Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Weed council gives dog owner 30 days to meet vaccine, licensing and harness conditions or face euthanasia
Summary
After a public hearing on a March 5 dog fight, the council voted to return Gemma to owner Jody Smith only if the owner obtains a city dog license, current rabies vaccination, and an approved harness within 30 days; failure to comply will result in impoundment and euthanasia.
The City of Weed on Tuesday voted to return Gemma, a mixed-breed dog seized after a March 5 fight, to her owner on strict conditions and a 30-day compliance deadline. The action follows testimony from the animal control officer, witness statements and veterinary bills for the injured dog.
"My dog is not vicious," owner Jody Smith told the council, saying she was not present for the incident and that she had tried to arrange vaccination and care while dealing with a family emergency. Community service officer Ryan Coats described the investigation and evidence against the animal: photographs, witness statements and veterinary records for the injured dog, Nikia. "I believe this dog to be a threat and a hazard to the residents... the only reasonable remedy would be to for the dog to be euthanized," Coats said during his presentation of the investigation.
Council members debated whether the record supported immediate destruction or whether conditions could reasonably mitigate risk. The majority opted for conditional return. The council's resolution requires proof of a current city dog license and rabies vaccination and presentation of a harness approved by the animal control officer prior to release. After release, Gemma must be securely harnessed, leashed and under the control of an adult whenever outside the owner's dwelling. The resolution states that violations of those conditions will lead to impoundment and possible destruction.
Councilors discussed additional possible requirements that were considered but not adopted, including an approved enclosure and a spay/neuter condition. City attorney McKenzie advised that civil restitution for veterinary bills is a separate civil claim and not part of this administrative decision.
Mayor Parham said he did not want to see the dog destroyed if responsible measures could protect public safety; other councilors voiced similar reluctance but emphasized enforceability. The motion passed after members recorded their votes; the city attorney will draft a formal resolution listing the conditions and the 30-day compliance timeline.
The council did not award civil restitution to the injured dog's owner; that remedy was described as a private civil action. The council also directed animal-control staff to monitor compliance and return the matter to the council if conditions are not met within the stated timeframe.
