Washoe County Animal Control Board MINUTES Tuesday ~ ~ 6:30 P.M. WASHOE COUNTY REGIONAL ANIMAL SERVICES CENTER CLASSROOM 2825 LONGLEY LANE, RENO, NEVADA 1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL [Non-action item] MEMBERS Dan Olsen, Chair Richard Simmonds, Vice-chair Elaine Carrick Linda Church Paul B. Davis Anne Forbes Kathryn Hass Chair Olsen called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m. A quorum was established. PRESENT: Elaine Carrick, Linda Church, Paul Davis, Anne Forbes, Kathryn Hass, Dan Olsen and Richard Simmonds. ABSENT: None. Terry Shea Deputy District Attorney, was also present. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT (Non-action item) Chair Olsen outlined the time limitations of three (3) minutes per person and explained that the board did not have jurisdiction on dangerous animals and that board members could not engage in any discussion on the matter. Member Forbes disclosed that she is acquainted with Ms. Christensen. Sally Christensen read a prepared statement (copy on file) written from her dog s, Dude s, point of view. Ms. Christensen asked that her dog be saved. Greg Pulley commented that he is acquainted with the dog for the past year and a half. Mr. Pulley explained that the dog is sweet and loving and that he has not found him to be dangerous. Mr. Pulley noted that he may be responsible for the dog being at-large and that the dog should not be punished for his mistake. Kyler Noonan-Vaught commented that the dog has been with him for eight (8) years and is very sweet and not dangerous. Kyler noted that the dog likes to play and has never harmed his 3-year old sister or 2-year old brother. Kyler explained the he wants his dog to be safe and returned to his loving home. 3. ELECTION OF OFFICERS [For possible action] 1) Chair; and 2) Vice-chair Chair Olsen opened nominations for the position of Chair. Member Carrick nominated Dan Olsen. Member Church seconded the nomination. Chair Olsen accepted the nomination.
Page 2 of 10 It was moved by Member Davis, seconded by Member Simmonds, to close the nominations and elect Dan Olsen as Chair of the Washoe County Animal Control Board. The motion carried unanimously. Chair Olsen opened nominations for Vice-chair. Member Davis nominated Richard Simmonds as Vice-chair. Member Forbes seconded the nomination. Member Simmonds accepted the nomination. The nomination to elect Richard Simmonds as Vice-chair of the Washoe County Animal Control Board carried unanimously. 4. APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 11, 2012, MINUTES [For possible action] Chair Olsen stated he would abstain from voting on the December 11, 2012, meeting minutes as he had been absent. It was moved by Member Simmonds, seconded by Member Hass, to approve the December 11, 2012, minutes, as submitted. The motion carried: Members Carrick, Church, Davis, Forbes, Hass and Simmonds assenting; and Chair Olsen abstaining. 5. EXOTIC PERMIT APPEAL HEARING [For possible action] A review, discussion and possible action to approve, deny or otherwise modify an Exotic Animal permit to allow Ivan Morales, to keep one (1) Marmoset at 6505 Bonde Lane, Reno, Nevada (City of Reno). Lead Animal Control Officer Nancy Ueda outlined the request noting that the inspecting officer indicated that the existing 30-foot by 30-foot case exceeds USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) requirements and that the primate cage was clean and sanitary. Officer Ueda noted that the approval of the permit will not violate any local or state regulations nor constitute a nuisance. Officer Ueda noted that the inspection report stated that the Marmoset was a healthy animal. Chair Olsen opened the public hearing. Ivan Morales explained that he had conducted a lot of research before deciding to purchase the Marmoset, which he named Gizmo. Mr. Morales noted that he had purchased the animal on-line and also purchased several books on the care of Marmoset. Mr. Morales plans to purchase a larger cage for the animal and indicated that he feeds the young animal a diet of bananas, milk and other fresh fruit. Mr. Morales noted that this is a Pygmy Marmoset that should reach a height of 6 or 7-inches when grown. Mr. Morales accepted Member Simmonds suggestion to contact the breeder about the diet as Gizmo matures. Mr. Morales noted that he might consider breeding but wants to be sure the animal is healthy as this is the first time he has taken care of this species. Member Simmonds noted that the USDA procedures for breeding and selling Pygmy Marmoset s commercially is a complex and somewhat difficult process.
Page 3 of 10 Mr. Morales noted that he uses the All Creatures Great and Small Veterinary Hospital for veterinary services and that he believes Gizmo is about 4-months of age. Mr. Morales explained that his girlfriend takes care of the animal when he is not home and that he socializes with Gizmo when he is home after 5:30 p.m. Chair Olsen closed the public hearing. Member Davis stated that he can support the request and finds that Mr. Morales appears to be a terrific owner that has done the necessary research. Member Forbes concurred and pointed out that Mr. Morales had indicated that his fiancé will take possession of the animal if necessary. Member Carrick commented that while Mr. Morales appears to be a responsible owner she cannot support the permit as this is a wild animal that should be returned to its native habitat in the canopy of the forest rather than be kept as pets. Members Hass and Church stated they could support the permit request. It was moved by Member Simmonds, seconded by Member Davis, to approve the exotic animal permit to allow Ivan Morales to keep one (1) Pygmy Marmoset at 6505 Bonde Lane, Reno, Nevada (City of Reno). Member Simmonds stated that because the evidence presented satisfies all of the requirements of Washoe County Code 55. Member Simmonds noted that while he understands Member Carrick s position, it would be detrimental to try and return an animal to the wild that was born in captivity. Member Carrick explained that there are refuges that mimic the wild that the animal could be returned to. Member Church commented that the Nevada legislature has a BDR (Bill Draft Request) that may prohibit the keeping of wild animal species in captivity in the State of Nevada. Member Carrick stated that BDR50-161 submitted by Senator Roberson has not yet come out of the LCB (Legislative Counsel Bureau). Member Simmonds explained that he believes if approved the legislation would most likely grandfather those that currently own such animals legally. Additionally, it is likely that the legislation will generate significant controversy. Member Carrick concurred. The motion carried: Members Church, Davis, Forbes, Hass, Simmonds and Chair Olsen assenting; and Member Carrick dissenting. Member Simmonds read the appeal process into the record.
Page 4 of 10 6. KENNEL PERMIT APPEAL HEARING [For possible action] A review, discussion and possible action to approve, deny or otherwise modify a kennel permit to allow Brad Royle to keep four (4) dogs at 3784 Big Dipper Court, Sparks, Nevada (unincorporated Washoe County). Lead Animal Control Officer Nancy Ueda summarized the inspection report submitted by Officer Brooks who notes that the existing kennel is in need of a footer and some additional chain link. Officer Ueda noted that the State of Nevada s Social Services requires the public hearing and permit and was not complaint driven. Chair Olsen opened the public hearing. Bradley Royle commented that he and his wife applied for the kennel permit to keep four (4) dogs and that the State of Nevada requires the kennel permit in order to foster or adopt children in the future. Mr. Royle noted that he and his wife each had two (2) dogs when they married and that the concrete footer could not be added yet due to the frozen condition of the ground. Officer Brooks will inspect the work once completed. Mr. Royle explained that the dogs are 6 and 12 years old and that there animal have access to an enclosed area within the garage. Additionally, all dogs have bark collars and that there has not been any complaint about the animals. Christian Ambrose commented that while he is not present to complain about the dogs, he believes there is a pack mentality. Additionally, Mr. Royle has not complied with HOA (Homeowners Association) rules or the Washoe County requirement for a kennel permit to keep more than three (3) dogs. Mr. Ambrose outlined his concern that the Pit-bull may be able to jump the fence and pointed out that the existing wood fence is not a full 6-feet in height. Chair Olsen explained that the ACB (Animal Control Board) could not impose any condition requiring compliance with HOA requirements only conditions related to the construction and size requirement for the kennel. Mr. Ambrose noted that there had not been any instance of the dogs jumping the fence. Mr. Royle noted that the additional chain link fencing was required along an area where the kennel met the wood fence. Mr. Royle noted that the dogs are required to be in the kennel enclosure unless accompanied by an adult when in the yard. And that he would encourage Mr. Ambrose to file a complaint with Washoe County Animal Services should any of the dogs are seen at-large. The kennel uses a latch and lock on the gate. Chair Olsen closed the public hearing. Member Davis stated that he could support the request and that the applicant appears to be a good owner and has indicated that the dogs could not jump the fence and had encouraged Mr. Ambrose to file a complaint if that occurred. Member Forbes noted that the Pit-bull is well socialized as it lives with a pair of Jack Russel- Chihuahua mix and a Pomeranian.
Page 5 of 10 Member Simmonds suggested that Mr. Royle not replace any dogs that passes on. Mr. Royle stated that there was no intention of replacing any of the dogs. Member Carrick stated that she could support the kennel permit as submitted. Member Church and Hass stated they could also support the request. It was moved by Member Carrick, seconded by Member Davis, a kennel permit to allow Brad Royle to keep four (4) dogs at 3784 Big Dipper Court, Sparks, Nevada (unincorporated Washoe County). Member Carrick stated that Mr. Royle must complete the required footing and installation of the additional chain link fencing within 60-days and stated she could make the applicable Findings in Washoe County Code 55.420(4) and 55.400(2) based on the testimony provided by Animal Control Officers and the applicant. The motion carried unanimously. Chair Olsen read the appeal process into the record 7. KENNEL PERMIT APPEAL HEARING [For possible action] A review, discussion and possible action to approve deny or otherwise modify a kennel permit to allow Willie J. Stevens, Jr., to keep five (5) dogs at 1539 Topeka Circle, Sparks, Nevada (City of Sparks). Lead Animal Control Officer Nancy Ueda outlined the report submitted by inspecting Officer Brooks in which he noted that the existing kennel is adequate and that maintenance of the dogs meets requirements. Officer Ueda noted that the kennel enclosure has a built-in drain and dog house and that all animals appear healthy and well cared for. Additionally, Mr. Stevens maintains pigeons on the property that are used to train the dogs. Officer Ueda noted that the black and white photocopied picture had been provided by one of the objectors and that Animal Control personnel had not taken any photographs. Chair Olsen opened the public hearing. Willie J. Stevens Jr. commented that he had requested a kennel permit for five (5) dogs in the event that the English Setter Sydney was returned. The four remaining dogs range in age from 15 to 5 years of age. It is Mr. Stevens belief that the objection filed to his application was in retaliation for his having called Sparks Police on the complainant s son for harassment, including ramming a trash can into his garage door and pounding on the door. Mr. Stevens then explained that Mr. O Neil sometimes leans against the fence adjacent to the dog kennel, which causes them to bark. Mr. Stevens pointed out that the concrete has a lip to prevent water from running under the fence when cleaning. The feces are removed manually followed by a hosing of the concrete. Mr. Steven s then explained that the families had been neighbors and friends for many years until the incident involving the harassment. Mr. Stevens noted that he had already installed one security light and intends to install a second one. Mr. Stevens commented that he uses the dogs in field hunting competitions and has only bred the dogs twice. Typically, when breeding dogs, the male is brought to the female in accordance with AKC (American Kennel Club) regulations. Mr. Stevens emphasized that when he trains dogs for others, the training is conducted in Hungry Valley. Mr. Stevens offered to add a border to prevent any run-off to the neighboring yard and pointed out that each kennel as its own drain. Additionally, Mr. Stevens uses his dogs for hunting purposes.
Page 6 of 10 Pam Stevens stated the she is acquainted with Deputy District Attorney Terry Shea and Animal Services Director Barry Brode from her previous employment with Washoe County District County. Ms. Steven noted that the O Neil s had lived next door for 25-years and they had always enjoyed a good relationship until about three (3) years ago. Ms. Stevens explained that with the harassment by the O Neil s oldest son she is now afraid to be alone and that it appears that the downstairs bedroom that the O Neil s indicated was no longer usable consistently had lights on indicating that it is still in use. Linda O Neil thanked the board for allowing her an opportunity to address their concerns. Ms. O Neil commented that there is always another side to any story and that some of the remarks she heard are only the opinion of the Stevens. Ms. O Neil drew attention to the photograph provided and pointed out that the dogs tend to scare her grand-children when they jump on their cage. Ms. O Neil noted that the Stevens have the dogs placed on the side of the house facing their bedroom rather than their own and that their rear yard has suffered due to the urine and feces. Ms. O Neil voiced her concern that approval of a five (5) dog kennel permit could allow Mr. Stevens to rotate dogs in and out. Chair Olsen explained that the permit, if approved, would not allow any rotation and would be limited to the number and breeds of the four (4) dogs named in the kennel permit application. Member Carrick pointed out that there was no history of complaints from either the O Neil s or anyone else. Ms. O Neil explained that she had only recently called Animal Control as they had wished to remain friends. Ms. O Neil noted that there had been complaints about the pigeons. Cindy Smullen commented that she has known the Stevens for 20 years and that she takes care of their dogs when they are out of town and that she is familiar with their feeding and cleanup routines. Ms. Smullen pointed out that the dogs come in the house at night to sleep. Randy Young explained that he and his wife moved into the area about 10-years ago and that Mr. Stevens had made a point to introduce himself a few days after they moved in. Mr. Stevens then asked that Mr. Young contact him with any concerns that may arise with the dogs or pigeons. Although Mr. Stevens had sought construction advice from him, Mr. Young explained that he had encouraged him (Mr. Stevens) to go to the building department for proper permits and construction. Jim Maskaly noted that he had known Mr. Stevens for the past 17-years and that he has never experienced any issue with barking dogs Additionally, the tenants currently living in that particular house have not expressed any concerns either. Mr. Maskaly noted that he had gone hunting with Mr. Stevens and that Mr. Stevens takes good care of the dogs. Responding to Member Simmonds inquiry about possible run-off to the neighboring property, Mr. Stevens explained that there is a way to correct the problem and that he would correct the issue. Mr. Stevens then explained that he also takes good care of the pigeons as he needs then for the field training exercises.
Page 7 of 10 Chair Olsen closed the public hearing. Member Davis commented that he could support the request and pointed out that Mr. Stevens had expressed his willingness to correct the problems identified. Member Davis also pointed out that other neighbors had expressed support for his request. Member Forbes concurred with Member Davis and noted that Mr. Stevens has reduced to four (4) dogs and was very knowledgeable. Member Simmonds stated that he too can support the permit request. Member Carrick commented that she can support the permit request and encouraged Mr. Stevens to complete the worked discussed and expressed her hope that the families can work out their differences. Member Hass expressed her support for the kennel permit. Member Church commented that it is unfortunate that the neighbors have an issue. However, she can support the request. It was moved by Member Simmonds, seconded by Member Davis, to approve a kennel permit to allow Willie J. Stevens, Jr., to keep four (4) dogs at 1539 Topeka Circle, Sparks, Nevada (City of Sparks). Member Simmonds deleted the English Setter from the list of approved animals and stated he could make the applicable Findings in Washoe County Code 55.420(4) and 55.400(2) based on the testimony provided by Animal Control Officers and the applicant. The motion carried unanimously. Chair Olsen read the appeal process into the record. The meeting recessed at 7:50 p.m. and reconvened at 7:56 p.m. 8. KENNEL PERMIT APPEAL HEARING [For possible action] A review, discussion and possible action to approve, deny or otherwise modify a kennel permit to allow Barbara LaForge to keep twenty-five (25) cats at 4475 Matich Drive, Reno, Nevada (City of Reno). Member Simmonds called a point or order noting that this was for a Cattery rather than a Kennel permit. Lead Animal Control Officer Nancy Ueda summarized the inspection report by Officer Brooks and explained that the cattery is adequate for the number of cats on the premises. Officer Ueda explained that Ms. LaForge keeps cats testing positive for FELV (Feline Leukemia) separated from those that are negative. It was suggested during the inspection that Ms. LaForge increase the number of litter boxes. Barbara LaForge explained that about 75-percent of her cats are FELV positive and not expected to have a long life expectancy. Ms. LaForge noted that she currently has several cats in treatment with one of the cats nearing her end of life due to kidney failure. Ms. LaForge outlined the additional
Page 8 of 10 windows and extra screening and other improvements made to assure that the cats cannot get out of the house. Ms. LaForge summarized her schedule for cleaning, injections, feeding and watering of the animals noting that a side porch had been enclosed for privacy. Ms. LaForge emphasized that she cleans the litter boxes twice daily and changes the boxes weekly. Ms. LaForge noted that two (2) of the cats (Diamond and Galaxy) have been rehomed reducing the number of cats to twenty-three (23). In the past year Ms. LaForge explained that she had lost fourteen (14) cats to FELV and that she expects to lose at least eight (8) more in the next several months. Ms. LaForge noted that she personally has seven (7) cats that have tested negative for the FELV. Ms. LaForge noted that she puts food out for two (2) neighborhood cats. Chair Olsen pointed out that Ms. LaForge could not replace cats as they pass on should the board approve her cattery permit. Ms. LaForge then explained that there is an enclosed area, similar to a dog kennel, in an outdoor area where the cats can go for fresh air and sun that includes a large litter box. Ms. LaForge commented that she kept the temperature inside at 80-degrees for the cats. Kathleen McDonald commented that she has been a friend of Ms. LaForge for many years and that Ms. LaForge comes over to care for and keep her cats company from time to time. Ms. McDonald emphasized that upon entering Ms. LaForge s home you would not know that she even has a cat as there is no odor. It is Ms. McDonald s belief that Ms. LaForge provides a valuable service by providing a rest home environment for cats nearing the end of life. Donna Ward expressed her concern about anyone keeping twenty-five (25) cats especially cats that are FELV positive. Of particular concern is that one of the feral cats in the neighborhood might become infected and infect other domestic cats in the neighborhood. Matt Ward also expressed concerns about FELV infection and that it is his belief that it never comes out good based on television shows. Mr. Ward believes that Ms. LaForge should be limited to not more than seven (7) cats. Chair Olsen closed the public hearing. Responding to Member Simmonds inquiry about whether the feral cats could touch or come into contact with FELV infected cats, Ms. LaForge commented that she has green plastic filler in the chain link but could put up a different type of barrier so that the cats cannot come nose to nose. Ms. LaForge also noted that the positive and negative cats are segregated with negative cats tested annually for the disease. Additionally, negative and positive cats do not share water/food dishes or litter boxes. Terry Shea Deputy District Attorney, drew attention to WCC (Washoe County Code) 55.415, which stipulates what constitutes a cattery. Ms. LaForge explained that she had started about 5-years ago by taking in kittens and bottle feeding then and about a year later took in the first FELV infected cats and has become a refuge for infected cats over the past 4-years.
Page 9 of 10 Member Simmonds explained that he believes that the cats owned by Ms. LaForge should not go outside and that the FELV infected cats should be confined indoors and when outdoors be in cages consistent with a cattery. Member Carrick believes that Ms. LaForge is a wonderful cat owner that has taken on the responsibility for FELV infects cats to live out their remaining time. Member Carrick noted that none of the neighbors were aware she had as many as 25 cats given the lack of complaints. Member Carrick stated she could support the cattery permit and that Ms. LaForge is doing the community a service by caring for these cats. Member Davis pointed out that it appears there are two primary concerns: 1) fear of roaming cats, which is not the case; and 2) a fear of odor on the premises, which was undetectable to the inspecting officer. Member Davis suggested that Ms. LaForge add an Animal Services approved barrier to further prevent any contact with outside cats. Member Davis stated he could support the request. Member Forbes commented that, in her opinion, Ms. LaForge is not a hoarder: but rather an individual that has opened her heart and home to cats with special needs. Therefore, Member Forbes can support the request with the addition of more litter boxes. Member Forbes stated that Ms. LaForge is an amazing woman and that the cats and community are lucky to have someone like this in the community. Member Simmonds concurred and noted that since two (2) cats had been removed from the request that the request be limited to 23 cats. Member Simmonds also recommend a polyethylene barrier to install along the chain link fence to a height of 24-inches from the bottom to provide a further barrier to physical contact. Member Simmonds noted that estimates indicate that nearly 1/3 rd of all feral cats are FELC positive and that Ms. LaForge s cats are likely not the source of any infection in the neighborhood feral cats. Members Carrick, Church and Hass also stated they could support the request. Chair Olsen recommended that Ms. LaForge discontinue feeding of feral and/or neighborhood cats. Responding to Mr. Ward s inquiry about whether Ms. LaForge could replace cats, Chair Olsen stated that Ms. LaForge would be limited to the cats listed in the permit application if approved and that new cats would have to be approved by the ACB (Animal Control Board). In response to one of Mr. Ward s comments, Officer Ueda commented that Animal Services calls before inspecting cattery permit holders. Mr. Shea recommended that Mr. Ward contact Animal Services if he believes there is any issue. Ms. Ward noted that while she believes Ms. LaForge is doing good and that she was unaware that she had so many cats, that the number of cats should be limited. Of particular concern is the number of apartments in the surrounding neighborhood and the potential for FELV transfer from Ms. LaForge s cats.
Page 10 of 10 It was moved by Member Carrick, seconded by Member Simmonds, to approve the cattery permit to allow Barbara LaForge to keep twenty-three (23) cats at 4475 Matich Drive, Reno, Nevada (City of Reno). Member Carrick conditions the approval to require that Animal Services approved screening be installed within 60-days of this approval. Member Carrick stated she could make the applicable Findings in Washoe County Code 55.420(4) and 55.400(2) based on the testimony provided by Animal Control Officers and the applicant. The motion carried unanimously. Chair Olsen read the appeal process into the record and reordered the agenda. 10. WASHOE COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL BOARD MEMBERS AND/OR STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS, REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION AND SELECTION OF TOPICS FOR FUTURE AGENDAS [Non-action item] Limited to items not addressed elsewhere on the agenda. While the Washoe County Animal Control Board may not engage in discussion or take action on any item identified under this topic the matter may be placed on a future agenda for discussion and possible action. The next regular meeting of the Washoe County Animal Control Board is tentatively scheduled for June 11, 2013. [Taken out of agenda order] Terry Shea Deputy District Attorney, outlined minor language modifications to the motion scripts noting that he would provide an updated copy to the recording secretary for distribution. Responding to Member Carrick s inquiry about plan to include rescue groups in a future update of Chapter 55, Terry Shea Deputy District Attorney, suggested that Member Carrick meet with Barry Brode Animal Services Director. Member Simmonds noted that he would ask Mr. Brode to bring the revisions to this body and pointed out that any revision on rescue operations had to be all inclusive. 9. UNCONTESTED KENNEL PERMIT APPLICATION APPROVALS [Non-action item] An informational update on the number of uncontested cattery/kennel permits issued by Animal Services. Lead Animal Control Officer Nancy Ueda noted that five (5) uncontested permits had been issued and that four (4) kennel permits were pending the June 11, 2013, meeting and that an Exotic Animal permit may also be requested. 11. PUBLIC COMMENT [Non-action item] There were no public comments. 12. ADJOURNMENT [Non-action item] Chair Olsen adjourned the meeting at 8:44 p.m. AS APPROVED BY THE WASHOE COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL BOARD IN SESSION ON JUNE 11, 2013.