A veterinarian for some of the area's largest breeding kennels is headed to court on an animal-cruelty charge for allegedly mutilating a puppy's tail.

It was a sting operation that landed Dr. Thomas F. Stevenson of Twin Valley Veterinary Clinic in Honey Brook at a preliminary hearing in Quarryville on Thursday before District Judge Stuart J. Mylin.

Stevenson faces up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine if convicted of the misdemeanor charge. The state Board of Veterinary Medicine also could revoke or suspend his license to practice veterinary medicine if he is convicted.

Mylin said he was "convinced" of the evidence presented Thursday against Stevenson, who is charged with amputating the already-damaged tail of a 9-week-old poodle mix after holding the dog under steaming-hot water.

Undercover humane officer Tara Loller of the Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals testified that on March 10 she posed as a Florida woman interested in buying the ailing puppy from Country Lane Kennels, a New Providence commercial kennel owned by Samuel E. King, who also is charged with animal cruelty in the incident.

Loller said the dog's tail was bleeding and oozing as she carried it around for the duration of her visit that day until Stevenson, who was already at the kennel, took the dog from her to treat its tail.

Stevenson testified Thursday that King had told him he accidentally cut the dog's tail while he was grooming it on March 9.

But it was how Stevenson treated the dog that was sharply contested at the preliminary hearing.

Loller said Stevenson examined the dog's tail, turned on hot tap water for about 30 to 45 seconds, then put the dog's tail under the running water. Loller she could see the water steaming as it came from the faucet.

"Basically, the puppy was yelping, screaming and trying to get away," she testified, saying the dog was "screaming bloody murder."

Loller testified that while King helped hold the puppy, Stevenson used a "scissors apparatus" to cut the dog's tail about six times. She said the vet then used his hand to apply ointment to the tail — "what was left of it" — and told her to use Neosporin on the wound until she could take it to her own vet, presumably in Florida.

Stevenson admitted Thursday that he used no anesthetic or painkillers on the dog, that he did not sterilize the scissors he used to cut its tail and that he did not suture the wound after he cut off the remainder of the tail.

But the reason for that, he said, was that he didn't have his surgical kit when he arrived at the kennel on March 10. Stevenson testified that under the circumstances he thought the treatment appropriate — that he only was snipping off clotted blood, some loose skin and a scab that had formed on the wounded tail.

"I told Sam the only thing to do is snip this off," Stevenson testified. "For me to do anything more than what I did would not be right because I didn't have what I needed to do that."

Stevenson denied that the dog "screamed" during the procedure.

"The puppy made not one sound. The puppy never made a sound," he testified.

Stevenson said he would not have used hot water to wash off a scab and clotted blood, and, in either case, his hands were under the tap water, too, and didn't get burned.

"I think I just turned on the cold water," he testified. "You just work the scab away, and you don't do that in hot water. My hands were in the same water the puppy was in."

However, in his testimony, Stevenson referred to the procedure he performed on the poodle mix as "tail amputation" — after he had already denied performing an amputation on the dog because that would have required sutures, anesthesia and sterilized equipment.

Assistant District Attorney Christine L. Wilson jumped on the opportunity to call Stevenson on his use of the term and on the fact that he had used only Dial antibacterial hand soap to prepare for the surgery.

Wilson also called PSPCA's chief investigating veterinarian, Rachel Lee, who examined the dog after it was taken from King's kennel.

Lee testified that the dog was missing 80 percent of its tail, which had been so crudely amputated that only a thin covering of tissue remained over the last vertebra on the dog's spine. She said the wound was caked with feces, but it had not become infected.

Lee also testified that a pathology report on the dog's tissue sample showed dead or decaying tissue "most consistent with thermal injury," suggesting the dog's tail might have been burned by hot water.

Lee said this wasn't simply a case of the dog's tail being docked, which is typically performed on puppies no more than 5 days old.

"This dog was far too old to have its tail just cut off. (Tail amputation) is a very painful procedure," Lee testified.

Given the looks of the wound, Lee said, she wouldn't even have assumed the amputation was the work of a veterinarian.

Stevenson's attorney, Dennis Boyle of Harrisburg, argued that the evidence did not support the accusation that Stevenson "willfully" and "maliciously" mutilated the dog, as Pennsylvania's animal-cruelty statute requires, but rather that the vet was simply treating the dog's already-damaged tail.

Wilson countered that the dog screamed during the procedure, which was improperly performed, making Stevenson's actions not only "beyond cruel" but also "reprehensible."

King, who operates his kennel at 223 Refton Road, also faces several other charges in relation to two separate incidents.

According to a police affidavit, an anonymous rescue group delivered 10 dogs from King's kennel to the PSPCA, where Lee deemed them in need of veterinary care because they had been kept in unsanitary kennel conditions.

King is charged with four summary counts of not providing adequate veterinary care and five summary counts of confining dogs in unsanitary conditions.

The state Bureau of Dog Law Enforcement also filed seven citations against King for alleged unsafe conditions and practices during a March 6 inspection at his kennel. King had 179 dogs at his kennel at that time, but is licensed by the state to house up to 500.

According to state warden Kristen Reed's inspection report, King refused her access to his kennels for inspection and "threatened" her until she called state police to the scene.

Reed's report stated that King agreed to the inspection, but then attempted to correct infractions while she was conducting the inspection.

Reed cited King for refusing access, selling underage puppies, keeping inaccurate sales and rabies-vaccination records and a host of unsanitary and unsafe conditions at his kennel.

The March 6 inspection was a follow-up to a Feb. 5 inspection, during which Reed ordered King to get veterinary care and grooming for several dogs and cited him for multiple infractions.

In 2000, King pleaded guilty when the Bureau cited him for operating a kennel without a state-issued license. Dozens of other citations followed over the years for unsanitary kennel conditions and refusing wardens access for inspection. King pleaded guilty to most of them and paid fines.

In January 2008, the Bureau and King's attorney came to an agreement that allowed King to continue his breeding business as long as he would abide by all the rules, including allowing access for routine state inspections.

Meanwhile, the poodle-mix puppy at the center of the animal-cruelty charges against King and Stevenson is reportedly recovering and living in a private home.

Mylin set Stevenson's bail at $5,000.

E-mail: slindt@lnpnews.com