Fairbanks weighs broader authority to take ownership of abused animals

Edited on September 17, 2026 at 11:52 am: This article was revised to clarify that borough code already permits limited seizure or protective custody in some circumstances. Staff identified the narrower gap as the lack of an adequate forfeiture process for abuse and neglect cases.

Fairbanks North Star Borough animal control officers lack a direct process to obtain permanent ownership of an animal solely because an owner refuses humane care. Staff said their tools in those cases are education, assistance, a citation or a call to police. "Fines are our only punitive action for failure to comply with code requirements," staff wrote in materials prepared for the borough's Animal Control Commission.

That gap is what a proposed change to borough code aims to close. The commission meets Monday to work through a draft forfeiture provision that would, for the first time, let the borough take ownership of an animal — and then adopt it out or euthanize it — in specific cases.

As the code stands, animal control cannot itself obtain permanent ownership solely because an owner refuses humane care. Other provisions allow limited seizure or protective custody in circumstances involving police, rabies or dangerous animals, but staff said the code does not provide an adequate forfeiture process for abuse and neglect cases. "The current code fails to provide adequate ways for an animal to be impounded," wrote Raeanne Ross, the borough's lead animal control officer, and fails to let the borough take firm ownership of one.

The draft would allow forfeiture in seven situations — among them a cruelty conviction, a court order, or an owner failing to reclaim an animal held in protective custody within 10 business days when no court case has been filed. It also proposes requiring animal-care professionals to report cruelty, allowing short-term impoundment for an animal's own welfare, and creating a certification for properties that keep large numbers of animals. Ross said the effort has been in the works since January, prompted in part by the severe cold of last winter.

Ross flagged one gap herself: the forfeiture rules may need an appeals process, since taking someone's animal ends a property right. National animal-law advocates say owners facing forfeiture are entitled to due process to protect their civil and property interests. The borough's draft doesn't yet spell that out. No final action is expected Monday.