Published: October 08, 2008 12:11 am         

Citizen wants cooperation from humane society

Garrett County group says it is following Maryland law

OAKLAND — Under Maryland law, the Garrett County Humane Society is the only group authorized to check on and seize animals in the county, and there are residents who feel that the group needs to cooperate more with the community.

“We do need the humane society,” Kermit Yoder of Accident said, “but some people feel they’ve crossed the line.”

Yoder said he felt the laws that allow the humane society the right to investigate and seize animals are not stated clearly. He questioned the county commissioners at their meeting Tuesday how difficult it would be to change portions of those laws or set more distinct guidelines.

Mercedes Pellet, humane society member, said the state criminal law gives the humane society’s authorized members the right to check on and possibly remove an animal. Currently, issues with Maryland law prevent the county’s animal control from having the same authority.

Lisa Baker, president of the humane society, said the main items they look for are the health of the animal and whether it has the basic necessities like food, water and shelter. She added they only go to check on an animal if they have received a complaint.

Baker said while the group does not have the right to enter a person’s home, members can go onto personal property to check on an animal.

Because it is a Maryland law, the commissioners said any changes would have to be made through specific recommendations to the state legislature.

Baker said in the case of agricultural animals, they are required to have a veterinarian inspect the animal before it is removed from the property, and they have a regular veterinarian whom they pay for his time.

There was concern from the public whether the animal’s owner would be able to get a second opinion from his own veterinarian.

Caroline Robison, member of the humane society, said a secondary recommendation would be possible and the humane society could cooperate with that.

When it was suggested the humane society also pay for this second opinion, Robison said that would not be possible.

“There’s a responsibility if you’re the owner,” Robison said. “If your animal is in medical need, then it’s your responsibility to respond to that medical need.”

Denny Glotfelty, commission chairman, suggested the group of concerned citizens and members of the humane society try to work together. He said that it might be worthwhile for someone to act as a liaison for local farmers to speak with the volunteer organization about concerns and to eliminate hearsay about what the society does and does not do as part of its regular practices.

Beyond that, he said the commissioners were merely acting as mediators at the meeting.

“Common sense is the best law we have,” Glotfelty said. “I think open communication would help.”

Sarah Moses can be reached at Contact Sarah Moses at smoses@times-news.com.