BUILDING A STABLE ENVIRONMENT SINCE 2001 ®

Deciphering the law is best left to attorneys and legislators.  For the uninitiated, terms like pet or animal or livestock seem pretty straightforward, but when it comes to enforcing the law, they are anything but. 

For example, Washington’s RCW 9.08.065 excludes livestock raised for commercial purposes from the definition of “pet animal.”  Is a Thoroughbred bred for racing a commercial purpose horse?  How about a Quarter Horse line that’s specifically bred to be a show horse? 

If a horse gets loose is it a “public nuisance”?  If it’s merely grazing along the roadside just outside it’s owner’s fence is it “at large”? 

What constitutes “necessary” when it comes to shelter or rest or space?  Are the requirements different for foals than for adult draft horses?  Could a blanket be considered shelter?

When does negligence become criminal?  Can a reckless act be intentional?

When does one private citizen have the right to act without trespassing on another? 

Citizens speak

Oh, wouldn’t the world seem dull and flat

With nothing whatever to grumble at?

     -- W. S. Gilbert (1826-1911)

Monday, December 31, 2007

Officer Clinton Davidson was relieved that two of the horses were finally able to be removed, but he knew they were still not out of the woods on this case.  He told his supervisor that he had been in “constant contact” with the owner Donna Gale, but felt like she needed a lot of hand-holding.    He had repeatedly asked her to put up shelters for the horses, but each time he came by little, if anything, had been done.  “She always complies when I ask her to do something, but she will never fix a problem on her own.” 

Davidson asked Donna about the horse with the infected and bleeding penis.  She told him that she had been treating the horse for a “boil” that happened several weeks earlier.  She had not actually seen a vet, but had talked to one on the phone, who told her what to buy at the local feed store. 

January, 2008

Pierce County Animal Control supervisor Lisa Drury was still fairly new at her job and already she had had to oversee several large and very public seizures of animals.  Back in June, animal control finally cracked a dog breeder case they had been working on for years, pulling dozens of dogs from the Graham location.  But at $10 a day per dog, the County had already spent more than $100,000 just in boarding fees in the past six months, and the case still had not come to trial.  The cost of that case had already bled into the new year, and Drury was worried.  

Drury sent a note off to her boss, County Auditor Pat McCarthy about the Waller Road situation.  “A meeting tomorrow at 2PM that was requested by two of the complainants ... has turned into a major event.  ...  There are thirteen [more] horses involved and this has the potential to be huge.” 

Meanwhile, Officer Davidson was gearing up to have the 13 remaining horses examined for potential removal.  He arranged for Dr. Linda Hagerman to meet him at the property the next day at 11:30.  When Hagerman spoke with Drury the next day about her findings, she agreed that the conditions were deplorable, but was unwilling to state that the horses were enduring pain and suffering, and without her commitment, they would not be able to obtain another warrant.

January 3, 2008

Government offices are notoriously small and ill-equipped for meetings of more than one or two people at a time, and Lisa Drury’s office was no exception.  The room was crowded with file cabinets and stacks of papers and electronic equipment.  But still she had been able to fit in one small round table and a couple of chairs.  That would work just fine for the couple of people who wanted to talk about the 96th and Waller Road case.

Except that eight people showed up.  And most of them were hopping mad.  Diana Martin and Diane Ellis (who had requested the meeting in the first place) had invited Nancy Parsons (from State Representative Dawn Morrell’s office), Rose Corey (who was boarding the two horses that had already been removed from the property),  and  a representative from Pasado’s (a local animal activist group).  Then there was Lisa Drury and two of her officers, and Jenny Edwards from Hope For Horses.   

The group crowded into the small space and Diana Martin played a video she had taken of the horses and the property conditions.  Rose explained that she had been caring for the Arab stallion and the foal that had been removed a few days earlier, and showed another video and some photos she had taken. 

Rose said that she had already begun to bond with the two horses and was paying for her vet (Dr. Linda Hagerman) to provide medical treatment, because she was just trying to be a good samaritan.  When she asked what would become of the horses, one of the officers explained that the owner had fourteen business days to petition for their return or post a bond that would pay for their care until the case could be decided by a judge.  Based on the date and time of the impound of the two horses, that would have given the owner until January 21 to respond because holidays and weekends are not included in “business days.”  But Rose left the meeting believing that by January 15 the horses would automatically become hers. 

There was talk of “going to the media” but Officer Davidson made the point that that wouldn’t change the law or law enforcement’s ability to act.   Someone asked about setting up surveillance on the property but the implications of that were huge.

For several hours the group talked about existing animal cruelty laws and how being able to demonstrate pain and suffering was key to an animal control officer’s ability to remove animals from an owner.  One of the officers explained how horses are generally considered livestock rather than domestic animals like dogs or cats, and suggested that the citizens might be more effective in spending time creating more effective laws for horses. 

The meeting drug on with no resolution in sight.  No one left the meeting happy.

Chapter 5

IMPOUND AT WALLER ROAD - CHAPTER 4