Animal Welfare Task Force

Meeting Minutes
Thursday, December 13th, 2012
2:00 pm
Buena Vista Conference Center
Dining Room
Task Force members present:
Sen. Patricia Blevins, Delaware State Senate
Sen. Karen Peterson, Delaware State Senate
Dr. Heather Hirst, representing Secretary Ed Kee, Delaware Department of Agriculture
Andy Lippstone, Office of the Governor
Hetti Brown, Public Member
Kathy Gallagher, Public Member
Mike Petit de Mange, Kent County Levy Ct.
Hal Godwin, Sussex County
Patrick Carroll, Delaware Humane Association
Anne Gryczon, Safe Haven
Jane Pierantozzi, Faithful Friends Animal Society
Anne Cavanaugh, Delaware SPCA
Kevin Usilton, Kent County SPCA
Dr. Morgan Dawkins, DVMA
Dr. Caroline Hughes, Public Member
Dr. Verne Smith, Widener University School of Law School
Staff present:
Carling Ryan, Delaware State Senate
Public Attendees:
Maj. Brian Whipple, KCSPCA Animal Control
Lt. Wendy Feeser, NCCPD
Amy Nicholson, DESPCA cruelty investigator
Gary Kennett, Safe Haven Dog Control
Cathy Samardza
Phyllis Frank
Gary Frank
Kathy Jackson, AHS
Carol Furr
Lynn Lofthouse
Doug Beatty
C. Scott Kidner, DVMA
Marleen Oetzel
Sherri Warburton
Sherene Lindo
Kathy Jackson
Donna Watson
The meeting was called to order at 2:08 p.m.
Senator Blevins asked that everyone, Task Force members and public attendees, go around the room and reintroduce
themselves.
1

1. Meeting minutes approval- November 15th, 2012

Senator Blevins noted that the minutes had been sent out for review two days prior to the meeting, and asked if anyone
had any changes to the minutes. Ms. Ryan noted that Dr. Hughes had informed her that the minutes did not indicate her
presence at the November meeting. Ms. Cavanaugh pointed out an inaccuracy in a statement on page 7 which said that
non-profits were not incorporated. Ms. Ryan stated that she would amend the minutes to reflect the necessary edits.
After no other changes were requested by the Task Force, Sen. Peterson made a motion to adopt the minutes as official,
and Mr. Petit de Mange seconded that motion. All were in favor, none were opposed.
2. Current Animal Control duties and training information from shelters and counties and 3. Discussion of Animal
Cruelty investigations
Sen. Blevins noted that there were several representatives from both the shelters and Counties to discuss how they train
animal control officers and how they perform day to day duties. She asked Maj. Whipple to discuss his experience as an
ACO first.
Maj. Whipple stated that he performed both dog control and cruelty, as well as the rabies control program. He noted
that the day in the life of an ACO varies; every call may sound the same, but are different when the ACO arrives at the
scene. He noted that Title 9 and animal cruelty violations go hand in hand, but do have some separate elements. He
stated that animal cruelty required significant proof. Title 9 dog control statues related to the husbandry of the animals,
including the day to day care and how they should be housed. Their ACOs are often dealing with diffusing situations and
talking to owners in the field, however, the court situations can be more difficult. He described the court system as
being hesitant to prosecute or not making the prosecution of offenses a priority. He stated that the new tethering law
was difficult to enforce, as there isnt enough manpower to make sure a dog isnt on a tether for 18 hours. He also did
not agree with the exception for dogs on properties which exceed 10 acres. He also said there was an issue with the
exclusion of dogs being deemed dangerous if they are on their own property. He stated that many cases start as Title 9
and end up as a cruelty case. He added that he hoped the Task Force could promote some unity amongst ACOs.
Sen. Blevins noted that Maj. Whipple participated in writing the tethering bill, and stated that a main focus of the bill
was to help animals who spent their life on tethers. Sen. Blevins stated that there must be something that ACOs could
do promulgate the new law to dog owners. Maj. Whipple stated that they were doing that, but that he had a problem
with the 10 acre exemption the statute provided. Sen. Blevins clarified that the 10 acre exemption was added as an
amendment in the House, and that was the only way to pass the bill. Sen. Blevins clarified that Maj. Whipple was
involved in the entire process of the bills passage.
Mr. Lippstone stated that the 10 acre exemption was not a bar to an ACO bringing action against a dog that has been
tethered which is on less than 10 acres.
Mr. Usilton shared an instance where a starving dog was taken in by Faithful Friends, and the Attorney General would
not charge the caretaker of the dog with cruelty because they were the caretaker and not the owner. Both the
KCSPCA and Faithful Friends had before and after pictures showing proof of the dogs starvation. Sen. Blevins noted that
Faithful Friends was able to save the dog. Sen. Peterson asked why the caretaker could not be charged, and Mr. Usilton
stated that the AGs office did not think the law was enforceable. He added that cases that are very important to the
animal welfare community are not as important to the judicial system, and many states now have judge education
programs to demonstrate why stopping animal cruelty is important, so that abuse does not escalate to a child or
another family member. Sen. Blevins noted that these were good observations and would be helpful in the Task Forces
recommendation.

Ms. Gryczon asked if there would be any consideration given to the original tethering bill, which included a night ban.
Sen. Blevins stated that it was not able to get passed in that form. She added that they were able to get a few specific
bans in the bill that would protect many young dogs and nursing mothers, and that ACOs would be able to educate
people on the new laws. She added that the bill was very difficult to be enacted. Ms. Gryczon and Ms. Pierantozzi
acknowledge that the bill was a great first step, but Ms. Gryczon wanted to know if there would be a bill in the upcoming
session to ban tethering at night. Sen. Blevins stated that she would not be opposed to someone introducing that
legislation.
Mr. Lippstone asked for clarification from Maj. Whipple if ACOs could inspect premises, but only enter the premises of a
residence if there is probable cause. Maj. Whipple stated that they would only enter a residence if they were invited,
and they would not otherwise do so without police present. They would go through the process of applying for a search
warrant, except for the case of exigent circumstances and they can see that the animal is near death. Mr. Lippstone
asked if Maj. Whipple was comfortable with his ACOs understanding of probable cause, and Maj. Whipple said that the
ACOs at KCSPCA have done training with the AGs office and on rules of evidence, but added that a refresher or
additional types of training would be welcomed.
Ms. Cavanaugh stated that the ACOs and SPCAs need to be more in touch with the Attorney Generals office in each
county, because she agrees that cruelty cases are continuously dropped, and even the strong cases are not a priority.
She added that the officers needed more search and seizure training.
Dr. Smith said that, as the chair of the Animal Law Committee on the Pennsylvania Bar Assocation, they have undertaken
judicial and prosecutorial education on these types of cases so that people in those positions understand that there is
often a link between animal cruelty and antisocial/psychopathic behavior against humans. Sen. Blevins asked if there
was a specific curriculum for this education, and Dr. Smith confirmed that there was a pilot curriculum in place which he
would be happy to share.
Sen. Peterson had some follow up questions for Maj. Whipple concerning his investigative authority. She asked if ACOs
have police powers, and Maj. Whipple stated that they can make an arrest under the cruelty statute, however, they ask
for the local police agency to assist with the arrest. Sen. Peterson indicated that she had reported a case of animal
cruelty, in which she and a number of other people witnessed the incident and she also took down the persons license
plate number. She was told that, upon the persons denial of committing the crime, the investigation ended. Maj.
Whipple stated that wasnt how investigations went, but noted that cases like that would be easier if the dog is
noticeably in pain or injured. However, he stated that the investigation should not have stopped after the person denied
injuring the animal.
Sen. Blevins asked if Sen. Peterson reported the incident to the police, and Sen. Peterson stated that when she called
the police, they stated that it wasnt their jurisdiction, and they stated that they had to call the SPCA, and she called the
DESPCA. The issue of dogs being locked in cars during extreme heat was also brought up, and both SPCAs stated that
they respond to those calls and, if the animal is in immediate danger, will remove the animal from the car. Maj. Whipple
noted that both Title 9 contract holders and SPCAs responding to animal cruelty could handle dogs locked in cars.
Sen. Peterson mentioned a concern about the Attorney Generals office and their willingness to take animal cruelty
cases to trial. Maj. Whipple stated that some DAGs do try, especially for the egregious cases. An issue that often occurs
is that it is never definite what DAG will be appearing in court. Sen. Peterson brought up the idea of a DAG having a
specific assignment to animal cruelty cases, and added that the DAG could possibly be full time, so as to have more
ability to prosecute more cases.
Ms. Cavanaugh said another important component of animal cruelty cases were veterinarians that the prosecutors
needed to go to court to testify on their findings to prove suffering. She stated that they have had a lot of difficulty
3

finding veterinarians who are willing to go to court, as the Court will not accept written testimony. Dr. Smith stated that
it was a national problem.
Dr. Dawkins said that veterinarians receive subpoenas all the time, however, when the veterinarian does show up to
testify, the court date has been changed or a plea agreement has been arranged, or the case has been dropped. This is
frustrating for them, because they are losing money at their business.
Sen. Blevins asked to backtrack to Sen. Petersons statement about the police not having jurisdiction over animal cruelty,
and asked the NCC police officer, Lt. Feeser, for clarification on this issue. Lt. Feeser stated that NCC officers normally
refer those calls to the SPCA because NCCPD are not as well trained as the ACOs. She also noted that they have a
contract with the SPCA to handle those complaints, but will assist them if necessary. Sen. Peterson asked if the NCC
police dispatchers were aware of the fact that their police can assist, saying that it was definitely imminent danger and
in a scenario she had witnessed, the dog was nearly dead. Lt. Feeser said that if the dog is that much danger, they would
respond, and Sen. Peterson noted that didnt happen.
Ms. Pierantozzi asked Mr. Usilton if KCSPCAs contract with New Castle County included funding for animal cruelty, and
he indicated that it did not. Mr. Usilton stated that there are some funds in their new contract with Sussex County to
help with their cruelty responsibilities. He added that there are limited officers to cover a very large span across the
County, and the demand is very high (between 5,000-6,000 calls/year) for animal control and cruelty services. He stated
that only dog control was funded but that residents want animal control.
Sen. Blevins stated that there was a basic misunderstanding, as the police agencies believed there is a contract for
animal cruelty, and there isnt, and for the police to not respond to animal cruelty cases was wrong.
Maj. Whipple stated that he has experienced police officers from different forces enforcing Title 11. Ms. Pierantozzi
noted that the SPCAs provide animal cruelty services but that it wasnt funded and there is generally not enough
support.
Sen. Blevins asked Maj. Whipple to give a description of the kind of training KCSPCA requires for their ACOs. Maj.
Whipple noted that there was no ACO specific training from the state, and that they reach out to national training
programs from organizations like HSUS and ASPCA for training, and they also try to attend Delaware State Police
Academy trainings. They also have DELJIS certifications by the State, as well as tactical baton and pepper spray
certifications. They have also taken ethics and report writing classes. The typical length of training was about 3 months
for ACOs at KCSPCA, 2-3 weeks of a classroom environment, and 1.5-2 months of riding along with trained ACO. Sen.
Blevins asked if they had a lot of turnover, and Maj. Whipple said this year, there has been some, but overall not much.
Ms. Brown clarified that the training Maj. Whipple described was KCSCPAs own training program, not training
mandated by the state, so training could be different depending on the officer or organization. Maj. Whipple added that
a lot of the issue is getting funding to attend more training programs, and many of the trainings arent local.
Mr. Petit de Mange said that there was currently confusion over who is handling complaints. He asked if it was
mandated in the code that the SPCAs must respond to animal cruelty complaints. He brought up a scenario where there
was a complaint about a tethered dog, and there was confusion about who should respond. Ms. Gryczon stated that
they cannot enforce animal cruelty statue, and Maj. Whipple said that there was confusion in the code as Title 9 and
Title 11 overlap, and both titles have a tethering statute.
Ms. Gryczon stated that they still dont have an answer as to whether Title 9 just applied to kennels, licensed kennels,
breeding kennels, or whether it also applies to private residences. Mr. Petit de Mange alluded to a situation where a dog
was on a tether all day in extreme heat without water, and the complaint was bounced around. Mr. Usilton stated that
the dog was saved, but in New Castle County and Sussex County, the residents know who to call, but because of the Safe
4

Haven contract, KCSPCA is no longer the first responder. They are only responsible to handle cruelty. Mr. Usilton felt
that many dogs suffered this past summer as a result of the dissolution of the contract.
Ms. Brown noted that a situation where a dog does not have water is a violation of Title 9. Ms. Cavanaugh stated that
KCSCPA has always handled Title 9 and while they can handle Title 11, DESPCA also does Title 11. She stated that
housing, food, water is all Title 9. Sen. Blevins stated that then the responsibility would be Safe Havens.
Mr. Lippstone acknowledged that there was some overlap in different sections of code, so he understood the confusion
about who has the requirement to respond. Ms. Cavanaugh stated that, in general, if a police agency gets a call about an
animal with four legs, the call immediately goes to an SPCA. Mr. Lippstone added that it was interesting to him that a
police agency would think that they did not have jurisdiction over animal cruelty, as the animal cruelty resides in the
criminal code. Lt. Feeser stated that it wasnt that New Castle County Police didnt think they had jurisdiction, but they
referred the cases to the SPCAs because they have more expertise in handling those types of calls. Ms. Brown noted that
this was a typical response in most states, because SPCAs animal control officers have the necessary equipment and
better training to handle situations with animals. Ms. Cavanaugh added that police are given many more resources than
SPCAs, and SPCAs simply cant respond 24/7 without funding.
Amy Nicholson, a cruelty investigator with DESPCA from Sussex County, stated that she only did cruelty investigations,
not animal control, and that she was the only cruelty investigator for Sussex County, so the distribution of manpower
was difficult. She said in Sussex County, she receives police support whenever necessary, but that the police dont have
the resources to handle animal complaints on their own. Dr. Smith asked Ms. Nicholson how many cruelty investigations
she handled per year; Ms. Cavanaugh stated that Ms. Nicholson works on 30-40 cases per month. Mr. Usilton added that
KCSPCA did 111 cruelty investigations in 2012 in Sussex County, 159 in Kent County, and 180 in New Castle County.
Sen. Peterson wanted to clarify that the 5,000-6,000 calls per year/county the KCSPCA received were for all types of
animal complaints. Mr. Usilton stated that those calls were solely regarding KCSPCAs Title 9 contracts, not cruelty calls.
Sen. Blevins asked Ms. Cavanaugh how many cruelty officers DESPCA had in New Castle County, and Ms. Cavanaugh
stated that there was one in New Castle County, but that they did have 2 animal control officers in the City of
Wilmington; the officers in the City of Wilmington also do cruelty investigations, but mainly inside the City. Ms.
Cavanaugh said that there really wasnt a great program for training for officers, and that DESPCAs officers had a
combination of different levels of training, similar to KCSPCAs training methods. In general, the officers have National
Animal Control officer training. She added that additional criminal/court procedure training would be helpful.
Ms. Gryczon deferred to Mr. Gary Kennett, Safe Havens dog control team supervisor, to discuss their operation and
training. Mr. Kennett stated that there were 5 officers whom he oversaw, and the typical calls they respond to include
strays, dogs running at large, dangerous dogs, etc. He stated that they are usually the first responders on the scene for
an animal cruelty case, where they will access the scene and determine if it is cruelty or not; he added that he struggles
with the distinction between animal cruelty and control. He described scenarios where he isnt sure if some housing and
water requirements should be classified as cruel and unusual. Sen. Blevins noted that Title 9 does have provisions in
the code regarding housing and water requirements, and asked what their officers did when they arrived at the home to
investigate a complaint. Ms. Gryczon stated that they are unsure if their jurisdiction for animal cruelty pertains only to
licensed kennels or to private homes as well, and that they were still waiting for an answer from the AGs office
clarifying that. Mr. Petit de Mange reiterated his point that cruelty was in Title 11, and control is in Title 9. Mr. Petit de
Mange wanted to recommend that all of the laws are placed in one section of the code. Ms. Cavanaugh stated that the
Title 9 piece was not just about private kennels, but about private homes as well.
Sen. Blevins asked what power Safe Haven has, since they have the contract for animal control in Kent County, to
investigate animal control complaints. Mr. Kennett stated that he tries to educate the owner. Sen. Blevins further asked
what Safe Haven officers do if the owner is non-cooperative, and Mr. Kennett said that he was unsure how to pursue
5

further action. Sen. Blevins then asked Ms. Cavanaugh what DESPCAs remedy would be for that situation, and Ms.
Cavanaugh stated that they could be cited for violating certain animal care requirements in Title 9. Sen. Blevins asked if
an agency which does not have cruelty authority can still issue citations for Title 9 infractions, and Mr. Usilton said that
they must be DELJIS certified to issue the citation themselves. Ms. Gryczon stated that they were still waiting for an
answer from the Attorney Generals office as to if they have the authority to do that with private homes, in addition to
private licensed kennels. Ms. Cavanaugh stated that Title 9 enforcement is being carried out in New Castle County with
private homes.
Mr. Kennett asked who had the authority to interpret these sections of the code to determine who has authority, and
Maj. Whipple stated that there was case law that has already been through the court system regarding citations and
other issues which clarify that certain things are enforceable. Ms. Cavanaugh added that the husbandry part of the code
has always been interpreted to apply to, not just kennels, but individuals as well.
Ms. Brown asked what kind of training programs were in place for the Safe Haven officers. Ms. Gryczon stated that they
receive some training from the police, and also had a national expert on dog control come to Delaware when they
started the contract and provide several days of training on the road and at their facility.
Mr. Usilton stated that part of the problem was that, if Safe Haven is not issuing citations for violations at private homes,
it may then escalate to a cruelty issue, in which case KCSCPA should be called and be informed if something they have
investigated is cruelty. Sen. Blevins asked if that had been happening; Mr. Usilton said that it had not, and Ms. Gryzon
said that there had been a few times. Maj. Whipple said that from time to time it does happen.
Mr. Kennett stated that he was aware of a law in New Castle County that disallowed a puppy to be purchased before a
certain age and that in Kent County he has seen puppies being purchased at 4 weeks. Ms. Cavanaugh clarified that it was
a State law that a puppy must be 8 weeks old before it can be taken from the mother, and Mr. Kennett said that he
wasnt sure that it was enforceable in Kent County.
Ms. Cavanaugh stated that the lack of enforcement of Title 9 at private homes in Sussex County was a big issue, because
if KCSPCA decided to not go to private homes in New Castle County and Sussex County and named every case a cruelty
case, that would mean that DESPCA with 1 officer and no funding would be going to all of the private homes when
KCSPCA is getting funds to do this work. Ms. Pierantozzi asked if either Sen. Blevins or Sen. Peterson could ask the
Attorney Generals office for their answer regarding the question of private home enforcement. Sen. Blevins indicated
that they could do that, and Sen. Peterson asked who advised Safe Haven to wait for an AG opinion, and it was
determined that Kent County Levy Court wanted to wait for clarification because their attorney did not see the housing
issue as part of the Countys responsibility. Sen. Peterson asked for clarification on whether the County didnt know if
they had authority or didnt know if it was part of obligation of the contract. Mr. Petit de Mange stated that they did not
want to cross into someone elses jurisdiction.
Sen. Blevins then stated that it seemed there was some question or confusion in Kent County over who should enforce
Title 9. Mr. Petit de Mange stated that Kent County believes it is meeting its obligation with regards to Title 9, and Title
11 should kick in regarding other complaints. Ms. Gryczon added that Safe Haven also does kennel inspections of
licensed kennels.
Dr. Smith asked for some clarification about what kind of animals Maj. Whipple responds to in his jurisdiction. Maj.
Whipple stated that they are contracted to handle dogs, but they can respond to other calls about other animals. Mr.
Usilton stated that the contracts KCSPCA has with the Counties are specifically for dog control, but the public has been
used to receiving animal control, including cats. Either KCSPCA or DESPCA can respond for cruelty, and Ms. Cavanaugh
stated that DESPCA responds mostly for cruelty to cats.

Ms. Pierantozzi asked if there was any fine that could be given to those people who are charged but not prosecuted with
animal cruelty. Maj. Whipple said that it was a misdemeanor charge and would have to go through the court system. He
also added that, with respect to the court system, KCSCPA uses the Countys dog running at large code, not the States
code, as the fine is higher and may deter a person from allowing their dog to run loose again; since then, their repeat
offenders on dogs running loose have dropped. Regarding cruelty, Maj. Whipple added that they prosecute for cruelty
and a person can be found guilty, and they are not permitted to own an animal again; however, often times that person
gets another animal, is brought to court again, but they only receive a fine. One of the SPCAs then has to house the
animal, and while they send the owner of the animal a bill for the stay and care of the animal, payment is rarely made.
Dr. Smith asked Sen. Blevins if a recommendation could be made for stiffer penalties and higher fines, or increasing the
offenses from misdemeanors to felonies. Sen. Blevins indicated that was a recommendation that the Task Force could
make. Ms. Brown asked Maj. Whipple if that would serve as a deterrent, and Maj. Whipple said it could, but another
problem was that judges often tell people to go to court for the charges instead of paying the fine.
Dr. Hughes said it seemed that in between the intersection between husbandry and cruelty, there seemed to be many
more cases than are being brought to the surface. She said that the man power for investigating these issues is lacking
and needs to be addressed, but didnt know how to compile the statistics proving that. Maj. Whipple indicated that they
could provide a print out of every citation they have issued through DELJIS in the past 6 years at least. Mr. Usilton stated
that, if the officer has a record of their criminal history with respect to animal citations, it gives the officer a better
understanding of the history of what is occurring within the household.
Mr. Usilton said that with respect to animal control hours, they were reducing the hours in which they provided service
in Sussex County. He added that in New Castle County, KCSPCA responds from 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Ms. Gryczon
stated that Safe Haven is available 24 hours a day/7 days a week for dog control. Sen. Blevins asked if that was at the
facility or on-call, and Ms. Gryczon said that it was mostly on call.
Sen. Blevins observed that it was all around a funding problem, and that ideally, to get the quick response to all of the
calls being discussed, it would require funds. Mr. Usilton added that having a centralized dispatch and creating a state
agency animal control which may or may not contract to private shelters would help.
Sen. Blevins asked Ms. Brown if this was a similar model that was used in New Jersey. Ms. Brown indicated that it was,
and referred Task Force members to a sheet in their packets describing the New Jersey model in more detail. The main
points Ms. Brown highlighted were

Each municipality must provide animal control services and officers to provide those services
If they do not, the state has the authority to establish an animal control contract with an animal welfare
organization (i.e. SPCA).
Oversight of Animal Control Officers
The Department of Health and Social Services contains an Office of Animal Welfare. This office oversees all
animal control services.
Health Officers (locally or regionally) oversee Animal Control Officers (in each municipality)
A Citizen Review Board, comprised of interested citizens and experts, review and participate in discussions on
complaints regarding animal control services. They receive complaints, examine the complaints and make
recommendations to local governments concerning animal control and impoundment issues.
Animal Control Officer Requirements and Authority
Standardized training and certification is required for all ACOs (government or contracted). There are also
minimum job requirements including a minimum high school education, relevant experience, good health, good
7

moral character, etc. Training programs include basic law enforcement training and third-party training specific
to animal welfare law enforcement duties. Training is funded by the state.
ACOs are authorized to initiate investigations, respond to calls, sign complaints concerning any violation of a
state animal control/cruelty laws, and direct that an arrest be effectuated under police authority for a violation
of animal protection law.
ACOs are not authorized to affect arrests or carry firearms. They are allowed to carry non-lethal animal control
devices after completing annual training (i.e. hazing devices, sprays, etc.)
Animal Cruelty Investigation:
Persons with responsibilities for animal cruelty response: Municipal police officers, county Sheriffs officers, state police,
Animal Control Officers (contracted or government) and Animal Cruelty Investigators. Animal Cruelty Investigators (nongovernment) require training and certification, similar to ACOs but specialized for animal cruelty.
Sheriffs Office Responsibilities
County Sheriffs Office provides systematic coordination and tracking
Responsible for tracking, reviewing and enforcing all applicable animal cruelty complaints
Coordinating animal cruelty complaint response with other law enforcement officers providing this service.
ACOs and ACIs are required to report animal cruelty investigation activities to Sherriffs office.
Ms. Pierantozzi asked more about the Health Officers, and Ms. Brown stated that she did not know their exact
credentials or training.
Sen. Blevins asked if there were any additional questions or comments about animal control and training. Ms. Gryczon
asked if Sen. Blevins thought that enforcing animal cruelty would be more palpable in terms of funding if cruelty was
more closely linked with the State Police. Sen. Blevins said she did not know if that would make a difference or not. Sen.
Peterson indicated that it would make animal control more uniform, so that it would be easier to monitor, and she
stated that the New Jersey model looked like a great model. She added that including the veterinarian piece regarding
cooperation in testifying on animal cruelty cases in court would be beneficial. Ms. Brown said that she could inquiry
about veterinary involvement and what their processes are like regarding cruelty testimony.
Ms. Gryczon was concerned about what the kill rate was for cats in pounds in New Jersey.
Sen. Peterson asked if the veterinarian testifying in court had to be the veterinarian who treated the animal. The group
indicated that it should be the treating veterinarian. Sen. Blevins asked if having the records would be sufficient in
proving cruelty, and Ms. Cavanaugh stated that, though they have tried several times, under Delaware law, the treating
veterinarian needs to be present and a written statement would not be admissible. Dr. Dawkins stated that it is the
treating veterinarian who must testify.
Sen. Blevins asked for clarification on which Court handled these cases; Ms. Cavanaugh said that it was mostly Court of
Common Pleas, and Maj. Whipple stated that it was either CCP or Superior Court, depending on felony or misdemeanor
charges. It was determined that the constant changing and/or cancellation of court dates with little notice happens
more often in the Court of Common Pleas.
4. Task Forces concerns/questions regarding animal control officers and animal cruelty and 5. What should the Task
Force recommend for Delaware
Sen. Blevins moved to the fourth item on the agenda, which was a list of questions and concerns regarding animal
control that had been brought forth at the meeting in September.
8

Mr. Usilton added that he felt oversight of animal control officers should be performed by the non-profit organizations
Board of Directors which employs them.
Mr. Petit de Mange said that there should be some inspection authority to enforce standards who can investigate
complaints. Sen. Blevins indicated that authority would be contingent upon if there was some sort of state certification
for animal control officers complaints could be reviewed similar to other license-required professions. She stated that
one of the groups recommendations would be some sort of standardized statewide training and certification for animal
control and cruelty officers. Sen. Blevins added that this could be discussed more in depth at the meeting designated for
consolidation and coordination of services.
Ms. Cavanaugh wanted to emphasize the importance of officer safety, as they face very dangerous situations in animal
control and are not permitted to carry firearms. This should be kept in mind with whatever training and standards are
established. Lt. Feeser added that, if KCSPCA requires New Castle County police assistance, they accompany them no
matter what.
The next meeting was then addressed, the topic of the meeting being Cats. Dr. Dawkins suggested that a
representative for the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control attend the meeting, with respect to
feral cats. Sen. Blevins asked what role DNREC would play in attending the meeting, and Dr. Dawkins stated that they
could discuss the effect of feral cats on natural resources and wildlife. Ms. Gryczon then suggested having a national nokill cat representative attend, and Ms. Gallagher suggested having a representative from Ally Cat Allies. Sen. Blevins
asked if Dr. Dawkins was suggested having a representative come that was in opposition to feral cat programs, and Dr.
Dawkins stated that he wanted to have both sides of the argument of TNR present. Sen. Blevins stated that she hoped
people werent suggesting Trap Neuter Kill.
6. Public Comment
Phyllis Frank described concerns she had with the way animal control officers from DESPCA and KCSPCA handled a
situation with her neighbors dog, BoBo, after she had called to inform them that the dog was starving and injured. They
delayed in taking the dog from the premises. Bobo ended up being euthanized for bites of unknown origin. Ms. Frank
wondered why one of the animal control officers didnt call for police assistance. She noted that the owner had not been
charged with animal cruelty. She noted that she was told there was also another dog in the house that could have had
rabies. She suggested that there should be better training for animal control officers.
Sherene Lindo stated that she was harassed by her neighbor, who constantly called animal control to have them remove
her dogs. Two of her dogs were killed by suspicious circumstances. One of her dogs was taken from her, though the dog
was not found loose. She was told that the dog was identified as a dog that had chased someone on a riding
lawnmower. She was told that her dog was being held for the Dangerous Dog Panel, and that the dog would be found
dangerous. She was not informed that she had to request a hearing before the Panel. She did not sign papers indicating
her dogs were dangerous. She was issued a warrant for arrest for having dogs running at large, even though her dog was
never found loose. She ended up getting her dog back, but spent over $3,000 to prove she secures her dogs properly.
She said there must be checks and balances in animal control, and officers need to be properly trained and supervisors.
Carol Furr wanted the Task Force to know about the negative behaviors of one of the members of the Task Force. She
stated that, at the public hearing that was held in Dover, the bashing of Safe Haven was planned by Mr. Usilton.
Marleen Oetzel stated that she attended the public hearing, and she stated that she wanted to know if the legislators
and members of the Task Force would be investigating the situation at Safe Haven in light of testimony heard at the
public hearing. She felt there was a double standard where shelters were concerned regarding kill vs. no kill shelters.
9

Cathy Samardza noted that she also attended the public hearing, and there are numerous complaints about varying
shelters. Any laws that apply to one shelter should apply to another. Ms. Samardza stated that, at the last meeting, the
Task Force was told that animals have a 24 hour hold period in Philadelphia. Ms. Samardza contacted Philadelphia and
was told, in writing, that there is a 48 hour hold period. She stated that if individuals cant be honest in the Task Force,
they should not be at the table.
Sherri Warburton stated that she was thankful that the Task Force was addressing the issue of Animal Control Officers.
She is a former ACO for KCSPCA, and is now a state trained probation and parole officer. She wanted to emphasize the
importance to have a state animal control office so there is uniformity in policies and one consistent agency. Ms.
Warburton also stated that the ACOs deal with very dangerous situations and are often alone and unarmed.
Doug Beatty stated that he thinks that animal control officers should be employees of the state and should be separated
from shelters. He stated that an ACO wearing a badge is operating under the color of the law, and should stick to the
scope of their legal abilities. Mr. Beatty added that ACOs should be armed because their lives are in danger when the
project police power.
Lynn Lofthouse said that she felt some of the questions being discussed had already been answered during a Task Force
held by Jane Brady. She stated that the definition of a shelter had been made more specific in the code as needing to be
three sided. Ms. Lofthouse added that there should be no question of whether animal abuse relates to people abuse, it
is. Ms. Lofthouse stated that Jane Brady answered this question during her Task Force as well.
Donna Watson stated that she agreed with the consistency in services. She didnt understand why Kent County Levy
Court would give jurisdiction over dog control to an organization that didnt have control over every aspect of Title 9 and
Title 11 and all animals. She heard two animal control officers bashed during the public comment, and she thinks that is
very unfair because they couldnt defend themselves.
Gary Frank countered Ms. Watsons statement and stated that what was said about the animal control officer was not
bashing, it was fact. He added that animal control officers need to utilize the police forces as back-up in order to more
properly doing their job.
7. Adjournment
There being no further business of the Task Force, a motion was made to adjourn. There being no objection, the motion
was adopted, and the meeting was adjourned at 4:11 p.m.

10