Chapter 6-1: Animals¹

6-1-1 Legislative Intent and Purpose.

(a) The purpose of this chapter is to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the city by prescribing the types of animals that can be kept in the city and the conditions under which they can be kept, limitations on keeping animals that create a nuisance by being safety or health hazards, and the procedures by which the city manager or an authorized agent may impound and dispose of animals kept in violation of the chapter.

(b) The city council intends to protect persons and property in the city from animals running at large and to abrogate the requirements of the Colorado fence law.²

(c) Notwithstanding the use of words such as "guardian," "keeper," "owner" or "title" in this chapter, the city council intends to reflect the common law view that the property rights of owners in their animals are qualified by the city's exercise of its police power over such animals, and that summary impoundments and dispositions of animals are two such qualifications of such rights.³

(d) Further purposes of this chapter are to:

(1) Protect unique elements of the local environment;

(2) Protect bio-diversity and overall health of natural ecosystems within this community;

(3) Recognize the important contribution of wildlife to the local environment;

(4) Advance local community values by encouraging humane means of wildlife control;

(5) Avoid collateral harm to wildlife that is protected under state, federal and local law;

(6) Manage conflicts between wildlife and human land uses;

(7) Foster preservation of animal and bird species native to the local community; and

(8) Legislate in a manner that satisfies important issues of local concern while also being consistent with applicable state and federal regulations.

(e) The following priorities shall guide the city's policies and regulations with regard to the interface between people and wildlife:

(1) Efforts should be made to minimize conflicts between human beings and wildlife;

(2) When unsustainable conflicts between wildlife and human beings exist on a particular property, efforts should be made, where appropriate, to maintain wildlife on portions of such property in order to minimize such conflicts;

(3) Where resolution of conflicts between human uses and wildlife habitat cannot be achieved on a particular property, relocation alternatives should be explored and encouraged;

(4) Where relocation alternatives are not feasible, capture and transportation of wildlife for use in animal recovery pro-grams should be explored and encouraged;

(5) Where lethal control measures for wild-life are required, the use of live trapping and individual euthanization should be considered and encouraged in order to minimize suffering;

(6) When lethal control measures are employed, action should be taken to mitigate the negative community-wide impacts associated with the loss of local wildlife and wild-life habitat; and

(7) When lethal control measures are utilized, notice should be provided to the city manager so that habitat preservation and environmental impacts can be monitored.

(f) The city intends to exercise its legislative authority and power to require action in compliance with this chapter by landowners, residents, visitors, employers and employees pursuant to its local home rule authority. To the extent any landowner is a person permitted by the State of Colorado to use pesticides, this chapter shall not be construed to regulate that person's handling, mixing, loading, application, administration, control or disposal of a pesticide or its container, and shall be construed only to regulate land use and the management of wildlife on local land.

(g) The city council finds that the regulation of local wildlife, wildlife habitat and any conflicts between human land uses and local wildlife constitutes an area of valid local concern and regulation and is therefore subject to the valid exercise of the city's police power. The various provisions of this chapter bearing upon those subjects reflect an appropriate exercise of the city's police powers, except to the extent that any such provision may be contradicted and overridden by a control-ling provision of state law.

(h) The city council finds that the use of poison to control wildlife is having an adverse and cumulative effect upon the local environment, and upon the health and safety of human beings and local wildlife. Residents and visitors to the city are urged to avoid using poisons as a mechanism for wildlife control, especially when other less ecologically damaging control strategies are available.

(Ordinance Nos. 4935 (1985); 7321 (2005))

6-1-2 Definitions.

The following words and phrases used in this chapter have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:

"Guardian" means owner.

"Keeper" means a person who has custodial or supervisory authority or control over an animal.

"Landowner" means the owner or manager of land, or any other person who has control over the management of the land.

"Leash" means a chain, rope, cord, or strap with a clip or snap for rapid attachment to a choke chain, collar, or harness, all the parts of which are of sufficient strength to hold at least four times the weight of the dog and are suitable for walking the dog and controlling it.

"Leg-hold trap" means a spring-powered device or trap that captures or holds an animal by exerting a lateral force with fix-mounted steel or other metal jaws on the leg, toe, paw, or any other part of the animal's body.

"Lethal control" means methods of wildlife control that rely for their effectiveness upon the killing of individual animals or upon the extermination of groups of animals.

"Mall" has the meaning prescribed by section 5-1-1, "Definitions," B.R.C. 1981.

"Owner" means each person who owns an animal. If an animal has more than one owner, all such persons are jointly and severally liable for the acts or omissions of an animal owner under this chapter, even if the animal was in possession and control of a keeper at the time of an offense.

"Peace officer" has the meaning prescribed by section 5-1-1, "Definitions," B.R.C. 1981.

"Prairie dog burrow" means any burrow actually occupied by one or more prairie dogs and any burrow of which any en-trance is surrounded by a mound.

"Premises" of the guardian or keeper of an animal means only that property over which the guardian or keeper has full possession and control, and from which the guardian or keeper has the authority to exclude, and does exclude, the public.

(a) Private property which is fenced or otherwise enclosed so that dogs within it cannot escape, and which is set aside by the owner of the property for use as a dog exercise or play area, and through which persons who are authorized to use the property are not required to pass in order to get to their destination, shall be deemed the premises of any guardian or keeper who has the express permission of the owner of such area to use it with the dog for such purposes.

(b) Places which are not "premises of the guardian or keeper of an animal" within the meaning of this definition include, without limitation, the following:

(1) All public property; or

(2) On private property:

(A) Any common sidewalk or walkway, any common unenclosed yard, or any other common unenclosed exterior space;

(B) Any common parking facility (whether or not spaces are reserved); or

(D) For the purposes of this definition, "common" means any part of a residential condominium, townhouse development, apartment building, shopping center, business condominium, office building, business center, or industrial park which residents, owners, tenants, employees, customers, or visitors of more than one unit or space may use.

"Protected birds" includes any bird protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. sections 703-712. Protected birds do not include members of bird species listed in a United States treaty, law or Executive Order as an invasive species.

"Service animal" means any guide dog, signal dog, or other animal individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability, including but not limited to guiding individuals with impaired vision, alerting individuals with impaired hearing to sounds, pulling a wheelchair, or fetching dropped items.

"Unnecessary suffering" means suffering resulting from reckless or negligent practices causing avoidable lacerations, suffocation, broken bones, amputations or the infliction of pain on animals that could have been avoided by the use of reasonable, practical, and humane practices.

"Voice control" means control of the behavior of a dog which is not leashed or otherwise physically restrained by its guardian or keeper sufficient that the dog does not, without regard to circumstances or distractions:

(a) Charge, chase, or otherwise display aggression toward any person or behave toward any person in a manner that a reasonable person would find harassing or disturbing;

(b) Charge, chase or otherwise display aggression toward any dog;

(d) Fail to come to and stay with the guardian or keeper immediately upon command by such person;

and voice control does not exist unless the guardian or keeper exercises this command authority at all times to keep the dog within the requirements of this definition.

"Wild birds" means birds that are living in a state of nature and that are not tame or domesticated.

(Ordinance Nos. 5377 (1991); 5393 (1991); 5858 (1997); 7133 (2001); 7321 (2005))

6-1-3 Limitation on Keeping of Domesticated Animals.

(a) No person shall own or keep a domesticated cat over four months of age unless such cat is currently inoculated against rabies.

(b) No person shall own or keep any swine, hogs, or pigs.

(c) No person shall own or keep any horse, goat, sheep, cow, llama, burro, or other equine or bovine animal unless such person has a total lot area on the lot of one-half acre per animal plus its young under six months of age.

6-1-4 Limitation on Possession of Exotic Animals.

(a) No person shall own or keep any animal for which a state license is required⁴ unless such person possesses the appropriate license from the Colorado Division of Wildlife.

(b) No person shall place on public display, own, or keep any of the following animals:

(1) Ursids (e.g., bears);

(2) Felids other than ordinary domesticated house cats;

(3) Mustalids other than ferrets (e.g., skunks, weasels, otters or badgers);

(4) Venomous reptiles;

(5) Procyonides (e.g., raccoons or coatis);

(6) Elephants;

(7) Marine mammals (e.g., seals, sea lions, dolphins or sea otters);

(8) Hyenas;

(9) Edentates (e.g., anteaters, sloths, or armadillos);

(10) Viverrids (e.g., mongooses, civets, or genets);

(11) Canids, but not including ordinary domesticated dogs, wolves, or wolf hybrids;

(12) Marsupials (e.g., kangaroo or opossum);

(13) Ungulates (e.g., deer, hippopotamus, rhinoceros, giraffe, camel, zebra, but not including any domesticated species);

(14) Any species of non-human primate or prosimian (e.g., monkey or chimpanzee), but excluding animals imported under authority of state or federal law so long as they are not displayed; or

(15) Crocodilians (e.g., alligators and crocodiles).

(c) No person shall feed any wild animal. For the purposes of this subsection, to feed shall mean all provision of edible or drinkable material, including, without limitation:

(1) Bones;

(2) Salt licks; and

(3) Water.

(d) It is a specific defense to a charge of violating subsection (c) of this section that a person is feeding only wild squirrels or birds or fish.

(e) It is a specific defense to a charge of violating subsection (b) of this section that the person is a governmental agency or a non-profit corporation or an employee or agent of such agency or corporation acting within the course and scope of the employment or agency, and is displaying an animal prohibited from display under this chapter, lawfully in such entity's or person's custody without charge for educational purposes.

(f) It is a specific defense to a charge of violating subsection (b) of this section that the person holds a state wildlife rehabilitation license for the animal and is acting in accordance with the license.

(Ordinance Nos. 4884 (1985); 7133 (2001))

6-1-5 Animal Fighting Prohibited.

(a) No person shall cause, sponsor, arrange, hold, or encourage a fight between animals other than dogs⁵ for the purpose of monetary gain or entertainment.

(b) For the purposes of this section, a person encourages a fight between such animals if the person:

(1) Is knowingly present at such fight;

(2) Owns, trains, transports, possesses, or equips such an animal with the intent that the animal will be engaged in such a fight; or

(3) Knowingly allows such a fight to occur on any property owned or controlled by such person.

(Ordinance No. 4935 (1985))

6-1-6 Subjecting Animals to Unnecessary Suffering.

(a) No person shall:

(1) Overdrive, overload, drive when overloaded or overwork any animal;

(2) Cause unnecessary suffering to any animal or take actions likely to cause unnecessary suffering to any animal;

(3) Needlessly shoot at, wound, capture or in any other manner needlessly molest, injure or kill any animal;

(4) Keep any animal in a manner that causes the animal to endure unnecessary suffering; or

(5) Confine any animal in a vehicle in such a manner that it places the animal in a life or health threatening situation by exposure to heat or cold without sufficient protection from such heat or cold.

(b) It is specific defense to a charge of violating paragraph (a)(3) of this section, that the action was necessary to avoid injury to a person or that the animal was not a domesticated animal and the action was necessary to avoid injury to a person or property.

(c) This section shall not apply to injuries suffered by prairie dogs as a result of trapping or relocation practices. Regulation of such conduct will be pursuant to sections 6-1-11, "Limitation on Lethal Means of Control for Prairie Dogs and Birds," and 6-1-37, "Procedures Affecting the Relocation of Prairie Dogs," B.R.C. 1981.

(d) In order to protect the health and safety of an animal, an animal control officer, code enforcement officer, police officer or any other peace officer under this code who has probable cause to believe that paragraph (a)(5) of this section is being violated shall have the authority to enter such vehicle by any means reasonable under the circumstances and take custody of the animal pursuant to section 6-1-28, "Emergency Impoundment of Animal," B.R.C. 1981, or as otherwise may be provided in the code.

Ordinance Nos. 7321 (2005); 7595 (2008)

6-1-7 Improper Care of Animals Prohibited.

No person owning or keeping an animal shall fail to provide it with minimum care and to keep it under conditions under which its enclosure is not overcrowded, unclean, or unhealthy.

(a) An animal is deprived of minimum care if it is not provided with care sufficient to preserve the health and well-being of the animal considering the species, breed, and type of animal and, except for emergencies or circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the guardian, minimum care includes, but is not limited to, the following requirements:

(1) Food of sufficient quantity and quality to allow for normal growth or maintenance of body weight.

(2) Open or adequate access to potable water in sufficient quantity to satisfy the animal's needs. Snow or ice is not an adequate water source. Fowl shall at all times be provided receptacles kept constantly filled with clean water.

(3) In the case of pet or other domestic animals other than livestock or poultry, access to a barn, doghouse, or other enclosed structure sufficient to protect the animal from wind, rain, snow, or sun and which has adequate bedding to protect against cold and dampness.

(4) Veterinary care deemed necessary by a reasonably prudent person to relieve distress from injury, neglect, or disease.

(b) An enclosure is overcrowded unless its area is at least the square of the following sum for each animal confined therein: the sum of the length of the animal in inches (tip of nose to base of tail) plus six inches.

(d) An enclosure is unhealthy when it is likely to cause illness of the animal.

(Ordinance No. 5866 (1997))

6-1-8 Abandoning Animals Prohibited.

No person shall abandon any animal.

6-1-9 Use of Certain Traps Prohibited.

(a) No person shall use, set, place, maintain, or tend any leg-hold trap. The city manager shall confiscate any leg-hold trap found in violation of this subsection and dispose of it as the manager deems appropriate.

(b) No person shall use, set, place, maintain, or tend any mechanical trap which is designed or used to capture or kill any animal and does not require the presence of a human operator to so capture or kill. It is a specific defense to a charge of violating this subsection that the person had the express permission of the owner of the land on which the trap was set. This subsection does not apply to public officials in the exercise of their duties.

(Ordinance Nos. 4821 (1984); 7019 (2000))

6-1-10 Poisoning Domestic Animals Prohibited.

No person shall knowingly poison any domestic animal. It is a specific defense to this section that the person was the guardian of the animal or a veterinarian acting at the direction of the guardian or an employee of an animal shelter and the poison was administered directly to the animal to euthanize it.

6-1-11 Limitation on Lethal Means of Control for Prairie Dogs and Birds.

(a) Except as authorized by other provisions of this chapter, no person shall utilize lethal means of control for prairie dogs or wild birds or remove prairie dogs from the ground with the intent to kill them.

(b) It shall be an affirmative defense to a violation of this section that behaviors described in subsection (a) of this section:

(1) Were undertaken by a person who owns, or is responsible for operating, an airport facility or a person who acted at the direction of the owner of an airport facility, where such action is necessary in order to promote human safety or in order to comply with Federal Aviation Administration standards or regulations;

(2) Were undertaken by a person who owns or is responsible for operating a dam or other existing structure where structural integrity or safety is threatened by the activities of prairie dogs or birds;

(3) Resulted from public or utility-related projects conducted in conformity with management practices designed to minimize avoidable harm to animals located within an area containing prairie dog habitat;

(4) Were undertaken by a permitted academic investigator or by a city or state employee while in the process of bona fide research related to animal control or protection issues;

(5) Were required in order to resolve immediate and verified health or safety hazards pursuant to a permit issued in conformity with section 6-1-39, "Special Permit," B.R.C. 1981; or

(6) Were undertaken as part of an ongoing and continuous program approved and permitted by the city manager that was designed to prevent re-colonization of lands from which prairie dogs had previously been lawfully removed, but only where such program had been initiated immediately following the lawful removal.

(Ordinance Nos. 7133 (2001); 7321 (2005))

6-1-11.5 Causing Death of a Prairie Dog or Wild Bird for Humanitarian Reasons.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the following persons are authorized to cause the death of a prairie dog or wild bird for humanitarian reasons: Humane Society of Boulder Valley employees, veterinarians, Colorado Division of Wildlife employees, City Park Rangers, City Wildlife Managers, or persons permitted under state or federal law as wildlife rehabilitators.

(Ordinance No. 7321 (2005))

6-1-12 Damaging Prairie Dog Burrows Prohibited.

(a) Except as authorized by other provisions of this chapter, no person shall damage any prairie dog burrow.

(b) It shall be an affirmative defense to a violation of this section that:

(1) The burrow was uninhabited when it was damaged;

(2) A state permitted relocator had, within the twelve previous months, attempted to relocate all prairie dogs utilizing that burrow, whether or not all those prairie dogs were successfully captured and relocated;

(3) The burrow was damaged by a person who owned, or was responsible for operating, an airport facility or by a person who was acting at the direction of the owner of an airport facility and the activity that damaged the burrow was necessary in order to promote human safety or in order to com-ply with Federal Aviation Administration standards or regulations;

(4) The burrow was damaged in connection with temporary disturbances caused by public or utility-related projects where such activities were conducted in conformity with best management practices within an area containing prairie dog habitat;

(5) The burrow was damaged by a person who owned, or was responsible for operating, a dam or other existing structure where the structural integrity or the safety of the dam or structure was threatened by the burrow or by burrowing;

(6) The burrow was on the property of a single-family residence in which the person who destroyed the burrow, or authorized its destruction, was residing;

(7) Activities were undertaken by a permitted academic investigator or by a city or state employee while in the process of bona fide research related to animal control or protection issues;

(8) The burrow was damaged during the process of utilizing lethal means of control in conformity with the provisions of this chapter; or

(9) The burrow was damaged in connection with an ongoing and continuous program approved by the city manager that was designed to pre-vent re-colonization of lands from which prairie dogs had previously been lawfully removed, but only where such program had been initiated immediately following the lawful removal.

(c) If the manager has reason to believe that work pursuant to any permit or other approval will damage any prairie dog burrow not subject to the defenses set forth in this chapter, the manager shall deny the permit or approval or condition its exercise on lawful relocation of the animals. Appeal from such a denial or conditional approval shall be in accordance with the provisions for denials of such permits or approvals.

(Ordinance Nos. 7133 (2001); 7321 (2005))

6-1-12.5 Limitation on Lethal Means of Control for Prairie Dogs and Birds, and Requirement for Use of Humane Methods of Relocation for Prairie Dogs.

Repealed.

(Ordinance Nos. 7379 (2004); 7424 (2005))

6-1-13 Killing Wild Animals Prohibited.

No person shall knowingly kill any wild animal protected by federal or state constitution (e.g., article XVII, section 12(b) of the Colorado Constitution), law, or regulation. This prohibition shall not apply where the applicable state law makes such killing a felony. "Protected" in this section means those animals which may not be killed under applicable law, and also means killing animals in a time, place, or manner prohibited under such law, or by a person not authorized to do so.

6-1-14 Dyeing Fowl and Rabbits Prohibited; Selling Dogs, Cats, and Fowl Limited.

(a) No person shall dye or color live fowl, rabbits, or any other animals or have in possession, display, sell, or give away such dyed or colored animals.

(b) No person shall sell, offer for sale, or give away dogs or cats under eight weeks old or any other warm-blooded animals under the normal weaning period for the animal.

(c) No person shall sell, offer for sale, or give away any fowl under six weeks old. It is a specific defense to a charge of violating this subsection that the fowl are sold or given away in lots of ten or more for commercial, agricultural, or scientific purposes.

6-1-15 Animals Running at Large Prohibited.

(a) No person owning or keeping any animal in the city, except a dog or domestic cat, shall fail to prevent the animal from being off the premises of the guardian or keeper and beyond such person's supervision and control.

(b) The maximum penalty for a first or second conviction within two years, based on date of violation, is a fine of $500.00. For a third and each subsequent conviction, the general penalty provisions of section 5-2-4, "General Penalties," B.R.C. 1981, shall apply.

6-1-16 Dogs Running at Large Prohibited.

(a) No person owning or keeping any dog shall fail to keep the dog on the premises of the guardian or keeper unless the dog is:

(1) On a leash held by a person, or

(2) Within a vehicle or similarly physically confined and without access to passers-by.

(b) The maximum penalty for a first or second conviction within two years, based on date of violation, is a fine of $500.00. For a third and each subsequent conviction within two years based upon the date of the first violation, the general penalty provisions of section 5-2-4, "General Penalties," B.R.C. 1981, shall apply. The maximum penalty for a first conviction occurring on land owned by the city and constituting park land or open space land is a fine of $50.00. For a second conviction within two years, based upon the date of violation, the maximum penalty shall be a fine of $100.00. For a third and each subsequent conviction, the maximum penalty shall be a fine of not less than $200.00.

(1)(A) Outside of the corporate limits of the city; or

(B) Inside the city limits within any of the following areas on land owned by the city and constituting park land or open space land: The areas annexed by Ordinance Nos. 4166, 4167, 4177, 4178, 4179, 4180, 4181, 4182, 4183, 4184, and 4577; and also on the following portions of open space land lying along the North Foothills Trail, as that trail is shown on the city's most recent official trails map, which runs north from Lee Hill Road from approximately one mile west of Broadway and turns east to cross U.S. 36: the entire width between the trail fences from Lee Hill Road north and west along the eastern and northern boundary of the area annexed by Ordinance Nos. 4143 and 4163, and, at the end of the trail fencing, the area starting one hundred feet west of the trail and extending east across it to the eastern boundary fence of the land annexed by Ordinance Nos. 4143, 4147, 4163, and 4164, also including the area within one hundred feet northerly of the trail as it goes east toward its juncture with U.S. 36; and also the part of Heuston Park constituting roughly the eastern one-third of the park and lying west of the base of the slope north and west of the path along the north side of the ditch, as defined by signs and markers erected by the city manager delineating it as a voice (as defined in Section 6-1-2 "Definitions," B.R.C. 1981) and sight control area; and a parcel of land containing one hundred twenty acres, more or less, in Section 12, T1S R71W of the 6th P.M., as described in the deed recorded February 28, 1973 at reception number 055946, Boulder County records. Said parcel is commonly known as "NCAR Park" and lies north of Bear Creek, east of the North-South centerline of said Section 12, and west of the western boundary of the National Center for Atmospheric Research property; and a portion of the parcel commonly known as "Batchelder" described as: the E 1/2 the NE 1/4 of Section 1, T1S R71W of the 6th P.M. lying outside the boundary of Chautauqua Park. Said parcel is described in the deed recorded May 5, 1898 at Book 206 Page 24, Boulder County records along with a portion of the parcel commonly known as "Austin-Russell" described as the eastern portion of the W 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of Section 1, T1S R71W of the 6th P.M., described in the deed recorded April 21, 1903 at Book 270 Page 40, Boulder County records, located within the city limits of Boulder, Colorado; and a parcel of land located in the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 25, T1S R71W of the 6th P.M., as described in the deed re-corded October 11, 1995 at reception number 01554297, Boulder County records. Said parcel is commonly known as "Seventh Day Adventist" along with a parcel of land located in the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 25, T1S R71W of the 6th P.M., as described in the deed recorded March 9, 2001 at reception number 2126152, Boulder County records. Said parcel is commonly known as "Community Hospital" along with a portion of a parcel commonly known as "Boulder Memorial Hospital" described as that part of the N 1/2 of the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 25, T1S R71W of the 6th P.M., located N of County Road 52 (Sunshine Road) and including Lot 15, Block 11, Mount Sanitas Heights subdivision, as recorded in the Boulder County records; and Outlot D, Shanahan Ridge Six, a part of the NW 1/4 of Section 17, T1S R70W of the 6th P.M., as shown on plat recorded July 13, 1977 as Plan File P-6-F-1-21, at reception number 232114, film 969, Boulder County records; and a parcel of land located in the SE 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 36, T1N R71W of the 6th P.M., as described in the deed recorded September 13, 1990 at reception number 01063953, Boulder County records. Said parcel is commonly known as "St. Germain" along with a portion of a parcel commonly known as "Moore, Ann & Donald" described as: the northern portion of a parcel in the NE 1/4 of Section 36, T1N R71W of the 6th P.M., described in the deed recorded April 17, 1987 at reception number 00842349, Boulder County records, located within the city limits of Boulder, Colorado. Said parcel is referred to as "Parcel 8" along with a portion of a parcel commonly known as "Moore, Ann & Donald" described as: the eastern portion of a parcel located in the NE 1/4 of Section 36, T1N R71W of the 6th P.M., described in the deed recorded April 8, 1986 at reception number 00751339, Boulder County records, located within the city limits of Boulder, Colorado. Said parcel is referred to as "Parcel 7" along with a portion of a parcel commonly known as "Overlook" described as: the eastern portion of Tracts 437 and 438 as shown on the Boulder County Assessor parcel map for Section 36, T1N R71W of the 6th P.M., located within the city limits of Boulder, Colorado;

(2) In an area which had not been posted by the city manager to require a leash; and

(3) Accompanied by a guardian or keeper, provided that the dog is:

(A) Within voice and sight control of such person; and

(B) Visibly wearing a Voice and Sight Control Evidence Tag that has been lawfully obtained pursuant to chapter 6-13, "Voice and Sight Control Evidence Tags," B.R.C. 1981.

(4) The accompanying guardian or keeper had a leash in such person's immediate possession in a condition to be attached to the dog without undue delay; and

(5) This specific defense is not applicable if the accompanying guardian or keeper has more than two dogs simultaneously unleashed or unrestrained.

(Ordinance Nos. 4862 (1984); 4879 (1985); 5497 (1992); 5858 (1997); 5890 (1997); 5926 (1997); 5988 (1998); 7443 (2006))

6-1-17 Animals on Mall Prohibited.

(a) No person shall bring an animal onto the mall or possess an animal on the mall, regardless of whether the animal is on a leash or is confined. But a person with an animal may cross the mall in a northbound or southbound direction at 11th Street, Broadway, 13th Street, 14th Street, or 15th Street.

(b) It is a specific defense to a charge of violating this section that the person is blind or deaf or otherwise has a significant physical disability and the animal is a service animal specifically trained to aid the mobility of such person.

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a) of this section, an animal may be present on the mall in accordance with the terms of a permit issued under this subsection.

(1) Upon application in accordance with the procedure prescribed in section 4-11-19, "Application Procedures," B.R.C. 1981, the city manager may issue such a permit, not exceeding three days in length, if the manager finds that:

(A) The animal will be kept under control at all times so as not to endanger persons or property;

(B) The proposed activity of the animal will not unreasonably interfere with pedestrian movement on the mall nor with other permitted activities;

(C) Neither the animal nor any enclosure for it will physically damage the mall in a manner that cannot be immediately repaired by the permittee;

(D) The animal will be present on the mall only during the daylight hours;

(E) The animal will be provided with food, water, shade, and space in any enclosure in which it might be contained that are sufficient in light of the anticipated weather conditions and duration of the animal's appearance on the mall to assure the animal's welfare;

(F) The animal's appearance will occur in connection with a public special event or other event of community-wide interest;

(G) The applicant provides a certificate of public liability and public property damage insurance meeting the requirements of section 4-1-8, "Insurance Required," B.R.C. 1981;

(H) The applicant shall pay the permit fee prescribed by section 4-20-11, "Mall License and Permit Fees," B.R.C. 1981; and

(I) None of the grounds for denial of a license under section 4-1-9, "Authority to Deny Issuance of Licenses," B.R.C. 1981, exists.

(2) The city manager shall prescribe the form of the application and may require such information as is reasonably necessary to make the required findings. The manager may waive the insurance requirement of subparagraph (c)(1)(G) of this section if the manager finds that the animal would not present a risk of injury to persons or property. The manager shall place in the permit such restrictions on time, place, and manner as the manager finds are reasonably necessary to meet the requirements of this subsection and to protect the public interest, the welfare of the animal, and the physical integrity of the mall. Permittees are in any case restricted to operating within the terms of their own application.

(3) A permittee shall pay, and by its acceptance of a permit specifically agrees to pay, any and all damages or penalties that the city incurs itself or may be legally required to pay as a result of the presence of the permittee's animal on the mall, whether or not the acts or omissions complained of are authorized, allowed or prohibited by the city and including, without limitation, repair of physical damage to the mall.

(4) A permittee shall also pay all expenses incurred by the city in defending itself with regard to any and all damages and penalties mentioned in paragraph (c)(3) of this section. These expenses include all out-of-pocket expenses, including reasonable attorney's fees and the reasonable value of services rendered by any employee of the city.

(5) A permittee shall comply with all applicable health and sanitation laws and regulations of the city, county, and state, and further shall meet at least the following specific sanitation conditions:

(A) The permittee immediately removes any excrement that falls on the mall at the permittee's expense; and

(B) All animal waste for disposal is promptly transported to sites or facilities legally empowered to accept it for treatment or disposal.

(6) A permit may be revoked by the city manager for a breach of any of its conditions under the procedure prescribed by section 4-1-10, "Revocation of Licenses," B.R.C. 1981.

(7) A person wishing to use any of the following very small birds: dove, love bird, cockatiel, conure, parakeet, or finch, as part of an entertainment act on the mall may obtain a permit to do so under this subsection without having to comply with subparagraphs (c)(1)(D), (c)(1)(F), and (c)(1)(H) of this section. A permit issued under this paragraph shall be on a calendar-year basis. The city manager is authorized to designate, by regulation, additional species of very small animals whose guardians may be issued a permit under this paragraph if the manager determines that the likelihood of such animals causing injury or annoyance to persons, damage to property, or interruption of the mall's function as a primarily pedestrian place is, in the manager's reasonable opinion, insignificant, but such a regulation may not designate dogs, cats, any animal for which a state license from the Colorado Division of Wildlife or a federal license from the United States government is required, or any wild or exotic animal prohibited by section 6-1-4, "Limitation on Possession of Exotic Animals," B.R.C. 1981.

(d) The maximum penalty for a first or second conviction within two years, based on date of violation, is a fine of $500.00. For a third and each subsequent conviction, the general penalty provisions of section 5-2-4, "General Penalties," B.R.C. 1981, shall apply.

(Ordinance Nos. 5313 (1990); 5913 (1997); 7133 (2001))

6-1-18 Removal of Animal Excrement Required.

(a) No person owning or keeping any animal shall fail to prevent such animal from defecating upon any property other than the premises of the guardian or keeper.

(b) It is a specific defense to a charge of violating this section that the defecation occurred on private property with express permission of the owner or all tenants thereof.

(c) It is a specific defense to a charge of violating this section that the defecation was from an ungulate or camelid within any park, recreation area, or open space.

(d) It is a specific defense to a charge of violating this section that the guardian or keeper immediately removed or cleaned up such deposit and disposed thereof by depositing it in a toilet or a receptacle ordinarily used for garbage and covered by a lid or in an otherwise lawful and sanitary manner.

(e) The maximum penalty for a first conviction is a fine of $500.00. For a second conviction within three years, based upon date of violation, the maximum penalty shall be a fine of $500.00, with the municipal court strongly urged to impose community service hours cleaning up dog waste in public areas as a condition of a suspended sentence or probation pursuant to paragraph 2-6-37(f)(4), B.R.C. 1981, where appropriate in the judgment of the court. For a third and each subsequent conviction within three years, based upon the date of the first violation, the general penalty provisions of section 5-2-4, "General Penalties," B.R.C. 1981, shall apply.

(Ordinance Nos. 5858 (1997); 7102 (2000); 7443 (2006))

6-1-19 Barking, Howling, or Other Unreasonable Animal Noise Prohibited.

(a) No person owning or keeping any animal shall fail to prevent such animal from disturbing the peace of any other person by loud and persistent or loud and habitual barking, howling, yelping, braying, whinnying, crowing, calling, or making any other loud and persistent or loud and habitual noise, whether the animal is on or off the guardian's or keeper's premises.

(b) No person shall be charged with violating this section unless a written warning was given to the person by an agent or employee of the city within twelve months preceding the first date alleged as a date of violation in the complaint. Such warning is sufficient if it recites subsection (a) of this section and states that a complaint has been received that an animal of which the defendant is a guardian or keeper is disturbing the peace of an individual. A warning is given under this subsection if it is personally given to the person owning or keeping the animal or if it is mailed first class to such person. The city manager shall keep records of all warnings given, and such records are prima facie evidence that such warnings were given.

(c) No person shall be convicted at trial of violating this section unless two or more witnesses testify to the loud and persistent or loud and habitual nature of the noise, or unless there is other evidence corroborating the testimony of a single witness on this element.

(d) The provisions of subsections (b) and (c) of this section do not apply when the animal is a cat and it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the cat was off the premises of its guardian or keeper at the time of the disturbance.

6-1-20 Aggressive Animals Prohibited.

(a) No person shall own or keep any vicious animal. A vicious animal is one that bites, claws, or attempts to bite or claw any person; bites or injures another animal; or in a vicious or terrorizing manner approaches any person in an apparent attitude of attack, whether or not the attack is consummated or capable of being consummated.

(b) It is a specific defense to the charge of owning or keeping a vicious animal that the person or animal that was bitten, clawed, injured, or approached by the vicious animal or another person was:

(1) Other than in self-defense or defense of its young attacking the animal or engaged in conduct reasonably calculated to provoke the animal to attack, bite, or injure;

(2) Unlawfully engaging in entry into or upon a fenced or enclosed portion of the premises upon which the animal was law-fully kept or upon a portion of the premises where the animal was lawfully chained;

(3) Engaging in unlawful entry into or unlawfully in or upon a vehicle in which the animal was confined;

(4) Attempting to assault another person;

(5) Attempting to stop a fight between the animal and any other animal; or

(6) Attempting to aid the animal when it was injured.

(c) For the purposes of this section, a person is lawfully upon the premises of a guardian or keeper when such person is on said premises in the performance of any duty imposed by law or by the express or implied invitation of the owner of such premises or the owner's agent.

(Ordinance No. 5374 (1991))

6-1-21 Animals as Nuisance Prohibited.

(a) No person shall own or keep any animal that constitutes a nuisance by violating any of sections 6-1-5, "Animal Fighting Prohibited," 6-1-6, "Subjecting Animals to Unnecessary Suffering," and 6-1-7, "Improper Care of Animals Prohibited," B.R.C. 1981, being a safety or health hazard, damaging the property of another, or creating offensive odors, any of which materially interferes with or disrupts another individual in the con-duct of lawful activities at such individual's home.

(b) No person shall be charged with violating this section unless a written warning was given to the person by an agent or employee of the city within twelve months preceding the first date alleged as a date of violation in the complaint. Such warning is sufficient if it recites subsection (a) of this section and states that a complaint has been received that an animal of which the defendant is the guardian or keeper is disturbing the peace of another individual. A warning is given under this subsection if it is personally given to a person owning or keeping an animal or if it is mailed first class to such person. The city manager shall keep records of all warnings given, and such records are prima facie evidence that such warnings were given.

(c) If the city manager finds that a nuisance exists in violation of this chapter, in addition to any other remedies available under this code the manager may request that the guardian or keeper of the animal correct the violation by notifying the guardian or keeper, or both the guardian and keeper, that such person has twenty-four hours from the date of the notice to correct the violation or such longer period as the manager determines is reasonably necessary to correct the violation. Notice under this subsection is sufficient if it is delivered to the guardian or keeper or mailed first class to the address of the owner of property on which the animal is kept on the records of the Boulder County Assessor.

(1) If the person notified fails to correct the violation as required by the notice, the manager may correct the violation by taking any necessary and reasonable means to do so and charge the costs thereof, plus an additional amount of $25.00 for administrative costs, to the owner of the property and jointly and severally to the guardian and keeper of the animal.

(2) If any property owner fails or refuses to pay when due any charge imposed under this subsection, the manager may, in addition to taking other collection remedies, certify due and unpaid charges, including interest, to the Boulder County Treasurer as provided in section 2-2-12, "City Manager May Certify Taxes, Charges, and Assessments to County Treasurer for Collection," B.R.C. 1981.

6-1-22 Nuisance Cat Prohibited.

No person owning or keeping any domestic house cat shall fail to prevent the cat from damaging the property of another.

6-1-23 Disposition of Dead Animals.

When any animal dies in the city, no person owning or keeping it shall fail to remove the body of such animal from the city or dispose of it in a lawful and sanitary manner.

6-1-24 Impoundment and Confinement of Animals.

(a) The city manager shall seek to impound or confine to a veterinary hospital, for a period of at least ten days for rabies observation, any dog or cat that has bitten any person. Any dog or cat licensed by the city and inoculated against rabies may, in the alternative, be confined to the premises of the guardian or keeper for a period of ten days unless discovered off such premises during such time or unless the records of the city show that the animal has been found within the city unattended and off the premises of its guardian or keeper within the preceding year. The city manager shall seek to impound or order confined any other animal that has bitten any person for a period of time determined by the Boulder County Health Department to be necessary for rabies observation for the particular animal.

(b) A peace officer, if probable cause exists to believe that a violation of any provision of this chapter other than section 6-1-17, "Animals on Mall Prohibited," 6-1-18, "Removal of Animal Excrement Required," or 6-1-23, "Disposition of Dead Animals," B.R.C. 1981, has occurred, may impound any animal involved in such violation.

(c) A peace officer may impound for its own protection any animal which is under the control of a person at the time of that person's incarceration if it reasonably appears to the peace officer that such person is unable to provide immediately a responsible alternative keeper for the animal.

(d) A peace officer may impound any domestic animal on city mountain park or open space property which is outside the supervision and control of its guardian or keeper.

(Ordinance No. 4935 (1985))

6-1-25 Disposition of Impounded Animals.

(a) As soon as practicable after the date of impoundment of an animal pursuant to this chapter, the city manager shall notify the animal's guardian or keeper, if such person is known to the manager, of the fact and place of impoundment. The notification shall be given by a method calculated to reach the guardian or keeper promptly, and may be made in person, by telephone, by facsimile, by electronic mail, or by regular or certified mail if more direct methods are unavailable or have failed. If the guardian or keeper of an impounded animal is not known, or if such person's address cannot be determined, the manager shall promptly place a description of the animal on its website or on a website linked to the city's website.

(b) The guardian or keeper of any animal impounded under this chapter shall pay the impoundment and feeding and keeping fees prescribed by section 4-20-39, "Animal Impoundment Fee," B.R.C. 1981, and no person may reclaim any animal until such fees are paid. If the guardian or keeper fails or refuses to pay when due any charge imposed under this subsection, the manager may, without limitation, certify the charge to the Boulder County Treasurer as provided in section 2-2-12, "City Manager May Certify Taxes, Charges, and Assessments to County Treasurer for Collection," B.R.C. 1981.

(c) If an animal was impounded solely on the basis of a violation of any provision of sections 6-1-5, "Animal Fighting Prohibited," 6-1-6, "Subjecting Animals to Unnecessary Suffering," 6-1-7, "Improper Care of Animals Prohibited," and 6-1-8, "Abandoning Animals Prohibited," B.R.C. 1981, then the notice required by subsection (a) of this section shall also include a statement that, if the guardian or keeper does not request a hearing within five days of the date of the notice, the animal will be disposed of by the manager. If a hearing is requested, the manager shall schedule it to occur within three city business days and shall give notice of same to the person requesting the hearing. Such hearing shall be conducted in accordance with section 1-3-5, "Hearings and Determinations," B.R.C. 1981. If the manager determines that the animal was being kept in violation of any provision of sections 6-1-5, "Animal Fighting Prohibited," 6-1-6, "Subjecting Animals to Unnecessary Suffering," 6-1-7, "Improper Care of Animals Prohibited," and 6-1-8, "Abandoning Animals Prohibited," B.R.C. 1981, the manager may dispose of the animal in the manner provided in subsection (d) of this section and not return it to its guardian or keeper, or may order it returned to its guardian or keeper upon payment of impoundment and shelter fees if the manager determines that, due to changed circumstances, the animal's health and the public health, safety, or welfare will not be endangered thereby. If the manager determines that the animal was wrongfully impounded, the manager shall order the animal returned without payment of accrued impoundment and shelter fees. If no hearing is requested, the manager may dispose of the animal in the manner provided in subsection (d) of this section.

(d) The city manager is authorized to dispose of any impounded animal by selling it at auction under the procedures prescribed by section 2-4-6, "Disposition of Property Other Than Motor Vehicles," B.R.C. 1981, or otherwise as the city manager may direct, putting it up for adoption through an animal adoption agency, or destroying it, if the guardian or keeper of the animal has not reclaimed it within:

(1) One day of the end of bite confinement pursuant to subsection 6-1-24(a), B.R.C. 1981;

(2) Two days of notification of the guardian or keeper as provided in subsection (a) of this section, or after holding the animal for at least the minimum period required by the state laws governing licensed animal shelters⁷ if the animal's owner is unknown or cannot be notified;

(3) Three days of notification to the person incarcerated and the guardian or keeper, if known to the manager, that the animal has been impounded solely pursuant to subsection 6-1-24(c), B.R.C. 1981;

(4) One day of an order returning the animal after a hearing conducted pursuant to subsection (c) of this section; or

(5) Five days of notification of the guardian or keeper as provided in subsection (c) of this section.

(e) An animal adoption agency shall spay or neuter an unneutered dog or cat before releasing the animal to a person adopting the animal and shall require such person to pay for such procedure. If the adoption agency determines that it is medically inadvisable to spay or neuter the dog or cat before the time of adoption, the adoption agency shall enter into a conditional contract of sale, on a form approved by the city manager, which shall provide, without limitation, that the adopter is given temporary custody of the animal, but title to the animal remains in the city until a date certain. If the affidavit of a veterinarian that the animal has been spayed or neutered is not delivered to the adoption agency on or before such date, the adopter shall surrender the animal to the adoption agency on or before such date and shall be subject to prosecution for failure to do so.

(f) If, in the opinion of a veterinarian, or the animal shelter supervisor, if a veterinarian is not available, a pet animal is experiencing extreme pain or suffering, the city manager may euthanize the animal as soon as the manager has exhausted reasonable efforts to contact the owner, but if the animal has identification, the animal shall not be euthanized for twenty-four hours⁸.

(Ordinance Nos. 4935 (1985); 5377 (1991); 7326 (2003))

6-1-26 Court May Order Forfeiture of Animal Pursuant to Criminal Conviction.

(a) Forfeiture of Animal as Consequence of Conviction of Specified Violations:

(1) The provisions of this section shall apply in addition to all other penalty provisions applicable to violations of section 6-1-20, "Aggressive Animals Prohibited," B.R.C. 1981, or neglected or abused pursuant to section 6-1-6, "Subjecting Animals to Unnecessary Suffering," or 6-1-7, "Improper Care of Animals Prohibited," B.R.C. 1981.

(2) Upon conviction of any of the provisions listed in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, and as a part of the sentencing process, the court shall have authority to order the forfeiture of any animal involved in the violation or violations proven if the animal has not already been forfeited pursuant to some other provision of this chapter. Any such forfeiture shall be accomplished by transfer of the animal involved in the incident for which a defendant is being sentenced to the city manager, and no guardian or keeper of the animal shall fail to comply with the court's order.

(3) Upon receipt of a forfeited animal, the city manager may dispose of the animal in any manner other than by return to its former guardian. Such disposition may include, without limitation, placement of the animal with a new guardian, or destruction of the animal.

(b) Standards for Forfeiture of Animal Pursuant to Criminal Prosecution: In determining whether an animal shall be forfeited pursuant to the provisions of this section, the court shall balance and evaluate factors relating to the health and safety of the community and the best interests of the involved animal.

(1) In making forfeiture determinations based upon convictions of violations of section 6-1-20, "Aggressive Animals Prohibited," B.R.C. 1981, the court may consider, without limitation, the following factors:

(A) Whether or not the animal attacked a human being;

(B) Whether or not there existed any provocation or other extenuating circumstances relevant to animal's behavior;

(D) The number and severity of any prior attacks on human beings committed by the animal;

(E) Any factors relating to probability of future attacks by the animal;

(F) The nature and number of prior incidents of aggressive behavior other than attacks on human beings which involved the animal;

(G) The existence or non-existence of prior animal at large incidents involving the animal;

(H) Evidence that corrective action on the part of the guardian of the animal will lessen the chances of future violations of the law involving the animal; and

(I) Any expert evaluation of the animal which is placed before the court for evaluation.

(2) In making forfeiture determinations based upon convictions of violations of section 6-1-6, "Subjecting Animals to Unnecessary Suffering," or 6-1-7, "Improper Care of Animals Prohibited," B.R.C. 1981, the court may consider, without limitation, the following factors:

(A) Any past convictions or other evidence establishing that the animal was subject to cruelty or improper care;

(B) Any evidence that corrective action on the part of the guardian of the animal will prevent inadequate treatment of the animal in the future, and the probability that such action will occur;

(C) Any evidence concerning the capacity of the guardian to prevent cruelty or inadequate treatment of the animal in the future, and the probability that the guardian will change past behaviors;

(D) The contents of any expert evaluation of the animal which is placed before the court for evaluation; and

(E) Any other evidence relevant to the probability that the animal will continue to be mistreated in the future if not forfeited.

(1) Following conviction for any of the provisions listed in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the court shall announce whether or not it will consider forfeiture of the involved animal.

(A) Such determination shall be based upon the evidence received by the court in conjunction with the conviction or upon any other evidence or argument which may have been placed before the court at any stage of the criminal proceedings in the matter.

(B) Neither a forfeiture nor a forfeiture hearing shall occur based upon the entry of a plea of guilty or no contest to any of the provisions listed in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, unless, as a part of the plea proceedings, the court has informed the defendant that forfeiture of an animal is a potential consequence of the entry of plea.

(2) If the court determines that forfeiture should be considered, the defendant (and the guardian of the animal, if different than the defendant), the victim (if the offense was owning an aggressive animal) and the prosecuting attorney shall have the right to request an evidentiary hearing regarding whether or not the animal involved in the incident should be forfeited.

(3) The court shall grant a continuance of no less than three days following conviction of any of the provisions listed in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, if such continuance is requested by any party for the purpose of marshaling evidence relevant to the issue of forfeiture of an animal.

(4) The subpoena power of the court shall be available to a defendant, guardian, and prosecuting attorney in order to facilitate the presentation of evidence at an animal forfeiture hearing. The court may accept evidence at such hearing in any form which is properly considered at a sentencing hearing.

(5) If the court feels a need for the presentation of particular evidence at the forfeiture hearing, it may issue its own subpoenas for the production of such evidence. The court may also order a convicted defendant or guardian to have the affected animal evaluated by an expert selected from a list maintained by the court for that purpose. Such an evaluation shall be conducted at the defendant's or guardian's expense. The failure of a defendant or guardian to obtain such an expert evaluation may be considered adversely to the defendant or guardian by the court when it makes its forfeiture determination.

(6) At an animal forfeiture hearing held pursuant to this section, the defendant, guardian, victim, or the prosecuting attorney may present evidence relevant to forfeiture in addition to that which was presented at the trial or plea stage of the proceedings concerning the facts of the offense. However, neither the prosecution, the defendant, nor the victim, if any, shall be required to present such additional evidence. Following the receipt of any such additional evidence, the court shall make its decision based upon the facts of the violation as proven or admitted at trial or plea stage of the proceedings, any additional evidence which may have been presented at the forfeiture stage of the proceedings, and any relevant information contained in the court's records relating to the affected animal.

(7) At a forfeiture proceeding held pursuant to the provisions of this section, the prosecuting attorney may urge the court to order forfeiture of an animal, urge the court to avoid forfeiting an animal or take no position with regard to such forfeiture.

6-1-27 Administrative Forfeiture of Animal Deemed to Constitute a Nuisance or to be Abused.

(a) The provisions of this section constitute an independent method of forfeiture of aggressive or abused animals in addition to other methods of forfeiture and impounding.

(b) Whenever the city manager determines that any animal is vicious as provided in section 6-1-20, "Aggressive Animals Prohibited," B.R.C. 1981, or neglected or abused pursuant to section 6-1-6, "Subjecting Animals to Unnecessary Suffering," or 6-1-7, "Improper Care of Animals Prohibited," B.R.C. 1981, the manager, through the city attorney, may apply to the municipal court for an order to impound the animal and remove it permanently from its guardian. Such application shall:

(1) Identify the animal;

(2) Identify the guardian and keeper, if known, or the residence of the animal if the guardian or keeper is not known;

(3) Identify the date and location of occurrence of one or more acts of viciousness, neglect, or abuse; and

(4) Request that the guardian and keeper be required to show cause why the animal should not be permanently removed from its guardian and forfeit to the city.

(c) Upon receipt of such an application, the court shall set a date for a hearing thereon, and in the manner provided in chapter 1-3, "Quasi-Judicial Hearings," B.R.C. 1981, cause to be served on the guardian and keeper, if known, and if not known, delivered to or posted on the residence of the animal, a copy of the application and a notice of the hearing.

(d) If the city can show by a preponderance of evidence at the hearing, conducted under the procedures prescribed by chapter 1-3, "Quasi-Judicial Hearings," B.R.C. 1981, that the animal was vicious within the meaning of section 6-1-20, "Aggressive Animals Prohibited," B.R.C. 1981, or was treated or used in a manner prohibited by section 6-1-6, "Subjecting Animals to Unnecessary Suffering," or 6-1-7, "Improper Care of Animals Prohibited," B.R.C. 1981, the judge may order the animal forfeit to the city. The judge shall use the standards of subsection 6-1-26(b), B.R.C. 1981, in exercising this discretion. Any such forfeiture shall be accomplished by transfer of the animal involved to the city manager, and no guardian or keeper of the animal shall fail to comply with the court's order.

6-1-28 Emergency Impoundment of Animal.

(a) When, in the opinion of the city manager, an animal constitutes an immediate danger to the community, or an animal is itself in immediate danger due to improper care or treatment, the city manager may cause that animal to be impounded subject to the following conditions:

(1) If at the time of impoundment, there exists a pending criminal case or a pending administrative forfeiture action pursuant to the provisions of this chapter involving the impounded animal, the city manager shall, within seventy-two hours, attempt to notify the parties in such actions by written notice or other means of the interim internment of the animal.

(2) If, at the time of emergency impoundment, there does not exist a pending criminal case or a pending administrative forfeiture action pursuant to the provisions of this chapter involving the impounded animal, such action shall be filed within seventy-two hours of the emergency impoundment of the animal.

(3) Within seventy-two hours of emergency impoundment, the city manager shall submit written reports to the court and the court shall review those reports to determine whether interim impoundment is appropriate. However, the city manager may submit such reports prior to impounding an animal in order to obtain a court determination.

(4) After evaluation of all reports and information submitted to it in support of interim impoundment, the court shall order the animal released unless it makes both of the following findings:

(A) There is probable cause to believe that following trial or hearing pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, forfeiture of the animal will be justified; and

(B) There is probable cause to believe that the impounded animal constitutes an immediate danger to the community, or is itself in immediate danger due to improper care or treatment.

(5) Upon making findings justifying interim impoundment, the court shall order the animal detained by the city manager pending outcome of a pending criminal case or a pending administrative forfeiture action, or may order the animal released to any person upon such conditions as may satisfy the court that the safety of the community and of the animal will be adequately protected.

(6) Interim impoundment shall be terminated upon the completion of a pending criminal case or a pending administrative forfeiture action at such point as an order for the disposition of the animal is made pursuant to the orders entered in such action.

6-1-29 Procedure Upon Entry of Judgment for Forfeiture of an Animal.

(a) Whenever, pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, the court determines that forfeiture of an animal is warranted, the court shall order that the animal be delivered to the city manager on a date certain.

(b) In entering an order of forfeiture, the court shall ensure that the record includes the following information and that such information is made available to the city manager:

(1) A sufficient identification of the animal to be forfeited such as to allow the city manager to identify the animal accurately;

(2) Identifying information regarding the guardian and any keeper of the animal, if known, or the residence of the animal if the guardian or keeper is not known;

(3) A description of the date and circumstances of acts of viciousness, neglect, or abuse which gave rise to the order of forfeiture; and

(4) A copy of all reports, documentary evidence, or other information which was introduced at trial or at the forfeiture hearing which might assist the city manager in determining the appropriate disposition of the animal.

(c) No person shall fail to deliver possession of an animal ordered forfeited pursuant to the provisions of this section. However, the existence of this provision shall not restrict the court from using all lawful enforcement procedures to ensure compliance with a duly entered order of forfeiture.

6-1-30 Peace Officer May Destroy Dog.

A peace officer or other duly authorized agent of the manager may destroy any dog observed by such person to be in violation of section 6-1-16, "Dogs Running at Large Prohibited," B.R.C. 1981, and running, worrying, menacing, threatening, or endangering persons, domestic livestock, or wildlife if the dog is a threat to the safety of any person, domestic livestock, or wildlife. (Ordinance No. 5497 (1992))

6-1-31 Police Dogs.

The provisions of this chapter do not apply to police officers using dogs as part of official police business.

6-1-32 Enforcement of Chapter.

The city manager shall enforce the provisions of this chapter and operate an animal pound for the city. The manager may delegate all or part of one or both of these duties to a private person or organization by contract. But all peace officers may enforce the provisions of this chapter.⁹

6-1-33 Bird Protection Sanctuary Created.

(a) The following are legislative findings of fact:

(1) Protected birds are essential to the city's local ecosystem and their presence contributes to the quality of life of city residents and visitors;

(2) The city's open space and parks programs are enriched by the presence of protected birds;

(3) The humane treatment of wild birds and other wildlife reflects a core value for city residents;

(4) Utilization of some methods of lethal control for wild birds can have adverse impacts upon non-target species of birds, upon bird species protected by federal, state and local regulations and upon other non-target wildlife species; and

(5) Lethal control methods are often ineffective because birds tend to perch or nest at sites at which such measures have been previously utilized. The use of mechanical and structural methods of control to make perching or nesting sites unattractive is often more effective and causes less ecological damage.

(b) The area within the city is declared to be a sanctuary for the refuge of protected birds. All persons are urged to safeguard protected birds and their refuges within such sanctuary and to take reasonable steps to prevent unnecessary molestation of any wild birds within the city. Wildlife management practices and other activities conducted within the city should be designed to avoid unnecessary suffering on the part of wild birds.

(Ordinance Nos. 7227 (2002); 7321 (2005))

6-1-34 Use of Poison Restricted for Lethal Control of Birds.

No person shall poison any wild bird or distribute poison with the intent to poison any wild bird.

(Ordinance Nos. 7227 (2002); 7321 (2005))

6-1-35 Injuring or Capturing Wild Birds Restricted.

(a) Except as authorized by provisions of this chapter, it shall be unlawful for any person in the city knowingly to shoot at, wound, kill, capture, ensnare, net, trap or injure any wild bird, or for any person to damage the eggs or nest of any protected bird. It shall also be unlawful for any landowner within the city knowingly to permit another to engage in any of the actions forbidden by this subsection.

(b) It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge of violating this section that the following circumstances existed:

(1) The capture of, or injury to, a bird was incidental to removing that bird or its nest from a structure, including, without limitation, any covering over a sidewalk;

(2) The capture of, or injury to, a bird was required in order to protect the safety of existing structures, or to deal with a verified health or safety hazard pursuant to a permit issued in conformity with section 6-1-39, "Special Permit," B.R.C. 1981;

(3) The capture and release of the bird was accomplished for purely humanitarian purposes;

(4) The capture of, or injury to, a bird occurred in conjunction with official activities of any of the following persons while engaged in professional activities of animal treatment, rehabilitation or removal: Humane Society of Boulder Valley employees, veterinarians, Colorado Division of Wildlife employees, City Park Rangers, City Wildlife Managers, or persons permitted under state or federal law as wildlife rehabilitators;

(5) The capture of, or injury to, a bird occurred in conjunction with authorized activities of a city employee, Humane Society of Boulder Valley employee, veterinarian, or any person permitted by state or federal law to act in the capacity of a wildlife rehabilitator or of a permitted researcher engaged in the capture and banding of birds; or

(6) The capture of, or injury to, a bird occurred in conjunction with activities authorized by a depredation permit issued by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.

(Ordinance Nos. 7227 (2002); 7321 (2005))

6-1-36 Procedures for Obtaining Prairie Dog Lethal Control Permits.

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, no person shall utilize lethal control measures for prairie dogs without first having obtained a lethal control permit from the city manager.

(b) An applicant for a lethal control permit shall file an application with the manager on forms supplied by the manager for that purpose.

(1) Proof that the applicant is the landowner on which the lethal means of control will be employed;

(2) Payment of a processing fee as prescribed by section 4-20-58, "Prairie Dog Lethal Control Permit Fees," B.R.C. 1981;

(3) The name, address and telecommunications numbers of:

(A) The applicant;

(B) The property manager of such property (if any);

(4) All information required by the forms supplied by the city manager in subsection (b) of this section;

(5) A description of:

(A) The reasons why lethal control measures are required;

(B) A description of any projected development that makes use of lethal control necessary;

(D) The date and time on which the lethal control measures will be initiated; and

(E) The steps that will be taken in order to preclude re-colonization following the utilization of lethal control methods;

(6) Authorization to the city manager or to a designee to be present during all extermination activities;

(7) Documentation that the following options were considered and the reason that they were not utilized:

(A) Non-lethal control measures;

(B) Minimizing on-site conflicts between desired land uses and wildlife;

(D) Where no reasonable relocation options exist, participation in an animal recovery program for the preservation of endangered species; and

(E) Trapping and individual euthanization as a method of lethal control;

(8) A description of steps considered in order to minimize potential negative impacts upon non-target species;

(9) A map of the property on which lethal control measures will be employed that includes the address or legal description of the property, and the general location of prairie dog burrows on that property;

(10) The number of acres of prairie dog habitat on the property;

(11) An estimate of the number of live prairie dogs inhabiting the site and an explanation of the methodology utilized for developing that estimate; and

(12) Demonstration, to a high degree of probability, that:

(A) The land on which the prairie dogs are located will be developed within fifteen months of the date of the application and the continued presence of prairie dogs would make such development impractical or impossible;

(B) A principal use of the land will be adversely impacted in a significant manner by the presence of prairie dogs on the site; or

(C) Established landscaping or an open space feature established and installed prior to any prairie dog colonization will be adversely impacted by the establishment of new prairie dog colonies;

(13) The application shall establish that the applicant has adopted an adequate plan to protect, to the extent possible, non-prairie dog wildlife during the process of utilizing lethal control measures for prairie dogs;

(14) If pesticides are going to be used, the application shall establish that the applicant will utilize any measures required by state or federal regulations to protect, to the extent possible, non-prairie dog wildlife during the process of utilizing lethal control measures;

(15) The application shall establish an adequate plan designed to prevent the reentry of prairie dogs onto the land on which lethal control measures are to be utilized. No person shall fail to comply with the provisions of such a plan after having utilized lethal control measures based upon an application containing it;

(16) The application shall establish that reasonable efforts will be made to avoid utilizing lethal means of control for prairie dogs during prairie dog birthing periods;

(17) If the applicant is proposing to poison prairie dogs, the application shall establish that the applicant has:

(A) Identified and employed a person approved for that purpose by the State of Colorado; and

(B) Submitted a plan to comply with chapter 6-10, "Pesticide Use," B.R.C. 1981, relating to the regulation of pesticide use and required notice.

(d) The city manager shall, within sixty days, review any application for completeness and shall accept the application upon determination that it is complete. An application shall only be deemed complete if it includes an adequate showing that the applicant has demonstrated reasonable efforts to identify and use relocation alternatives in lieu of lethal control measures. Factors to be considered by the manager in determining whether the showing is adequate shall include, without limitation, the following:

(1) Whether or not the manager has determined that city lands are available for relocation. Such determination shall be based upon the wildlife carrying capacity of city lands and upon the manager's consideration of the policies set forth in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan bearing upon natural ecosystem management and the management of wildlife-human conflicts. The manager's determination in this regard shall be final and not subject to appeal or review;

(2) Whether or not there are non-city lands available or feasible for relocation; and

(3) Additional information relied upon by an applicant to determine that relocation is unavailable, not feasible or otherwise inappropriate.

(e) A property owner of a site on which burrow fumigation measures will be utilized shall post signs on the affected property designed to give reasonable notice to neighbors and passers by. Such signs shall be posted within one day of submission of an application and shall remain posted until two days after the use of lethal control measures is completed.

(f) Not less than fifteen days after accepting an application as complete, the manager shall commence a sixty day public comment period on the application, soliciting public comment on relocation alternatives for prairie dogs that would otherwise be lethally controlled under the permit application. The only information from the permit that the city manager shall make available to the public for purposes of this sub-section shall be information that is submitted by the applicant pursuant to paragraphs (c)(7), (c)(10) and (c)(11) of this section.

(g) Not less than fifteen days after the close of the public comment period, the city manager shall determine whether or not to issue the permit.

(1) If the city manager determines that relocation alternatives exist, the city manager shall delay issuing the permit for an additional twelve months to allow for relocation to occur.

(2) If the city manager determines that relocation alternatives do not exist, the city manager may issue the permit.

(h) Owners or occupants of residential lots containing a single residence may, at any time, obtain a lethal control permit to exterminate prairie dogs on their property. No fee shall be charged for such a lethal control permit and no waiting period longer than that period of time reasonably required to process an application shall be required.

(1) The intent of the permit process for such residential lots is to provide a mechanism for the city to monitor prairie dog populations and related ecological issues within its boundaries while allowing owners or occupants of small residential lots to respond to the presence of un-wanted wildlife.

(2) Applications for a lethal control permit for such residential lots shall be approved upon receipt of the following information:

(A) Address of the subject property;

(B) The name and telephone number of the applicant;

(D) A demonstration of compliance with any applicable state and federal regulations pertaining to the utilization of lethal control measures; and

(E) Such other information as the manager may require to adequately evaluate such requests, their purposes, and the expected outcomes of the use of lethal control measures.

(3) Lots containing multi-family residential structures shall not qualify for treatment under this subsection.

(i) The city manager may impose upon the exercise of the permit any conditions reasonably related to the purposes of this chapter.

(j) A permit issued under this chapter is specific to the property for which application is made and is not transferable.

(k) The requirements of this section apply to all private lands within the city limits of Boulder, all lands owned or managed by the city, and all city activities affecting prairie dogs inside or outside of the city limits.

(l) Any applicant for a lethal control permit aggrieved by a decision of the city manager concerning an application may appeal such decision to a hearing officer appointed by the manager by filing an appeal with the manager within fourteen days of the issuance or final denial of a permit. After giving notice to all interested parties, the hearing officer shall hear the appeal within thirty days of the notice of appeal, or at such other time to which the applicant and the city may agree, and the hearing shall be held pursuant to the procedures prescribed by chapter 1-3, "Quasi-Judicial Hearings," B.R.C. 1981. The hearing officer shall determine whether the permit meets the requirements of this chapter and shall grant or deny the application with conditions, as appropriate.

(m) The manager shall specify the term of each permit, which shall be a reasonable amount of time under the circumstances.

(n) The manager may revoke a permit issued under this chapter for the grounds and under the procedures prescribed by section 4-1-10, "Revocation of Licenses," B.R.C. 1981, and also for failure to abide by any provision of this chapter or condition of the permit.

(o) The manager may suspend any portion of this chapter in the event of an emergency situation which threatens irreparable harm to the health, safety or welfare of the inhabitants of the city or to the city's planning area or to the city's environment.

(Ordinance Nos. 7227 (2002); 7321 (2005))

6-1-37 Procedures Affecting the Relocation of Prairie Dogs.

(a) The landowner from whose land any relocation of prairie dogs is to be made shall provide the manager with at least twenty days' advance written notice of the initiation of relocation of prairie dogs, which notice shall include:

(1) The name, address and telecommunications numbers of the applicant;

(2) The name, address and telecommunications numbers of the owner of the property from which prairie dogs will be relocated and the name, address and telecommunications numbers of the owner of the property to which the prairie dogs will be relocated;

(3) The name, address and telecommunications numbers of the property manager of property from which prairie dogs will be relocated, if any, and the name, address and telecommunications numbers of the property manager of property to which the prairie dogs will be relocated, if any;

(4) The name, address and telecommunications numbers of any consultants retained or consulted with regard to the proposed relocation measures;

(5) A description of the reasons why relocation measures are required;

(6) The date and time on which the physical relocation measures will be initiated;

(7) A plan detailing those steps that will be taken in order to prevent or discourage the re-entry of prairie dogs onto the land from which relocation is to take place. No person shall fail to comply with the provisions of such a plan after having conducted relocation activities based upon an application containing it;

(8) Seven days' written additional notice if relocation is not initiated on the date provided pursuant to the terms of a preceding notice; and

(9) Copies of all required state and federal permits, including any required permits from the Colorado Division of Wildlife.

(b) The city manager or a designee shall be allowed to be present on the land from which relocation is being made and on the land to which relocation is being made during the relocation procedure.

(c) No person shall relocate prairie dogs unless the property owner of the land from which relocation is to take place, or that person's agent, has obtained all required state and federal permits, including any required permits from the Colorado Division of Wildlife.

(d) Re-location shall not be permitted during the birthing, nursing and early rearing period of March 1 through June 1.

(e) No person shall trap or relocate prairie dogs in a way that results in unnecessary suffering to the animals.

(f) No person engaged in the relocation of prairie dogs shall maintain such prairie dogs in his or her possession for more than forty-eight hours, unless such animals are sick or injured, in which case the animals shall be turned over to a state permitted animal rehabilitator.

(Ordinance No. 7321 (2005))

6-1-38 Fees and Requirements for Issuance of Prairie Dog Lethal Control Permits.

Private landowners seeking lethal control permits shall be required to pay a fee to mitigate the loss of prairie dog habitat as a consequence of the use of lethal control measures.

(a) The fee as prescribed in section 4-20-58, "Prairie Dog Lethal Control Permit Fees," B.R.C. 1981, shall be required on a prorated basis for each acre of active prairie dog habitat lost as a consequence of the use of lethal control measures. There shall be an offset against this fee for any costs incurred by a property owner in connection with the lawful relocation of prairie dogs from the property on which lethal control measures are to be utilized in order to avoid subjecting the relocated animals to lethal control measures.

(b) A processing fee shall be paid by an applicant for a lethal control permit for birds or prairie dogs in an amount prescribed by section 4-20-58, "Prairie Dog Lethal Control Permit Fees," B.R.C. 1981.

(c) No fee, other than processing fees, shall be charged to the city or its departments which obtain lethal control permits made necessary by city projects or programs.

(d) No fee, other than processing fees, shall be charged to any property owner who captures prairie dogs for the purpose of supplying them, either after euthanization or live, to wildlife recovery programs.

(e) The manager may adopt regulations allowing for the waiver of fees, or any portion of such fees, in situations in which a landowner establishes to the manager's satisfaction that the landowner would be entitled to utilize pesticides to poison prairie dogs but chooses instead to capture individual animals and subject them to euthanasia in order to minimize their suffering.

(f) Fees collected pursuant to this section may be utilized for the following purposes:

(1) Offsetting administrative costs associated with operating the lethal control permit system;

(2) Acquiring additional public land to accommodate uses displaced by relocation of prairie dogs;

(3) Conducting relocation activities of wildlife;

(4) Creating new habitat for wildlife by converting selected parcels of public lands to conditions suitable for future relocation or habitat development;

(5) Enhancing the habitat quality of public land prior to relocation of prairie dogs, such as through weed management and supplemental seeding programs;

(6) Monitoring the success of wildlife relocation programs;

(7) Constructing and maintaining wildlife areas, such as by erecting fences and establishing natural barriers, to minimize impacts of existing or future wildlife on city residents, and monitoring the effectiveness of such barriers;

(8) Producing educational signs, brochures, or other materials related to wildlife conservation and management;

(9) Retaining consultant services to assist with wildlife management and to monitor prairie dog or bird population sizes that might be affected by city or private development projects;

(10) Offsetting ecological losses associated with the use of lethal control measures by enabling the city to provide new or enhanced habitat elsewhere or by allowing the city to preserve wildlife through relocation or other activities;

(11) Funding prairie dog-related research; or

(12) Funding other programs that are determined by the manager to be consistent with the wildlife protection policy objectives set forth in this chapter.

(Ordinance No. 7321 (2005))

6-1-39 Special Permit.

(a) The city manager may grant or deny a special permit for the killing or the capturing and releasing of birds or prairie dogs when it is shown in writing that:

(1) The birds or prairie dogs constitute a health hazard in a particular location in the city and that the specific actions are needed in order to eliminate the health hazard; or

(2) The birds or prairie dogs must be removed in order to permit completion or maintenance of a public improvement project approved by the city council, but only after the city council has been provided with notice that bird or prairie dog removal will be required.

An applicant for special permit pursuant to this subsection must show in writing that he or she has taken reasonable steps to control the situation by exclusion devices, non-injurious repellants or other non-lethal means. Where such steps are not feasible, the applicant shall provide the reasons why such alternative measures are not feasible.

(b) The city manager may grant or deny a special permit to allow a landowner to damage prairie dog burrows on that landowner's property where that landowner produces proof satisfactory to the manager that the following conditions exist:

(1) The legal parcel or lot on which burrows may be damaged had no prairie dog habitation for a period of at least three hundred sixty five consecutive days;

(2) Following the period without prairie dog habitation, at least one but not more than five new burrows were established;

(3) The landowner wants to be allowed to damage the new prairie dog burrows as part of an ongoing program to halt new colonization; and

(4) No permit shall be issued pursuant to this subsection between March 1 and June 1.

(Ordinance No. 7321 (2005))

6-1-40 City Manager May Issue Regulations.

The city manager may adopt reasonable interpretive and administrative rules and regulations as deemed necessary to administer and enforce the provisions of this chapter.

(Ordinance Nos. 7133 (2001); 7227 (2002); 7321 (2005))

¹ Adopted by Ordinance No. 4719. Amended by Ordinance Nos. 4730, 7062. Derived from Ordinance Nos. 1734, 1941, 2208, 2257, 2843, 2866, 3080, 3467, 3679, 4040, 4242, 4350, 4387, 4656, 1925 Code.

² 35-46-101, 102, C.R.S. See SaBell's Inc. v. Flens, 599 P.2d 950 (Colo. App.1979) Berman, J., dissenting, aff'd, 627 P.2d 750 (1980).

³ Thiele v. City and County of Denver, 312, P.2d 786 (Colo.1957).

⁴ 33-6-114, C.R.S.

⁵ Dog fighting is a felony, 18-9-204, C.R.S.

⁶ As with other similar provisions of the B.R.C., compliance with each of paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(5) of this section must be established in order for the defense to be established, because the paragraphs are in the conjunctive. Defense (c)(1)(B) was authorized by Ordinance No. 5811, adopted by the voters on November 5, 1996, and covers the strip of land generally running east from U.S. 36 through Boulder Valley Ranch and the Boulder Reservoir and Coot Lake to 63rd Street which constitutes park land on the east, and open space land on the west, as well as a strip of open space land along the North Foothills Trail as described, and the portion of Heuston Park as described.

⁷ Section 35-80-106.3, C.R.S.

⁸ Section 35-80-106.3, C.R.S.

⁹ 30-15-105, C.R.S.

Top of Page

Site Navigation

Page Contents

Chapter 6-1: Animals¹

Site Navigation

Page Contents

Chapter 6-1: Animals1

Chapter 6-1: Animals¹