Residents urge Liberty County to create animal shelter as dog attacks rise

Dozens of residents urged Liberty County’s commissioners on Tuesday to establish a county animal shelter and strengthen enforcement of spay‑and‑neuter and animal‑control laws, saying volunteers cannot keep up with growing numbers of abandoned and aggressive dogs.

The most vivid appeals came from local rescuers and residents who described burned, beaten and tied dogs, packs that have attacked people and a spike in reported bites. "We have rescued over hundreds, if not thousands, of dogs from Cleveland…this is the worst state I've ever seen in the world," Lydia Martinez said, arguing that the county must adopt "enforceable laws" and provide a shelter instead of leaving rescue work to volunteers.

Why it matters: Speakers said the problem poses public‑health and public‑safety risks, citing both human injuries and the potential for disease spread. Amanda Jordan cited county bite‑call data to show escalating incidents: 88 bite calls from Oct. 2022–Sep. 2023 and 253 from Jan.–Jul. 2024. Several commenters warned the next victim could be a child.

Multiple speakers recounted rescuing or fostering dozens of animals at personal expense. Yabel Luarte described caring for nearly 30 animals at one time and recounted euthanizing a severely abused dog rescued from a sewer. "We need enforceable laws that mandate spay and neuter. We need a shelter to place animals in need," she said.

The public pleas included policy suggestions: a countywide shelter (some speakers suggested locating one near Colony Ridge), funded animal‑control officers, a community spay/neuter program, and evening public meetings so more residents can participate. Mira Nadlaw, of the Texas Humane Legislation Network, noted that the county’s population (about 92,000 as she cited) exceeds state guidance recommending shelter services for counties above 75,000 and emphasized vaccination and containment to prevent zoonotic disease.

Court reaction and next steps: The commissioners listened to public comment under the court's three‑minute rule and did not respond during the comment period. The court’s formal business proceeded after public comment; no immediate commitment to fund a shelter or adopt ordinances was made on the record during this meeting. Several speakers asked how to get the item formally placed on a future agenda so the court could act.

Context: Speakers repeatedly credited independent rescuers and nonprofit partners with extensive rescue efforts and warned that county reliance on volunteers and out‑of‑state placement is unsustainable.

The meeting moved on to the consent agenda and a series of administrative votes after public comment concluded.