Loading...
1989-24160-Minutes for Meeting September 06,1989 Recorded 9/15/1989t 89-24160 DOG HEARING 6`J C096 DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS=; 0i_ September 6, 1989 Chair Prante called the hearing to order at 10:05 a.m. Board members present were Dick Maudlin, Tom Throop and Lois Bristow Prante. Also present were Rick Isham, County Legal Counsel and Cynthia Komurka, Animal Control Officer. Officer Komurka testified that there was a report of an animal involved with livestock and trespass on private property from August 25, 1989 at approximately 10:30 p.m. She responded to the call the next day and spoke with Jim Brown, the reporting party. She said Mr. Brown reported he heard his horses running, went out on his front porch, and saw a pit bull terrier which he identified as belonging to a neighbor. She said there was reportedly another dog (a heeler) involved in the incident which Mr. Brown did not see. Mr. Brown signed a request that the dog be impounded and that he would testify at a hearing. James A. Brown, 62610 Waugh Road, testified that on the evening of the 25th he was asleep and awoke to the sound of horses running. At first he didn't see anything, the second time he got up he saw a pit bull in the front yard. He shot at it to chase it off. His wife told him there was another dog (a heeler) there also. He contacted the pit bull dog owner and told him he didn't want the dog coming on his property again. The following morning when he went out to check on the horses, he noticed that one of the horses had been run through the back fence and was cut on his legs, chest and stomach area apparently from the barbed wire. He then contacted animal control. The other dog (the heeler) did come back the following evening and he shot and killed the dog. Commissioner Maudlin asked if he saw the pit bull chasing the horses, and Mr. Brown said no, he only saw him in the yard. Cynthia Komurka introduced photographs of the injured horse and a picture of a pit bull. Mr. Brown identified the picture of the pit bull as the dog he saw on his property. Officer Komurka identified the cuts as being wire cuts but could not say for certain if any were bite marks. Commissioner Throop asked Mr. Brown if his horses had ever run through the fence before, and if they were excitable. Mr. Brown indicated that they had not run through the fence before, and that they were not excitable unless there was something in the pasture to disturb them. Mr. Brown indicated that the heeler dog had been at his property last winter and that the pit bull had been on his property on several occasion before the incident on the 25th. Commissioner Maudlin asked if the pit bull had ever been observed PAGE 1 DOG HEARING MINUTES: 9/6/89 C096 '.636 chasing the animals. Mr. Brown said that by the time he could get outside, the dog would already be leaving the area, and he hadn't actually seen the dog with the horses. Ronald Allen, whose son owned the pit bull, testified that he was in bed at the time of the incident and that his son had told him that the dog was in the house at the time. He said he woke up when Mr. Brown arrived and argued with his son. Mr. Allen indicated his son said he had just let the dog out into their fenced pasture when Mr. Brown arrived. Mr. Allen reported that the dog was not let out for long periods of time unsupervised and was usually chained or in the fenced yard. He said there were other dogs in the area that ran loose that resembled their pit bull. Margaret Micnhimer 21045 Clairway Avenue, testified that when Mr. Brown came to the Allen's residence, he didn't identify himself and didn't respond when questioned by Ronald Allen. She said Jason (Ronald Allen's son) was outside watching his dog when Mr. Brown arrived. Melanie Brown, 62610 Waugh Road, testified that she had seen the pit bull dog three different times within a distance of five feet and was positive that the dog she saw was the Allen's dog. Commissioner Maudlin said there had been no eye witness identification of the pit bull dog chasing, harassing, or biting livestock and therefore the dog could not be disposed of. Commissioner Throop said his sentiments were the same, and that it was unfortunate that Mr. Brown did not shoot both dogs since they were having such problems in the neighborhood. He admonished Mr. Brown to make sure his son made arrangements to adequately contain his dog or the dog would probably come before the Board again or be shot by one of the neighbors. Commissioner Prante felt there was a strong likelihood that the dog was involved, but lacking an eye witness, felt the dog could not be put to sleep. Commissioner Maudlin asked if the dog were licensed. Officer Komurka said the dog was not licensed and that the owner was advised that should the dog be release by the Board, he would have to post a license deposit prior to obtaining the dog from the humane society. MAUDLIN: I would move due to lack of evidence, an eye witness on the fact of whether the pit bull was or was not chasing animals, that we find that the dog shall be released to the owner with the admonition as first stated. THROOP: Second the motion. PAGE 2 DOG HEARING MINUTES: 9/6/89 6 ~ 60 7 VOTE: PRANTE: YES THROOP: YES MAUDLIN: YES DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Lois B stow Prante, Chair I~ Tom Throop, ommissioner Di Maudlin, Commissioner BOCC:alb PAGE 3 DOG HEARING MINUTES: 9/6/89