NEWS

West Lafayette man to appeal fine for keeping ducks

Eric Lagatta
Reporter

COSHOCTON – A law prohibiting a West Lafayette man from keeping pet ducks for emotional support is "callous" and ignores the plight of veterans suffering from nervous conditions, according to an appeal filed with the Fifth District Court of Appeals.

U.S. Army veteran Darin Welker will appeal an October guilty ruling handed down in Coshocton County Municipal Court that also fined him $50 for violating a village ordinance that bans farm animals within its limits.

At issue are six ducks that live in a fenced-off portion of his yard on Grandview Street in West Lafayette.

Welker, 36, argues he should be allowed to keep his ducks for therapy for his post-traumatic stress disorder and depression since the harm of taking them away would be more severe than if they were allowed to stay, according to the appeals brief filed by his attorney Bob Weir.

But the state maintains the letter of the law, arguing the case is a "strict liability offense" to protect other residents from the hazards of farm animals such as ducks within the village.

Welker's case rests on a concept called "affirmative defense," meaning the facts of his situation— the medical necessity of keeping the ducks for therapy— should excuse what is otherwise illegal.

Unlike most other states, Ohio has not codified the necessity defense in its code except in cases of self-defense.

But a separate brief filed by City Law Director Bob Skelton on Wednesday argues there's a reason the law exists, and Welker shouldn't expect to be exempt from it.

The state also argues the necessity defense is invalid in this case, as Welker himself decided to purchase the ducks knowing it was against the law and also failed to provide evidence from a medical provider that he needed them to treat his PTSD.

Although Welker and his wife had testified in October to a marked improvement in his demeanor since he got the ducks, and a social worker had written a letter suggesting Welker benefited from the animals, that doesn't qualify as medical evidence, the state posits.

"We cannot allow citizens to be able to be excused from the police powers of municipalities and villages solely by their own testimony that their actions make them feel better," the state argued in its brief.

When Welker was cited in June, he had 14 ducks at his Grandview Street home.

Although he gave eight ducks away, Welker would still violate a recently amended village law that allows no more than two therapy pets in the village. The village council added the provision late last year to accommodate people such as Welker who may have a legitimate need for therapy animals, but they decided two was enough.

But Weir argues the law, and October's trial court ruling, may be indicative of societal neglect of veterans who suffer from an invisible illness such as PTSD.

Weir argues for a "more compassionate, humane law" that recognizes the needs of a person such as Welker whose welfare "may depend on the prudent, therapeutic use of animals."

Welker and his attorney have 10 days to write a reply brief to the state before the matter is scheduled for an oral hearing.

The appeals court must decide whether the municipal court's ruling was correct. It typically takes between two and three months until an oral argument is scheduled, and another 30 to 60 days until there's a ruling.

Welker declined to comment until a ruling from the appeals court is issued.

Welker, who served a year in 2005 in Operation Iraqi Freedom, has raised the ducks since March when they were ducklings. The ducks, who have names like Clyde, Bo and Lucy, live in a fenced-off portion of his yard.

Previous testimony indicates that since he got the ducks, he takes less medication and requires fewer visits to the VA outpatient clinic in Zanesville.

elagatta@coshoctontribune.com

740-295-3442

Twitter: @EricLagatta