Dog-attack victims wait days or weeks for response

The first pit bull ripped into David Salter's left arm. The second snapped at his right arm.

The Kent man's screams shocked neighbors on that quiet spring evening last year. But when they called 911, sheriff's deputies and animal control refused to come because by then, the dogs' caretaker had put the animals back in their enclosure.

The next day, when an animal-control officer stopped by, the dogs were gone.

It took more than six weeks for the caretakers to bring the dogs in. One dog was euthanized, the other transferred to a new owner.

"They should be responding right away," said Salter, who needed more than 40 stitches. "Situations like this should have higher priority. You're taking a chance because if the dogs get loose, they can attack again."

Salter's case is hardly unique. King County Animal Care and Control, under a mandate to step up efforts to protect animals, is struggling to fulfill the other half of its mission — public safety.

On some days there are only two officers responsible for covering hundreds of square miles. Those officers often respond first to animal-welfare calls, leaving dog-bite victims to wait days, sometimes weeks, for the county to deal with vicious dogs.

In several instances, people complaining of vicious dogs, including a parent whose child was bitten, waited three months or longer for a response. Even then, Animal Care and Control didn't find the dogs, nor did it fine the pet owners.

The Times found that the agency's response to calls for aid from the public has sharply deteriorated, in large part because of a 2007 mandate from the Metropolitan King County Council to aggressively pursue animal-cruelty cases and improve conditions at its animal shelter.

Among The Times' findings:

• Median response times for animal bites have tripled — rising steadily from nine hours in 2005 to nearly 28 hours last year. The median response time for an injured animal? Within an hour.

• The median response time for vicious-animal calls was 71 hours last year, up from 26 hours in 2007.

• The agency has a dedicated investigator for animal cruelty but none for dogs that bite people.

• The number of orders to confine or remove biting and vicious dogs has dropped by nearly 80 percent from 2006 to 2008 — from 55 to 12. The typical fine: $100.

Remaking the agency?

"We just are stretched thin," said Nancy McKenney, the agency's interim manager. "We have not been able to add more staff to do both field and shelter services and maintain the mandate that the council gave us. We've had to pull from one side to do the other."

The agency's difficulties were on display again just over a week ago when five dogs attacked four horses owned by Patricia Clark of Maple Valley.

Clark, founder of a nonprofit horse rescue, and her neighbors had complained to the agency over the summer about the dogs chasing horses and scaring people. The dogs weren't biting anyone, and the agency took no action.

After the Sept. 5 attack, two of Clark's horses had to be euthanized.

"They don't know how to prioritize," said Clark, whom the agency praised in February for her help in a horse-cruelty investigation. "Cases are being closed that have no business being closed."

Local lawmakers are now questioning whether the agency can fulfill both of its missions.

King County Executive Kurt Triplett also has proposed eliminating the county's subsidy of $1.1 million — about one-fifth of Animal Care and Control's budget — as part of broader cost-cutting. Triplett's office said the agency, which is funded largely by pet-license sales, could become self-sufficient by charging suburbs for its services and outsourcing the shelter.

Dow Constantine, who chairs the King County Council, said the county should hand off shelter services to a nonprofit and animal-control duties to the Sheriff's Office. He pointed out that the county increased agency funding in 2008 to improve care for animals.

"They've been given more resources to do their job," Constantine said. "That's an issue of failing to manage the system properly."

Shelter comes first

While the agency's name evokes twin goals — caring for animals and protecting people — the reality is that the shelter takes priority over the field.

Two years ago, animal-welfare activists blasted the county shelter for dirty, crowded kennels, insufficient veterinary care and unacceptably high euthanasia rates. For example, cats diagnosed with ringworm were put to sleep rather than being treated for the condition, animal-control officials said.

The County Council responded by requiring the agency to cut its euthanasia rate to 20 percent in 2008 and to 15 percent thereafter. It also paid for improvements such as new dog runs and cat cages at the shelter, which is a safety net for abandoned, stray or abused animals, each year taking in more than 10,000 dogs and cats.

The county spent more on disease prevention and veterinary care and designated an officer to do off-site adoptions. From 2006 to 2008, the shelter's laundry bill quadrupled to more than $80,000. The agency spent more than $2.5 million on pet and veterinary care in 2008, up almost 50 percent from the previous year.

The result? The agency reports its euthanasia rate was 21 percent last year, down from about 40 percent in 2006.

"It's hard to find a municipal shelter with rates lower than that," said Al Dams, who supervises pet licensing and who once ran the agency.

But the money dedicated to improving care hasn't been enough, said Sgt. John Diel, who supervises the shelter.

"When I don't have [enough] officers in the shelter, I have to take them from the field," Diel said.

Animal Care and Control spent nearly $1.4 million on field operations last year, responding to more than 11,000 calls for assistance with animals. While the agency budgeted about $1.6 million this year for the field, those figures don't reflect the reality that field officers are pulled into the shelter.

Those officers say they are frustrated at being diverted to such tasks as cleaning kennels, driving sick animals to vets and assisting with adoptions. Under the new mandate, officers also must respond right away to almost all animal-cruelty calls, even though those cases often involve disputes among neighbors.

"It's a shame because I always thought bites should be our No. 1 priority," said Officer Steve Fuchser, 48.

In 2003, King County animal-control officers handled more than 85 percent of dispatched calls the same day. Last year, even with fewer calls, officers were spending so much time dealing with shelter and animal-cruelty issues that they responded to fewer than 60 percent of calls the same day.

Waiting and worrying

In several cases, people have reported vicious dogs, yet the agency waited months to go to the scene.

• In November, a Kent mother e-mailed Animal Care and Control about a Rottweiler that bit her 13-year-old son on the arm, but the agency didn't dispatch the call until February this year, records show. By then, no dog fitting the description lived at the address.

• In October, a Bellevue woman e-mailed the agency, saying a neighbor's dog had bitten her in the leg. Animal Care and Control contacted the dog owner nearly two months later. The owner had given away the dog on Craigslist, and the agency closed the case.

• In July last year, a father of a 1-year-old notified the agency of a pack of vicious dogs running loose near his Kent home. By the time an officer showed up in October, the dogs and owner couldn't be found. Someone complained again in November about one of the dogs coming after him, and three months later, the agency issued a warning.

In Salter's attack, he, his wife and two young sons were driving home one evening in May 2008 when two pit bulls began chasing their car. He later walked toward the house where the dogs lived to ask the owner to keep them indoors. Before he got there, the dogs attacked.

Animal Care and Control didn't dispatch an officer partly because it was after business hours. After 6 p.m. and on weekends, the agency responds only to Priority 1 calls, and, officials say, Salter's case didn't meet the criteria.

"In general, if the animals are confined, it's a lower priority than a bite in progress, given our staffing levels," Diel said.

The agency, which gets immediate notice from 911 dispatch of Priority 1 animal calls, didn't send out officers on any calls that night. That same month, however, the agency sent an officer at night on at least three occasions to pick up sick or injured pets, records show.

In the absence of quick response, some cities such as Auburn and SeaTac have subsidized some or all of an animal-control officer's cost — $71,000 per year — in exchange for dedicated hours.

Others handle animal control themselves instead of using the county service.

Police departments in Renton, Tacoma and Des Moines hire their own animal-control officers. Seattle has its own department.

The point is to respond before people or pets get hurt, said Jan Magnuson, vice president of the Washington Animal Control Association and Des Moines' animal-control officer.

She frequently hears from frustrated King County officers and residents.

"They know that something's broke," she said.

Sanjay Bhatt: 206-464-3103 or sbhatt@seattletimes.com and Justin Mayo: 206-464-3669 or jmayo@seattletimes.com

Former Seattle Times reporter Warren Cornwall contributed.