• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Pierce County, Washington seizure?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Washington State Animal Cruelty Statutes:

    http://asci.uvm.edu/equine/law/cruelty/wa_cruel.htm

    16.52.207. Animal cruelty in the second degree

    (1) A person is guilty of animal cruelty in the second degree if, under circumstances not amounting to first degree animal cruelty, the person knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence inflicts unnecessary suffering or pain upon an animal.

    (2) An owner of an animal is guilty of animal cruelty in the second degree if, under circumstances not amounting to first degree animal cruelty, the owner knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence:

    (a) Fails to provide the animal with necessary food, water, shelter, rest, sanitation, ventilation, space, or medical attention and the animal suffers unnecessary or unjustifiable physical pain as a result of the failure; or

    (b) Abandons the animal.

    (3) Animal cruelty in the second degree is a misdemeanor.

    -----------------------------------

    16.52.085. Removal of animals for feeding--Examination--Notice--Euthanasia
    (1) If a law enforcement officer or animal control officer has probable cause to believe that an owner of a domestic animal has violated this chapter and no responsible person can be found to assume the animal's care, the officer may authorize, with a warrant, the removal of the animal to a suitable place for feeding and care, or may place the animal under the custody of an animal care and control agency.

    In determining what is a suitable place, the officer shall consider the animal's needs, including its size and behavioral characteristics. An officer may remove an animal under this subsection without a warrant only if the animal is in an immediate life-threatening condition.

    (2) If a law enforcement officer or an animal control officer has probable cause to believe a violation of this chapter has occurred, the officer may authorize an examination of a domestic animal allegedly neglected or abused in violation of this chapter by a veterinarian to determine whether the level of neglect or abuse in violation of this chapter is sufficient to require removal of the animal.
    This section does not condone illegal entry onto private property.
    ************************
    \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"

    Comment


    • #62
      Ah...now Fairfax is making as much sense as he can on a thread like this. Thank you for the link.

      Your credibility is nil. Go away.
      Proud member of the "Don't rush to kill wildlife" clique!

      Comment


      • #63
        I wasn't saying they should have been given a warning, just that it's probably would have happened in my area based on what I've seen local AC here do.

        I've also heard of much more proactive ACs in other parts of country just the same as I've heard of ones that do even less than mine. I'd guess mine falls somewhere in the lower end of the middle, I've certainly seen them drag their feet a-plenty but I've also seen them step up on occasion (usually when someone like the media lights a fire under their ass).

        My point was, in my area the seizure probably wouldn't have happened. Obviously it's different where those horses were. Not saying it's better or worse just different.

        I'm glad the horses are out of that barn. It was horrid. How it came about I'll not judge because I simply do not know. I will say I have a hard time buying into conspiracy because with as strapped as many ACs/local governments are for cash I just do not see why they would want to take on a large herd. Makes no sense. From what I've seen they avoid doing so many times to the detriment of the animals being neglected. It's actually kind of nice to see a case where they are being proactive and not hiding behind the old excuse "well there is food and water on the property". There is more than one way to abuse or neglect a horse, and plenty of valid reasons that don't involve starvation to take them. Unfortunately that seems to be the only reason they WILL take them in many parts of the country and even then it can take a while.

        Comment


        • #64
          Everything else aside...just watched that video. Question to think about: when urine leaches out of a manure pile, what colour is the liquid? Not clear like in the video - that is mud the person is walking through and not runoff.
          I am also suprised at the term "emaciated", as the horses in the video were not underweight by any stretch. I think of all the horses out there who DO need to be seized for lack of feed, or lack of shelter, and wonder why they are getting bypassed. Just don't get it. Not saying that this was fantastic by any stretch, but after seeing all the horses who are living in far worse situations being ignored, I don't get it at all. Why bypass them in favour of these?
          Dee
          Founder of the I LOFF my worrywart TB clique!
          Official member of the "I Sing Silly Songs to My Animals!" Clique
          http://wilddiamondintherough.blogspot.ca/

          Comment


          • #65
            Fairfax, I'm also wondering to what end is the seizure, if it's a case of these people being railroaded. What is local government getting out of it besides a hefty feed bill?

            Brownie points with the DEA who called in in? Public praise? Valuable blood stock? Personal vendetta?

            And why, if they just wanted to go seize a bunch of animals, would they pick on a doctor? Doctors can generally afford lawyers. Wouldn't it make sense to single out someone a little lower on the economic ladder?

            I'm just trying to understand why you're so quick to jump to the conclusion that this seizure wasn't in good faith even if it was flawed. Save one account on here from a person who says to be close to the situation which confirms the news article and also says this place has been an ongoing problem all any of us are privy to is the news articles. Just wondering off of what you are drawing your conclusions and the logic behind them.

            Comment


            • #66
              Coincidences are generally worth at the least a second look. If the local news reports are true regarding the DEA being on the premise the day before, then I am going to wait to see this play out before forming an opinion.

              Comment

              • Original Poster

                #67
                Originally posted by DeeThbd View Post
                Just don't get it. Not saying that this was fantastic by any stretch, but after seeing all the horses who are living in far worse situations being ignored, I don't get it at all. Why bypass them in favour of these?
                Dee
                Does it have to be an either/or?
                If the laws are as someone stated above and the ventilation and other concerns about this place are as represented, I am relieved that some officials are responding as they are required without waiting until animals are at death's door.

                Considering the situation about the draft stud covered on the fugly link someone provided, I wonder if this wasn't a case of AC responding and removing the horses was b/c they finally had a "final" reason to. If they found out about the draft after it was moved they would be hard-pressed to prove when/who caused its feet issues (why you don't feed or move horses before calling AC). And someone on this thread stated that AC had been called on them before; maybe this is the straw that broke the camel's back, as they could prove multiple issues and get a CO.

                Same with CCH; maybe the "nice" discussions she had previously with the AC weren't as nice as she portrays and she finally ran out of warnings (she had mentioned that the AC officer had stated to her that things hadn't gotten any worse, maybe they were expecting/requiring an improvement?)

                And with PP; she had numerous instances of issues with AC, and maybe while that instance wasn't critical at that moment it was the final straw.

                And maybe someone high up in Pierce county wanted a nice Arab.
                I don't think there is enough evidence at this point to prove either way without question (regardless of what Fairfax insists), but as I said, if there is an AC unit out there that is responding and legitimatly seizing before critical care is required my hat is off to them.

                And I find it hysterical that people insist you can never believe a newcaster because they always slant things for the "glory" of the story, yet jump on every. single. word. to prove their point as if a newcaster could never misspeak or have incorrect information when it suits them.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by LauraKY View Post
                  A blast from the past regarding Fairfax. This is Fairfax's "rescue".

                  http://chronofhorse.com/forum/showthread.php?t=347389

                  Leo says he's not involved with ARM, but he's listed on their website. From the thread:
                  Did I miss something...is ARM involved in this rescue?

                  A resounding NOPE

                  I was put on their website during the Robin Vess Case...this was all brought up before...

                  I had forgotten I was even on it..however when contacted I said to just leave my name on their list.

                  Why would you think this is important for this case?...ah...trying to make a connection that I will bash everyone but ARM....nice try but AGAIN LAURA...you fail

                  I have spoken with Terry regarding the accounting problem which I read about on COTH and said it needed to be cleared up for credibility sake.

                  Am not on the BOD which you implied before over and over and over until you finall READ the list.....there are many many Arabian Horse people on as helpers..

                  International coordinator...there was a case in B.C. that I tried to help with regarding the movemet of A stallion to the U.S. Again LAURA...you have been around this dance floor more than once.

                  READ INTERNATIONAL REP.

                  But then..when you are trying to discredit...LOST AGAIN...there is nothing else I can say or do about it....I seem to remember you tried to tell me I wasn't me...or something quite ridiculous...and weren't you the one who contacted ARM and told them if they removed me they would have more credibility?...how strange.....

                  Your gun is shooting blanks...as usual...wouldn't it be neat if you actually ACCOMPLISHED ONE THING other than demonstrating the lowest level of your potential?
                  The Elephant in the room

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by luvmytbs View Post
                    Washington State Animal Cruelty Statutes:

                    http://asci.uvm.edu/equine/law/cruelty/wa_cruel.htm

                    16.52.207. Animal cruelty in the second degree

                    (1) A person is guilty of animal cruelty in the second degree if, under circumstances not amounting to first degree animal cruelty, the person knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence inflicts unnecessary suffering or pain upon an animal.

                    (2) An owner of an animal is guilty of animal cruelty in the second degree if, under circumstances not amounting to first degree animal cruelty, the owner knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence:

                    (a) Fails to provide the animal with necessary food, water, shelter, rest, sanitation, ventilation, space, or medical attention and the animal suffers unnecessary or unjustifiable physical pain as a result of the failure; or

                    (b) Abandons the animal.

                    (3) Animal cruelty in the second degree is a misdemeanor.

                    -----------------------------------

                    16.52.085. Removal of animals for feeding--Examination--Notice--Euthanasia
                    (1) If a law enforcement officer or animal control officer has probable cause to believe that an owner of a domestic animal has violated this chapter and no responsible person can be found to assume the animal's care, the officer may authorize, with a warrant, the removal of the animal to a suitable place for feeding and care, or may place the animal under the custody of an animal care and control agency.

                    In determining what is a suitable place, the officer shall consider the animal's needs, including its size and behavioral characteristics. An officer may remove an animal under this subsection without a warrant only if the animal is in an immediate life-threatening condition.

                    (2) If a law enforcement officer or an animal control officer has probable cause to believe a violation of this chapter has occurred, the officer may authorize an examination of a domestic animal allegedly neglected or abused in violation of this chapter by a veterinarian to determine whether the level of neglect or abuse in violation of this chapter is sufficient to require removal of the animal.
                    This section does not condone illegal entry onto private property.

                    DEA is NOT restricted by state or county laws. THEY were the ones who reported (according to the news) the conditions to the local A/C
                    The Elephant in the room

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Calvincrowe View Post
                      Ah...now Fairfax is making as much sense as he can on a thread like this. Thank you for the link.

                      Your credibility is nil. Go away.
                      I at least print my name Leo Maxwell when ever requested...unlike the group who attack and give each other group hugs meanwhile hiding your venom behind a moniker

                      What ARE the credentials for the A/C agent you hold in such high esteem and what relationship to that person and the rescue involved in this?
                      The Elephant in the room

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Fairfax View Post
                        DEA is NOT restricted by state or county laws. THEY were the ones who reported (according to the news) the conditions to the local A/C
                        And your point?

                        Regardless of who reported it, the A/C acted within their rights.

                        What's the conspiracy again????
                        ************************
                        \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          If there was that much urine, wouldn't they have used masks while in the barn?

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by GaitedGloryRider View Post
                            Fairfax, I'm also wondering to what end is the seizure, if it's a case of these people being railroaded. What is local government getting out of it besides a hefty feed bill?

                            Brownie points with the DEA who called in in? Public praise? Valuable blood stock? Personal vendetta?

                            And why, if they just wanted to go seize a bunch of animals, would they pick on a doctor? Doctors can generally afford lawyers. Wouldn't it make sense to single out someone a little lower on the economic ladder?

                            I'm just trying to understand why you're so quick to jump to the conclusion that this seizure wasn't in good faith even if it was flawed. Save one account on here from a person who says to be close to the situation which confirms the news article and also says this place has been an ongoing problem all any of us are privy to is the news articles. Just wondering off of what you are drawing your conclusions and the logic behind them.
                            Animal seizures have a protocol as set down 1984 and part of the rules of engagement were:

                            Photograph EACH horse from all sides including top and bottom on the property before you move them.

                            (this is to ensure the owner can not claim they were abused, dirtied up or starved AFTER seizure.

                            Robin Vess case...Nancy Silva of the Port Clinton Ohio H.S. (Sandusky County) was recorded TELLING THE VOLUNTEERS to reduce the amount of hay for all of the horses as they did not want to alter any of the evidence

                            The reason for doing seizures properly, including warrants is the increased success rate in prosecution.

                            Unless the horses are ready to die that day (and should they be moved then?) a warrant allows the COURTS to make a decision rather than one based on emotion and fund raising

                            The claims that the horses had been in for such a long period of time would NOT raise warning bells IF THEY WERE LAME when led out. According to ALL five yets I spoke to today..one Canadian and four American everyone of them said the sole of the hoof would be pulpy and thrush infested IF they had been there for such an extended period of time.

                            And yet, no horses are reported as thrush infested and they were not (with the exception of two noted) lame

                            When terminology such as: the worst case OUR PROFESSIONALS have ever seen...(in this case absolutely NO DEAD ANIMALS, NO DEAD FOALS OR BROODMARES) lying in stalls or fields then the representatives have either never been on a rescue of "merit" or are prone to exaggeration in order to stir the pocketbooks of viewers and listeners.

                            Those who "claim" they were there when the horses were unloaded (I have no way to verify) state STALLIONS AND MARES were unloaded from the same trailer.

                            (Vess case again...this resulted in the death of a mare due to a knock down by two year old colts (she was around 30) and they trampled her.

                            Experts have stated over and over and over...unless it is critical, LEAVE THE HORSES IN THEIR GROUPS.

                            What I have said is: I think there is more to this story than the horses.
                            The Elephant in the room

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by luvmytbs View Post
                              And your point?

                              Regardless of who reported it, the A/C acted within their rights.

                              What's the conspiracy again????
                              Since you are insinuating you are on top of all of this...please tell me which rescue had its members and volunteers loading the horses?

                              Please tell me why the majority of the vehicles pulling the horse trailers in the pictures and the video on the TV are marked DEA

                              Please tell me why the solicitation of donations is going to the county instead of the rescue.

                              Your quick to accuse me of everything short of dining on dead babies...so....give me the answers....
                              The Elephant in the room

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by dacasodivine View Post
                                If there was that much urine, wouldn't they have used masks while in the barn?
                                No thrush, no watery eyes and no respiratory problems according to the county .... strange for such a long term abuse with horses locked into an unventilated barn.

                                Sometimes when things are staged..they are a little too perfect
                                The Elephant in the room

                                Comment


                                • #76
                                  Fairfax: I have read all your reason to discredit, everything everyone has said and all your nutty ideas and opinions, and I believe you just have too much time on your hands. I have owned horses myself for over 30 years. You stated earlier I am here with alternative motives, so very wrong you are.. I simply stated what I witnessed personally and why yes I am related to someone who helped inthe resuce effort, and shame on you for accusing that family member for being there for anything other than sheer concern for the horses involved, there was nothing to be gained on her part beyone doing what she thought should be done and that was someone helping out along with many others mind you, to give a large number of horses a chance at a life they have been deprived of, for many their whole lifes..
                                  For a horse person you would think you would realize its almost October and you dont see many foals born this time of year.. I seen many a foal at that farm every spring for the last 12 years.
                                  And someone brought up a good point do you live here local? Did you ever see this first hand, as you seem to talk as though you have a great deal of knowledge, so if you know something to be fact that you have seen by all means please share.
                                  I dont care if the horses had or did not have manure stains thats a pebble in the pond looking at the big picture, and as I stated it was compacted, meaning squished, hard, flat, so if a horse chose to lay down I could see where it would not get covered in it, its not a fresh pile of crap most horses tend to roll in, when kept in a normal daily cleaned stall.
                                  I pointed out the facts nothing more, and you really make me wonder what a self claimed life long horse owner has been drinking way to much of to ever be able to be anything but appaled at what you have claimed to see.

                                  Comment


                                  • #77
                                    My dear Leo, all I did was repost an old thread I remembered. However, if you want to think I'm your stalker, be my guest.

                                    I was just pointing out why you might have a thing against rescues and A/C. Just a little background history for those who might have missed it.

                                    Comment


                                    • #78
                                      Originally posted by Fairfax View Post
                                      Please tell me why the majority of the vehicles pulling the horse trailers in the pictures and the video on the TV are marked DEA
                                      I reviewed all the pix available on this thread. Not one with a DEA vehicle in it. Where do you come up with this stuff????

                                      Originally posted by Fairfax View Post
                                      Please tell me why the solicitation of donations is going to the county instead of the rescue.
                                      Also couldn't find mention of a rescue group - but whatever.
                                      If it's animal control caring for the animals, they are part of county government. Duh....
                                      ************************
                                      \"Horses lend us the wings we lack\"

                                      Comment


                                      • #79
                                        I"m with Fairfax on this one. Something isn't right. Someone stated the horses were put IN the barn before DEA got there. True? Don't know. I'm sure that will come out if it did happen.

                                        No horse pees that much to have it standing. The barn would have to literally be packed with horses.

                                        Were the conditions good? No. Seizable? No.

                                        Look at the overall condition of the horses. Coats are shiny and the horses look healthy and cared for. If they were as neglected as stated, they would not look like that. A horse in good weight can still show signs of neglect such as dull coat, signs of worm infestation, and untrimmed hooves. I did not see that.

                                        For the person that said they appear in good weight because they are pregnant. We are horse people and not stupid. We know a pregnant skinny horse from a horse in good health, tyvm.

                                        If any real evidence is brought to light to show I am wrong, I'm prepared to listen. Right now all there is is what the people who seized the horses say. No actual evidence/pictures to back it up. Anytime a seizure is legitimate, there are lots of pictures right from the start. Think about the Vess case. Almost no pictures of the horses because most were in good shape.

                                        You can't go in and take horses before things get bad, or "just in case." I know there have been cases of owners waiting too long to get help but there have also been cases of large herds being seized without any real cause.

                                        I think this is going to generate easy money for the county or DEA. If they win, they get to adopt out the horses. As the horses are healthy, they will require very little money to keep. If they lose, the owner either pays an exorbitant fee to get them back or turns them over because he can't afford that fee, and they get adopted out.

                                        Any way you look at it, the county or the DEA is going to get a lot of money from those horses with little if any money going out. By now they have donations coming in to pay for feed, vet costs, and other expenses. I would wager they also have foster homes lined up that will be paying for feed and taking care of the day to day stuff out of their own pockets once they have the horse in their care. Easy money.

                                        Comment


                                        • #80
                                          Dacasodivine--You need to google the incident, watch the news stories and read the news accounts. The horses were seized after a DEA-led arrest of the doctor who owns the horses. The AC of Pierce and Kitsap counties were involved, following the laws of the state of Washington. The living conditions were appalling, and we have (GrahamHeeler) an eyewitness who has corroborated the conditions. They live there...Fairfax does not. The AC and Animal Abuse laws of Washington are pretty good. I've reported neglect to them, dealt with them, etc. They prefer to leave animals in place (as they did with the starving horses next door to me) and help the owners to become better horsemen. They seize when the situation clearly can't be safe or improved.

                                          Fairfax insinuated (as did an elderly vet who lives next door) that the man loves his horses, works full time, and is now presumably in custody of the county. Who would care for them now?

                                          Not sure why Fairfax feels that Pierce Co. is "making money" off the situation. Leo seems to have some interesting conspiracy theories about AC/LE.
                                          Proud member of the "Don't rush to kill wildlife" clique!

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X