ORANGE — At its Oct. 1, 2025 meeting, the Orange Select Board held a dog hearing and unanimously voted to declare one dog dangerous and two others nuisances after hearing extensive testimony from neighbors, town officials and the dogs’ owner.
The decision stems from multiple incidents involving dogs owned by Clayton Kessler of 662 East River Street. The board classified his dog Bailey, a 2½-year-old pit bull mix, as a dangerous dog, and Dixie (age 4) and Derby (age 2½), also pit mixes, as nuisance dogs, based on behavior patterns and repeated failures to confine the animals.
Assistant Animal Control Officer Calls for Action
Assistant Animal Control Officer Janelle Caron testified that since 2022, there have been escalating complaints, culminating in confirmed bite incidents involving Bailey.
“We are getting to the point where one of the dogs has bitten and broken skin on at least two people,” Caron told the board. Bailey also reportedly killed three hens and damaged a rooster and two coops when Kessler lived in Athol.
Caron said the aggressive behavior—particularly from Bailey—led to her recommendation that Bailey be formally declared dangerous, with physical containment required by law. “We ask that [Kessler] build or purchase an enclosure,” Caron said, noting that electric fences do not meet the requirements for dangerous dog containment under Massachusetts law.
In contrast, she said Dixie and Derby could be managed with lesser restrictions, but she added that confining them with Bailey would be “enough” for the two nuisance dogs.
Board Members Express Concerns Over Public Safety
Orange Select Board Clerk Andrew Smith asked Caron if Bailey’s behavior warranted euthanasia. Caron said, “Both bites were, in my opinion, fairly minor. They did break skin, but nothing life-threatening. It was a single bite and then let go.”
Still, select board members cited serious concerns. “What is it going to take to prevent having a child get badly injured?” Smith said.
Town Counsel Donna MacNicol reminded the board to strictly follow Massachusetts General Law Chapter 140, Section 157, including sworn testimony and a step-by-step review of legally permissible outcomes for dangerous dogs.
After MacNicol spoke, Caron reapproached the dais to say that in both instances where Bailey’s bites broke the skin, the attacks were unprovoked.
“There was no teasing or anything, one of them, the lady was just walking [down Partridgeville Road], the other one was on a relative’s property,” Caron said.
Owner Acknowledges Fault, Says He Took Action
Clayton Kessler told the board he spent $2,500 on a solar-backed electric fence he installed on September 11. “I understand what happened. I know they were off the leashes, this and that,” Kessler said. He added that during one of the incidents, the person was “nipped” because he had batteries in his hand, which scared Bailey, and another dog was barking at them, which also spooked her. Kessler opposed building a full physical enclosure, saying it would block his driveway.
“And where I live, in an enclosure, I don’t see how it’s even physically possible to put up a fence; even neighbors will say that,” Kessler said. Later adding, “If you look at the geographical place of my my home, there’s no way to close it completely off. Underground you can because I can drive over it. I can do everything else over it. And like I said, I’ve talked to my neighbors and they’re fine with it as well.”
Board Chair Tom Smith asked whether the animal control officer agreed the enclosure met the requirements — that it have a roof, be embedded at least two feet into the ground, and include the other statutory features. Caron replied stating that for a dog deemed dangerous, an electric fence does not meet the requirements under the dangerous dog law.
“Anytime that we deem a dog dangerous, it has to follow under those steps and there is a specific description on what the enclosure needs to be,” Caron said. “I do not feel an electric fence is enough — things do happen: collars fall off, dogs slip out of them, and batteries can die. I would still recommend building a physical enclosure for that specific dog.”
Kessler replied stating that Bailey barks a lot and she was being protective because she recently had puppies, but they’re gone now.
“She was protective. She had puppies. They’re gone,” Kessler explained. “So, it was just in that
time that this happened.”
Neighbors Divided on Threat
Wayne Gelinas, an East Road resident, testified under oath that he was bitten by Bailey on August 25, 2025, while retrieving junk batteries at his cousin’s house to bring down to his nephew at Gelinas Waste Recycle Landscape, a waste management service in Orange.
Gelinas said he was bit by Bailey as he went around the side of the house to pick up the batteries.
“The…dog came up in between [two other dogs] and just went right after me,” Gelinas said, adding that he defended himself with a trash-can lid, striking Bailey.
Other neighbors also voiced concerns. Francis King said all three dogs regularly roamed onto his property. “They nip at my heels and ankles and my grandkids are afraid to walk down to the school bus,” he said.
In contrast, nearby residents Micah Stratton and Allison King defended the dogs, especially Bailey. “She definitely seemed more protective [when she had puppies], but she’s not a mean, miserable animal,” Stratton said.
Likewise, King stated, “They ran the neighborhood a little bit,” but described them as friendly overall. “When she was pregnant she just got a little temperamental and that’s when she started to scare us a little bit, you know? But now, we haven’t seen anything like that.”
When a board member asked King if she had a child and was afraid Bailey would hurt her child, King said she had a son and replied: “I don’t know if she would. I know she would bark at him and jump on him because she’s done that, but she’s never bit him. She scared the crap out of him a few times, but she’s never bitten him.”
Final Vote and Requirements
The board unanimously voted to declare all three dogs nuisances, with conditions that Kesler keep them confined using his existing electric fence and comply with all local leash laws.
Then, by separate motion, the board voted unanimously to declare Bailey a dangerous dog, ordering Kessler to:
- Restrain Bailey humanely (but not by tethering)
- Confine her in a roofed, fenced-in pen embedded at least two feet into the ground
- Provide identifying information (such as microchipping)
- Spay Bailey
The board gave Kessler 60 days to build the enclosure and comply with containment rules, and 90 days to complete the spaying procedure.
The hearing concluded at 6:40 p.m. with a formal vote to close the session.
