Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board orders owner to cure conditions or pay costs in Elk Mountain vicious-animal case; hard deadline set
Summary
After lengthy testimony about multiple close incidents, the Board modified a county abatement order for four impounded dogs tied to livestock losses on Elk Mountain, setting a hard compliance deadline and requiring payment of impound and veterinary costs before any release.
The Board of Supervisors modified an animal control abatement order at its Jan. 14 meeting and directed staff to return the final paperwork: the owner of four impounded dogs must meet containment and licensing conditions and pay the county—s impound and veterinary costs before any animals are released. The board set a firm compliance deadline (Jan. 21, 2025) and warned that failure to comply could lead to euthanasia of the impounded animals.
Background: County animal control placed four dogs into custody after neighbors reported repeated livestock attacks in the Elk Mountain area and presented photographic evidence of dead and maimed cattle and sheep. Neighbors and witnesses described multiple incidents stretching back to November; several said they saw dogs chasing or attacking calves and adult cattle. Animal control staff recounted prior contacts with the owner and a record of prior impoundments of dogs associated with the same household.
Board action: After public comment and testimony from witnesses, the board voted to modify the abatement order to require the owner to comply with all conditions (including microchip, licensing, rabies vaccinations, spay/neuter and construction of approved kennels) and to pay all related fees and veterinary costs. The board directed staff to record the hard deadline (Jan. 21, 2025) and to proceed with humane destruction of the animals if conditions were not met by that date.
Why it matters: The decision moves the county from investigation to a firm timeline for resolution. Residents said they had lost livestock and asked for decisive action; animal-control staff said they will enforce the abatement conditions and that the department had arranged temporary housing and care while the appeal was pending.
What to watch: County animal control will track compliance and report back to the public; owners who disagree with the outcome may pursue civil remedies for damages (the board notes that animal-control proceedings do not replace civil claims for livestock losses). The order requires payment of the county—s impound and care costs; the county will also accept any civil claims the livestock owners pursue.
Evidence and record: Multiple speakers, property owners and a wildlife specialist testified on the record; the board acknowledged that while not every incident had video proving a specific dog killed a particular calf, multiple witnesses and a documented history of prior incidents supported a firm enforcement approach.
