Animal Rescue Corps asks judge for $91,888 security bond to cover care of 17 seized animals

Animal Rescue Corps (ARC) and Chetm County Animal Control asked a judge to order a security bond to cover the cost of caring for 17 animals seized from a Chetm County property in August.

Britney Sellers, director of Chetm County Animal Control, testified that officers executed a search warrant and removed 17 animals —11 exotic birds, three chickens, two dogs and a miniature horse — after finding unsanitary conditions at the property. ARC’s director of operations, Amy Havstick, described on‑scene findings and the shelter intake: heavy ammonia odors, soiled cages, lack of potable food and water, a chest freezer containing deceased birds and evidence of animal illness and injuries.

Sellers said the agency chose ARC as its statutory designate because the county shelter lacks capacity for exotic avian care. ARC then took custody and transported animals to partner facilities equipped to board and medically treat them.

Havstick presented ARC’s cost‑of‑care worksheet and supporting invoices and testified the organization has incurred $86,555 for boarding and $5,383 for veterinary services to date — a combined total of $91,888 — and projected a 30‑day operating estimate of $11,350 (boarding plus ongoing veterinary oversight). She told the court the boarding estimates include specialized feed, enrichment, staff time and overhead; vet charges included testing and treatment, nail and beak trims and follow‑up care.

“Ammonia levels were 100 parts per million,” Havstick testified about an in‑home measurement, adding that safe indoor ammonia levels for animals are far lower. She said many cages and enclosures were heavily soiled with feces and debris and that some birds had overgrown beaks and missing feathers.

ARC introduced invoices from vendors and veterinary providers and an intake video the court admitted to show the property condition and the animals’ state. Chetm County animal control emphasized it had no funds to continue long‑term boarding and that ARC has not been reimbursed; ARC said it has not derived revenue from the case and that adoption revenues would not offset the immediate costs.

Defense counsel objected to late production of some invoices and redactions on financial records; the judge overruled the objections and accepted the documents as business records for purposes of the bond proceeding while noting the unusual statutory structure that consolidates a pretrial security bond remedy with criminal charges.

The court did not decide the bond amount at the hearing; it accepted material into the record, allowed ARC to continue presenting proof and set follow‑up dates for additional testimony and ruling. The transcript shows the court intends to treat the petition under the state statute that provides for posting a security for seized animals’ care during criminal proceedings.

Next steps: The judge admitted documents and video evidence, allowed the state and ARC to put more proof on the record, and scheduled additional hearings; counsel were instructed to coordinate discovery and, if necessary, the court will resume the bond hearing on the next available criminal docket.