Klamath County commissioners on Oct. 29, 2025, found insufficient evidence to conclude that three dogs belonging to a neighbor attacked and killed livestock, but they ordered the dogs confined and required microchipping and licensing fees. The decision came after an evidentiary hearing prompted by a complaint from resident Connie Gonzales that her animals were attacked on Oct. 15.

Gomez, an animal control officer, told the board that Gonzalez reported two pit-bull mixes and a Rottweiler mix entered an enclosure and "ended up attacking a goat, valued at 1,500, a sheep valued at a thousand, and a pig valued at about 2,000." Officer Gomez said Gonzales provided photographs by email that show injuries and that the fence line was bowed where the animals entered. The dogs were impounded on Oct. 23, eight days after the initial report.

Gonzales, the complainant, testified that she had endured "numerous issues with her dogs over the last several months" and that she had lost the goat, sheep and pig and "I've gotten 8 cats have been killed by her dogs as well over the last several months." Under questioning she initially said the attack occurred "around 11:00 or so in the morning."

Alicia Hutchings, who identified herself as squatting on the property in dispute, denied that her dogs had attacked Gonzales's animals and disputed several factual points. Hutchings told the board she had videos and text messages and said, "My dogs didn't do it. I've got plenty of witnesses that my dogs are always tethered." Under later questioning she gave a different time for the incident, saying it happened "more in the afternoon around, like, 03:00, 04:00."

During deliberations commissioners noted the eight-day lapse between the reported attack and the impound, and several said the delay made physical evidence difficult to locate. One commissioner described the matter as largely a credibility dispute between witnesses and said that, beyond a bowed fence and the witness statements, there was little physical evidence presented. The board therefore concluded there was insufficient evidence to find the dogs at fault.

A motion carried unanimously by voice vote found the dogs not at fault, waived impound and boarding fees, and imposed microchip and licensing fees; the board also recorded a recommendation not to impose restitution. The board additionally adopted animal-control guidance that the dogs must be confined so they cannot run at large or cause harm to people or livestock, and warned that a repeat incident would carry more severe consequences.

The presiding commissioner said the defendant may work with animal control to arrange return of the animals. The board adjourned the hearing at 02:00.