http://paloaltoonline.com/square/print/index.php?i=3&d=&t=1906


Town Square

Animal cruelty charges against goat owners

Original post made on Aug 7, 2007

The discovery of a corral of emaciated goats along Alpine Road on undeveloped land owned by Stanford University in Portola Valley has led the Peninsula Humane Society to seek animal-cruelty charges against the goats' owners.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Saturday, September 2, 2006, 5:19 AM

Comments

Posted by Mike, a resident of another community
on Aug 7, 2007 at 1:16 pm

Scott Kulenguskey and Joy Richardsson are currently living in
Shamokin, Pennsylvania 17872 at 609 E Independence Street

I know this because they have done damage to my vehicle and are driving with no vehicle insurance at the time. I will also be after money owed me from a judgement against them.


Posted by John, a resident of College Terrace
on Aug 7, 2007 at 1:32 pm

When goats are used to clear weeds, instead of Round-Up (a herbicide), do government officials demand a background check on the methods used, as they do with herbicides? Are site checks made to insure humane treatment? Are the goat owners required to have liability insurance? Are the owners licensed? Are the level of flies monitored? Are the animials monitored for disease? Is there a vet on call?

If all the appropriate costs were factored into the equation, I suspect it would much cheaper to do mechanical mowing or use Round-Up.

Remarkably, there were some people that actually suggested that goats be used to clear some weeds at Gunn HS, instead of Round-Up.


Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of Midtown
on Aug 7, 2007 at 5:19 pm

I was curious about this because my brother's goat lady told me about people starving goats so they would eat weeds. I am pleased that the City of Palo Alto assures that goats are cared for, receive dietary supplements and vet attention.


Posted by BoeZoe, a resident of another community
on Jan 25, 2009 at 6:23 am

Sounds to me that local government and University Administrators are more likely to blame. When an RFP goes out, all the particulars for humane care should be spelled out up front with penalties for failure. Why do these organizations have an attorney or a team of lawyers on staff or under retainer to review and approve such contractual obligations if they: fail to do so, don not correct deficiencies, or amend the contracts to include proper protections? Incidents such as these can and should be prevented; however, I don't think the method should be totally condemned due to a few "bad operators".