Puppy-mill operators should pay for sick animals
Editorials & Opinion | Puppy-mill operators should pay for sick animals | Seattle Times Newspaper
A Skagit County judge should compel the owners of an massive puppy mill operation that was uncovered by investigators to pay for the costs of the hundreds of animals rescued from the operation.
JIM BATES / THE SEATTLE TIMES
SKAGIT County prosecutors were right to ask a Superior Court judge to force two people charged in a massive puppy-mill operation to post bonds for the animals' care — and the owners should.
The judge should agree and compel the defendants to help clean up the mess they made.
Cash-strapped animal shelters should not have to bear all the costs of caring for the hundreds of sick and diseased puppies seized during raids last month.
Some 600 dogs were rescued from two homes in Snohomish and Skagit counties and since then, local shelters and animal advocates have scrambled to provide care. About 80 percent of the dogs were pregnant and some have required costly medical treatment. Donations and a community fundraiser have helped, but the costs go beyond puppy chow.
The animal shelter in Skagit County has incurred $30,000 in expenses so far for the 70 dogs in its care.
A mass adopt-a-thon would ease shelter budgets and offer the puppies respite from the hell they've been through. Indeed, animal shelters ought to be the starting place for any would-be pet owner. But for now, the puppies remain evidence in a criminal trial. Technically, they are still the property of their owner while the case is adjudicated.
That could be awhile. Meanwhile, expenses mount. Dogs kept in cramped, unsanitary conditions tend to have health and socialization problems that could cost plenty to resolve.
A glimpse of what is faced by the puppies and those who care for them can be see through the eyes of Ruth Brombaugh. The elderly widow answered a classified ad and envisioned the Yorkshire terrier she purchased as a healthy, good companion and one who would alert her to strangers.
Instead, she ended up with nearly $1,200 in veterinary bills for a dog that was deaf, couldn't bark and had to undergo a cesarean section to deliver two stillborn puppies.
Charging papers show similar complaints date back to the late 1990s. Someone ought to pay. The judge should start with the defendants.