Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners consider adding peafowl to animal-control ordinance, discuss penalty increases
Summary
Commissioner Stevens asked staff to draft changes to O-16-4 to include peafowl and to raise fines for violations; staff flagged a practical barrier — humane-society and shelter options for seized peafowl — and will work with the county attorney on draft language.
Grant County commissioners discussed possible amendments to the county’s animal-control ordinance (O-16-4) on April 8, focusing on two topics: adding peafowl to the list of regulated animals and increasing monetary penalties for ordinance violations.
Commissioner Stevens said residents had repeatedly complained about peafowl damaging yards and that the county should hold owners accountable. He asked for language to add peafowl to the ordinance and proposed increasing fines so penalties would be more meaningful than the existing $25, which, he said, a local judge had sometimes reduced.
"I basically just really feel for this resident. . . . The only person who would be inconvenienced would be the owner of the peafowl, but they, in my mind, should be responsible for their animals," Stevens said during the discussion. He and another resident had suggested raising fines; Stevens said a proposed structure could set a first-offense fine higher (a $150 proposal was discussed, with a higher maximum for repeat offenses).
Staff concerns and next steps: County staff said they are researching fee structures and dangerous-dog language and working with the county attorney to draft a single ordinance amendment incorporating commissioner input. Staff raised a practical issue: humane-society and shelter options for seized peafowl are limited. "If we seize those animals, then where do we take them? What do we do with them?" staff said, noting the humane society will not accept peafowl.
Commissioners asked staff to work closely with Stevens and to return a consolidated draft for legal review, followed by public-notice and public-hearing steps if the board approves moving forward.
What was not decided: No formal changes were adopted at the meeting. Commissioners directed staff to draft language and explore placement or custody options for seized birds.
Ending: Staff will confer with the county attorney and produce a draft ordinance text that addresses adding peafowl and revises penalties; staff will also research intake/placement options for seized birds before the board considers a public hearing.
