State alleges violations against pet crematory
State regulators say an animal crematory may have broken multiple state rules, including keeping dead cats and dogs for longer than a month before cremating them.
A recent inspection of Chaparral Veterinary Clinic in Yuma turned up several alleged violations of state rules governing animal crematories.
An inspector for the Arizona State Veterinary Medical Examining Board wrote that the crematory kept animals intended for communal or “mass” cremations longer than the 30-day limit. Some equipment, such as a processor for the ashes, was “old and deteriorating,” according to an inspection report obtained by The Arizona Republic under the Arizona Public Records Law. The inspector also alleged containers of ashes lacked the pet’s name, as required.
Leo Land, who owns the animal clinic and has operated the crematory since about 1975, told The Republic he believes the inspection was “biased,” but on Monday he informed the vet board in a letter that he has closed the crematory and is surrendering his crematory license.
“We decided not to argue because they are the powers that be,” he said. “I wasn’t going to put a lot of money forth to fix it.”
He said the crematory equipment is “old” and “doesn’t look the greatest” but still does the job.
Regarding the delay in cremating deceased pets, he said the cats and dogs are frozen until they are cremated, and the remains are treated with respect.
The state inspector also found the crematory didn’t provide heat protection for the person operating the crematory except for leather gloves. There was no apron, no arm protection, no heat suit. The crematory also lacked certain tools and was using a “brick on concrete” to process the ashes.
Land’s wife, Jo Ann, said the crematory uses a stainless-steel pan and a brick to process the ashes, not a brick on concrete.
The animal crematory usually performs around 70 or 75 cremations a year, she said. This includes “mass cremations” where several animals totaling up to 100 pounds are cremated together. Other customers pay to have
An inspector for the Arizona State Veterinary Medical Examining Board wrote that the crematory kept animals intended for communal or “mass” cremations longer than the 30-day limit.
their dogs or cats cremated separately, and the ashes are returned to them. So far this year, cremations have generated about $4,000.
“It’s a small part of our business,” she said.
The Lands said they started the crematory as a community service in the 1970s because the only way to dispose of deceased pets in the Yuma area was the landfill or mass burials.
Leo Land was opposed to using the landfill.
“At first, I paid someone to do mass burial with a trencher, and I thought I can afford a crematory for that (price),” he said.
The Yuma crematory is one of 16 licensed by the state veterinary board to perform animal cremations.
The veterinary board’s executive director, Victoria Whitmore, brought the inspection report to the board in July because of what she said were “many concerns.” The board didn’t take action, however, because Leo Land had already told Whitmore he was surrendering the crematory license.
The veterinary board also directed staff to begin talks with the Arizona Board of Funeral Directors and Embalmers to possibly contract out crematory inspections to funeral board staff. Whitmore said having the funeral board perform the inspections, which take about 90 minutes each, would give a “higher level of expertise.”
The board also directed staff to talk with the funeral board to see if board members would support a legislative change to give the funeral board responsibility over animal crematories, as is common in many states.
In Arizona, animal crematories fall under the auspices of the veterinary board, which inspects them before opening and also at random, and issues and renews licenses.
Records indicate Chaparral Veterinary Clinic was inspected by the veterinary board in July 2007. That inspection turned up two potential violations: lack of written procedures and the lack of labels with the crematory’s name and cremation date. In a response to the inspection, Jo Ann Land wrote that the issues identified in 2007 had been corrected.