Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- blog:2019:0208_goat_case [02/13/2019 18:02] – Alisssandra
+++ blog:2019:0208_goat_case [06/11/2019 01:44] (current) – removed Alisssandra
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-====== goat case ======
-goats seized taken due to hoof rot disease. 2 yrs prior Complaints about goats suffered hoof rot. hoof rot can not be cured, but treated with zinc oxide greatly reduces inflammation and owned a particular goat that naturally suffer hoof rot.
-When goats have dry condition hooves are fine, and in wet condition hooves become inflamed with level of wetness increase hooves sensitivity. I don't know full detail of story.
-. During 2 yr complaint period did owner ask for prior building permit to build safe enclosure for goats?
-. Why wasn't vet able to examine goats day of seizure, and why was defendant denied right and transparency to be present at goat examination?
-. Why was gag order set on defendant?
-. Owner claims housing developments want owner out of business b/c they don't pay taxes for farmland?, Who else experienced seizure of land? Correlation needed to be proven.
-. How long were employees fired from date of seizure?
-owner's first offense goat seized, treated, and sold? Owner paid 5,000 fine, medical/care/shelter totalled 4,875, and legal fees. The Statement owner gave by admission. "When I found out goats were not kept treated I fired employees." Meaning owner was not aware of problem by not checking goats feet created a environment
-for neglect. My assertion could be wrong b/c a vet did not examine goats day of seizure without owner present creates lack of transparency and honesty. Punishment far exceeded crime.
-{{tag>critical}}