State-Journal.com - Malnourished dogs rescued during raid

Photo By Hilly SchifferA pit bull barks stands near his doghouse at the home on 3387 St. Johns Road.

A Franklin County couple have been charged with animal cruelty after officials removed 11 pit bulls from their property - leaving nearly 50 dogs behind.

Sandra Coy, 52, and William S. Coy, 44, both of 3387 St. Johns Road, were served Sunday with multiple misdemeanor cruelty to animals charges after Franklin County Sheriff's deputies and animal control officers raided their property Dec. 14.

According to Sheriff Steve Clark, the Coys had more than 60 dogs at their property when officers received complaints that barking dogs were chained in the Coys' yard.

Clark said 11 malnourished animals, two of which ultimately died from their treatment, were taken from the Coys' property in December.

Nearly 50 animals remained at the property, Clark said.

The Coys have an unlisted telephone number and could not be reached for comment.

No one answered the door at their St. Johns Road residence Thursday, though dogs could be heard barking inside and they were pawing at a window partially obscured by a Christmas tree.

A barking German Shepherd was chained to an outbuilding on a sliding lead that crossed a frozen creek.

Numerous other dogs, pit bulls included, were chained to buildings and near dog kennels in sub-freezing temperatures.

Court documents said county animal control officer Kevin Caudle described the dogs as "malnourished" and "in poor condition."

An animal control official declined to comment on the investigation into the Coy's treatment of their animals.

A 2007 article attributed to Hardin County's News-Enterprise posted on the Web site www.pet-abuse.com says the Coys have walked this road before.

The article says they agreed in August 2007 to leave Larue County and not return with animals for two years after they were charged there with 12 counts of animal cruelty.

LaRue County officials confiscated 37 pit bulls, a German Shepherd and eight puppies from their property, the article says.

A dog was found dead on its chain when officers arrived at their property.

The article says 11 of their dogs died after they were housed in a Taylor County animal shelter, either from attack from other dogs or disease.

The Coys received six months jail time in the matter, which was probated for two years, the article said.

According to meeting minutes posted on city Web sites, Sandra Coy addressed city council members in Ludlow, Taylor Mill and Crestview Hills in 2005 concerning dog breed bans.

She decried breed-specific bans and vicious dog legislation at local levels, the Taylor Mill minutes said.

Coy was identified as chairperson of Responsible Dog Owners of Eastern States at the Crestview Hills meeting.

Coy and her husband are set to appear in Franklin County District Court Feb. 24.

22.	Posted by frankfortgal85 February 7, 2009
	RE 'SaveDowntown' I'm not saying that its a bad thing that we have the shelter, BUT everytown that designates tax dollars for animal control is suppose to have a government run facility for the animals to go to. I just think its really sad that we don't have a facillity like that and so animals suffer. People have no where to take animals when they need to take them somewhere and so they get turned loose or given away to free to homes that most of the time don't take care of the animals. It is not normal for a town to treat its animals like this. I esp think its sad that WE ARE THE CAPITOL and we treat our animals like this. We should be setting an example! Esp when we all know people in government that could make a change!

21.	Posted by SaveDowntown February 7, 2009
	Here is the history of the FCHS, from its website. It appears that individuals are the primary reason it even exists. Maybe we all should consider a donation to them? They aren't government, they are non-profit - read all of the below if you want to know. --- The Humane Society was organized on May 22, 1943 by a small group of women interested in helping the stray and homeless animals. It took six years to convince the City and County Officials that Frankfort should have an animal shelter and to raise enough money to build it. This little shelter was built at the end of Clinton Street on the river with contributions of money , love from these loyal friends. The little shelter began with 10 pens growing to 20 and served its purpose well from 1949 to 1969. It was the third animal shelter in the State of Kentucky, the other two being Louisville and Lexington. Because of the building of the Flood Wall in 1971, the Humane Society had to find an appropriate site and one was found at the end of Kentucky Avenue in Bellepoint. The City bought the land from the State Department of Education and deeded a little over an acre of land to the Humane Society. The Second and present shelter was built on this land with money from a Trust Fund made by Susan B. Leibig of Middlesboro, Kentucky. Mrs. Leibig was an animal lover and good friend of Mrs. Irene Miller and named Mrs. Miller in her will as a Trustee. The will named specific location for the shelters and provided the money to build them but not money for maintenance. Four Shelters from this Trust have been Built. This Money certainly came as an answer to prayer at just the right time. The shelter was built at no cost to the City, County or Community and is owned by the Humane Society, Inc. The animals from the old shelter were moved to the present shelter on Memorial Day 1969. On July 17, 1988 the Shelter was renamed the Irene Miller Animal Shelter in honor of Mrs. Miller's steadfast dedication and devotion to over 50 years to animal welfare.

18.	Posted by stubbornasamule February 6, 2009
	Posted by frankfortgal85: When I pull dogs from shelters, since I rescue, I can get the dog or cat vetted for a lot cheaper than $80.00. And from my experience A lot of the animals I pull have other problems, and need to wait to be vetted until they can have all their surgeries done at once (that the shelters don't or won't do). I agree that there are times that it's best to wait because depending on the situation - mange, etc. - it could jeopardize the animal's health. The reason why I was writing the thing about the cost is because someone else was saying it was 'too much' to pay, and I think that it is for a rescue (who is just trying to help) but not too much for a regluar adopter in the community, in that case it is definately a great price. I know rescues that are always prepared to pay a fee and if an animal is fully vetted, including microchip, as a rule they don't have a problem with it and have the funds available. If you are talking about Louisville Metro, I believe it was because their main vet was 'pulled away'. I'm talking about the spay/neuter clinic that was in the same little shopping center off of Holmes Street as Sweet Potato's restaurant. The sign is on the marquee but their slot is empty. That is where FCHS took the animals that were to be adopted to have their spay/neuter surgery.

15.	Posted by stubbornasamule February 6, 2009
	If it was an adopter that would be fine, but what the FCHS is doing is they make even rescues pay this pull fee when all the rescue is trying to do is save the dog from being euthanized for space. -Which in my opinion is ridiculous. fully vetted, neutered/spayed, all their shots, microchipped (I believe) FCHS has a poor working - almost non-existent - relationship as far as working with rescues. With what vet's charge these days $80 is a bargain. You basically get a "free" dog. I have issues with Kentucky Humane Society in Louisville having an event to promote their 125th anniversary by adopting out animals, fully vetted, etc., for $1.25 plus a donation of an item. I doubt if there's any real screening and that can be mighty tempting to people with ill intent. BUT rescue and shelters DO TALK and it doesn't take long for word to get out as far as who NOT to adopt to in town. As far as why the other animals were left? I'd say it was the lesser of the evils. There's no way that the shelter could add that many animals to what they have now. If there was a positive relationship with rescue there are plenty of people that could have been contacted to help. That's not done in this town. Just as a note: Does anyone know why the Metro Spay/Neuter Pet Clinic is no longer? That's where the FCHS animals were taken. The storefront is empty. Before it opened there was a letter from the city on the window addressed to the Director and President as being owners. Isn't that a conflict of interest? Maybe not since their "private"?