The appellant pet store appealed a removal order, a decision to keep in care, and three statements of account issued by the Chief Animal Welfare Inspector regarding an agama, two leopard geckos, and two common rats.
The Animal Care Review Board found that the agama was in distress and its removal was necessary due to the appellant's failure to obtain ordered veterinary care.
However, the Board found the decision to keep the leopard geckos in care was unreasonable, as their required medical treatment did not necessitate close monitoring outside business hours.
The statements of account for the agama and rats were confirmed, while the account for the geckos was varied to remove boarding costs.
