Fairbanks North Star Borough commission affirms 'dangerous' designation for dog Shar

The Fairbanks North Star Borough Animal Control Commission on Jan. 28 affirmed a dangerous-animal determination for a dog named Shar following an appeal by the dog's owner, who argued the incident was a herding nip and raised procedural objections to the investigation.

Animal Control lead Officer Ross told the commission the agency met its burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not), noting the borough code defines a bite to include puncture wounds and that an intentional bite or an attempt to bite qualifies an animal as dangerous. "A bite is defined as an injury, including but not limited to puncture wounds, lacerations and or contusions caused by the mouth and or teeth of an animal," Ross said, and added that an attempt to inflict a bite would also qualify.

Why it matters: The commission's decision lets the borough require conditions intended to reduce the risk of further bites and creates a written record of findings the owner may challenge in court. The owner may seek removal of a dangerous designation after one year, and the commission said it will issue written findings and conclusions to support the oral motion.

What the record shows: Animal Control investigator Foster summarized the agency's review of an incident on Dec. 17, 2025, on Molly Road. The victim, Doug Best, testified he was walking his usual route when a group of about 8–10 dogs from the owner's property approached and that one delivered a puncture wound to his lower left calf that broke the skin. Foster said the dog Shar was microchipped (microchip 7607840309), current on rabies vaccination, was quarantined as a precaution, and that the quarantine period ended with no reported signs of disease. Foster said she reviewed available evidence and concluded "no exceptions applied," leading to the dangerous classification and a set of behavioral and containment recommendations for the owner.

Owner's argument: The owner and appellant, identified in the record as Mr. Prade, told the commission he accepts responsibility for having let the dogs out but argued the incident was a herding nip consistent with the animal's age and context. Prade asked the commission to apply borough-code exemptions he cited (record references to "22.2.0.01 b3" for conduct consistent with age and "b6" for protection of the owner or offspring) and criticized Animal Control's timeline and documentation practices. "I would argue in summation that the term 'dangerous' be removed on the grounds that exemption 22.2.0.01 b3 applies," Prade told the panel, while acknowledging he erred in judgment by letting the animals out.

Agency response and process questions: Officer Ross and Foster defended the investigation and explained procedural limits: Animal Control uses a preponderance standard for these administrative determinations and, while the agency aims to complete investigations within the quarantine period, staffing constraints, holiday timing and limited weekend or after-hours coverage affected timing. Ross also said owners are not required by code to submit a written statement by a fixed deadline, but staff attempt to explain a 10-day timeline associated with quarantine procedures.

Commission decision: Commissioner Cavapel moved to affirm the officer's determination and to adopt the investigator's nine findings of fact and five recommendations. The motion passed on a 6–0 roll-call vote; the clerk recorded affirmative votes from Johnson, Rosenberg, Wilson, Cavapel, Rudy and Gardiner (names as listed on the roll call). The chair announced that written findings and conclusions will follow and reminded the owner the decision may be appealed to the Superior Court within 30 days; notice of intent to appeal must be given to the animal control officer within 72 hours.

Next steps: The commission will issue a written decision containing specific findings of fact. The owner may appeal to the Alaska Superior Court within the statutory time frame; the commission also noted owners may petition after one year to remove the dangerous designation.

Sources: Hearing testimony from Animal Control officers (Officer Foster, Officer Ross), victim Doug Best, and owner/appellant Mr. Prade; the commission's oral motion and roll-call vote at the Jan. 28, 2026, hearing.