissioner to plead their case for allowing dogs to run off-leash on the Common. After an hour-long session, they were told it would be OK. Yet within a few weeks the Parks Department inexplicably reneged on its commitment; park rangers were out in full force, ticketing unleashed dogs.

In this case, at least, there's some hope. Just this week, prodded by the same group of dog owners who were burned in 1998, the mayor's office has agreed to a six-month trial, designating a portion of the Common for off-leash dogs in the evening and early morning.

It may seem curious, this notion of creating spaces for dogs. But it is by no means a novel idea. New York City - yes, the Big Apple itself - has many. Nor is it an expensive undertaking, since it involves little more than fencing, signage and some modest maintenance.

Fully one-third of Boston's households have a dog - a startlingly high number. It does seem they deserve more from the city than an animal control department bragging about how many dogs it hopes to catch off leash this year.

Tom Keane writes weekly for the Boston Herald. He can be reached at tomkeane@tomkeane.com.