AUBURN – After a nearly three-hour public hearing to appeal a nuisance dog order, selectmen voted in favor of the Board of Health ruling and shot down the dog owner’s appeal.

On Monday, Robert Davis Jr., of 14 Preston Ave., made his appeal to selectmen, while Darlene M. Coyle, director of inspectional services and of public health, and Aimee L. Contois, animal control officer, restated the Board of Health’s Oct. 25 ruling.

In addition, nearly 10 residents spoke against Barnabus and Ian, both one-year old male Rottweilers.

“After April, there were complaints that the town was receiving from neighbors in the area regarding the dogs barking incessantly and causing disturbances,” Ms. Coyle said. “In October, we received several concerns for dogs from 14 Preston Ave. being loose in the neighborhood.”

In addition, Ms. Coyle said several neighbors who spoke about the dogs being loose were worried about the animals' health and safety.

On Oct. 25, the Board of Health held a public hearing regarding reported violations of a nuisance dog order the board had issued on April 5 regarding Barnabus and Ian and the board determined that neighbors’ concerns were valid.

Based on the evidence and testimony presented at the October public hearing, Mr. Davis was deemed to be in violation of the order issued on April 5 and the Board of Health voted to amend the April 5 nuisance dog order.

While unattended outside, Barnabus and Ian shall be confined in a securely enclosed and locked pen or dog run area on the property with a fence not less than six feet high in an area not less than ten feet by ten feet per dog, the nuisance dog order states.

While attended outside, the two dogs shall be under the direct control of their owner, or a keeper with expressed permission by the owner to have the dogs in their possession and be restrained by leash or lead not exceeding six feet in length, states the nuisance dog order.

Mr. Davis was also ordered to cover the kennel enclosure on three sides, while the fourth side facing his home may remained uncovered, according to the order.

In addition, the two dogs shall be permanently identified by the implantation and registration of a microchip in each dog, as well as being altered by a licensed veterinarian that the dogs shall not be reproductively intact, according to the order.

The microchips and the neutering of the dogs became a sticking point for Mr. Davis.

Selectman Tristan J. LaLiberte made a motion Monday to continue the hearing until Dec. 10, adding he thought neutering the dogs was too severe a punishment, especially since none of the complainants ever suggested it. Selectman Daniel S. Carpenter voted with Mr. LaLiberte but the motion failed 3-2.

In a 4-1 vote, selectmen voted to uphold the Board of Health’s decision, with Mr. LaLiberte being the sole vote against.

After the vote, Mr. Davis said he plans to appeal the ruling to the courts.

“The only thing I really have any opposition to is castration and the chipping,” Mr. Davis said. “Both are physically invasive. These dogs don’t deserve it.”