Print
Email
Share

Animal control locates owners of dogs that killed pet goats

by GARY CHITTIM / KING 5 news and KING5.com

Bio | Email | Follow: @gchittimK5

KING5.com

Posted on January 21, 2010 at 10:40 AM

Updated Thursday, Jan 21 at 10:52 AM

GIG HARBOR, Wash. - The owners of two dogs who killed livestock at a Key Peninsula veterinary hospital earlier this week have  surrendered their animals to Pierce County Animal Control.

Two innocent-looking dogs, currently locked up at the Pierce County Humane Society, were caught at the scene of a bloody slaughter at Brookside Veterinary Hospital near Gig Harbor Tuesday morning. The dogs killed two pet goats and a sheep and injured a third goat.

"It wasn't for hunger. They weren't trying to eat the animals, it was just kill sport," said veterinarian Lisa Woods.

Woods is still shaken up by the attack at her clinic.

"And when they finally caught her they just took the skin off her head and she was still alive and that's how I found her," she said.

Woods had to euthanize that sheep. Two of her goats were already dead. Another victim was found in the pen - a wild deer.

Woods believes the dogs attacked the deer on the other side of the fence and that it jumped in to what it thought was safety. The dogs tried to dig under the fence in several places and finally broke through, finished off the wounded deer, then set their sights on the goats and sheep.

Only one animal survived. But Ralph, a 200 pound goat, suffered neck wounds so severe he may have to be put down.

"I don't blame the animals. The animals are doing what instincts tell them to do. They pack up, something clicks in them, and they go into that primordial, the game is on sport, who I blame are the owners who don't take the responsibility that they need to take," said Woods.

Animal Control officers said a tip from a citizen who saw a news account of the incident led them to the owners.

Officers traced the dogs to a residence on Glenwood Road SW in rural south Kitsap County. An Animal Control officer interviewed the owners, who believed their dogs - a 1-year-old Saint Bernard mix and a 5-year-old Australian shepherd - had been missing for more than a day.

The dogs were allowed to run freely in their unfenced yard. Kitsap Animal Control had no history of complaints about the impounded dogs or the owners.

A report will be sent to the Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney's Office for review of possible charges in the case. The dogs face a much more serious fate. Their night on the prowl, when their instincts took over, is probably their last.

Print
Email
Share

To add a comment, please register or login.

1000 characters remaining

Submit

We welcome your comments on this story's topic. Off-topic comments, personal attacks, and inappropriate language may be flagged and removed, and comment privileges blocked, per our Terms of Service. Thanks for keeping the comments space respectful.

Privacy Policy

You have indicated this comment should be removed.

Close

The comment has been submitted for review. Thank you .

Comments: Displaying 1 - 15 of 25

photophem said on January 22, 2010 at 1:06 PM

NORWEGIANDAVE (cont): As for your statement that she was partially responsible, I should just let it pass as it was so utterly ridiculous and ignorant that it really doesn't deserve a response. But, I won't... What really floors me, is how you could have the mindless audacity to suggest that she was in any way responsible for what occured. Dr. Woods did exactly what she should have. She had HER animals fenced in and controlled. Not only that, but it is galvanized steel fencing. AND, those dogs traveled 1.9 miles to dig UNDER that fence (do you even have the slightest idea of how an electric fence works?). To suggest that she did anything less than she should have is assanine and nothing more than an attempt to victimize the victim, which is, at best, sleazy and contemptuous.

36155712
Flag this comment

photophem said on January 22, 2010 at 12:17 PM

NORWEGIANDAVE: So, there should be no consequences (pardon me, no consequences other than $121 fine and relinquishing the dogs)? As you apparently only place value on human life, understand this: it could very well have been a person. Dr. Woods' son frequently played in the pasture with the animals. Those dogs were in a killing frenzy, and once they'd killed the deer, they simply went after anything that moved. If her son had been in there at the time, he wouldn't have stood a chance. The point that you and others like you are entirely missing, is that without any significant consequences, as you suggest, there is nothing to deter the type of negligent and irresponsible behavior such as occured with the owners of those dogs. And without it, next time the victims may not be "only" animals. Continued below:

36151987
Flag this comment

photophem said on January 22, 2010 at 9:59 AM

SUMITHRYO: What Dr. Woods did was describe what happened in terms people could relate to. These dogs did not make these kills out of hunger or necessity. It WAS out of sport! No, the dogs did not think to themselves, "hmm...it would be so much fun to chase some animals around, terrorize them and then kill them today", and Dr. Woods was not indicating any such thing. Perhaps you missed the period in grade school where they differentiated between "literal" and "figurative".

36141659
Flag this comment

exidore said on January 22, 2010 at 4:07 AM

I disagree. The owners of the free roaming dogs are to blame, because they broke the law by letting their dogs roam free. I feel sorry for the dogs. Pack animal mentality is natural for dogs. Even the most cowardly of pooches will run with confidence in a pack. It doesn't make a difference if it is a pack of 10 or 2. I don't feel sorry for the owners of the dogs. Helpless animals were viciously maimed and killed. If the owners had lived up to their responsibility, this would have never happened. They caused so much pain for defenseless animals and their owners, and ultimately it is their fault for the pain they will have to go through watching their dogs be euthanized. They themselves earned that pain. I think this is reckless negligence.

36117347
Flag this comment

getalife2010 said on January 22, 2010 at 1:55 AM

stop commenting on news when non of your opinions mean anything, think of the family who lost two loved animals and the vet that lost her loved animals as well. no one is to blame, dogs will be dogs, they did what they are born to do, be prediators.

36114202
Flag this comment

realitychk said on January 21, 2010 at 10:43 PM

Austrailian Shepherds are herding dogs. It is in their nature to chase. St. Bernards are not immune to chasing either. When dogs that are not trained to be around livestock are allowed to run loose, this too often happens. Those dogs were in a pack-- hunting..starting with the deer and ending with the other occupants of the pen. The fact that they were in such high prey drive that they sought to dig under and then breached cattle panels is scary. The dogs are not "mean", they were not controlled or supervised. The dogs should be put down...they had too much fun chasing and killing. They will do it again given the chance. They didn't kill to eat, and it has nothing to do with tasting blood...it is all about chasing the prey. As soon as one animal went down, they went after the next moving target. If it were my livestock, the owner would be paying for the lost animals and for vet bills on the survivor.

36109629
Flag this comment

auburngirl said on January 21, 2010 at 10:28 PM

The dogs need to be put down. Once they kill they will do it again.The owners need to be fined and the vet should have had an electric fence to protect the livestock. It was definitly human error all around. People need to treat animals like animals. They act on instinct no matter how domesticated they are. I have an Aussie and Border Collie I would not trust them around stock, because they are not trained for stock. I take my dogs to the dog park all the time and they are not agressive towards other dogs, but if a dog enters our yard and acts aggressive I have seen them act completely unexpectedly aggressive. Their breed discription says they are not aggresive but I know they are still animals with big teeth and small brains. So you have to control them.

36109372
Flag this comment

getrealppl said on January 21, 2010 at 8:17 PM

So strange. I don't know much about St. Bernards, but Australian Shepherds are typically very gentle animals. Their instinct is to protect, not kill.

36105582
Flag this comment

seattlekos said on January 21, 2010 at 6:13 PM

I grew up with a St Bernard, and we lived on the only farm in the city of Portsmouth, NH. At various times in our tenure there we had cats, chickens, ducks, a baby bull and a goat. Satchmo never harmed any of them (although to him woodchucks were fair game). He protected his territory from intruders he didn't like (most kids were allowed to pass on through to the airbase, except for these two boys Satchmo hated). They'd pass through, we'd hear them say, Hey, Satch, and he wouldn't even bark. As for the Australian shepherd, I've heard they're one of the very best dogs to have for children. I find it hard to believe these two (esp the St Bernard, being one year old -- still a puppy) would do this under normal circumstances. I blame the owners; they must've done something to these dogs. I think the vet should be held partly responsible too, for not having a more secured area for farm animals at the hospital. I wish these two dogs wouldn't be put down but alas, they probably will.

36100042
Flag this comment

skippypotpiebaby said on January 21, 2010 at 5:43 PM

Bad dogs bad no treats for you

36098739
Flag this comment

llj33 said on January 21, 2010 at 4:10 PM

The dog owners are the ones responsible! They should be fined and made to do community service for the veterinary hospital! When you take on the responsibility of an animal, that by nature is a hunter, you are responsble for creating a safe haven for not only your animals, but any other animals or humans that are around. The owners, however, were probably cruel to their dogs, which brought out this kind of behavior, especially since they didn't care about the fact that the animals had been missing for several days. So now, two wonderful creatures will be killed because their owners are complete morons! I don't think the dogs should be killed, but should be adopted out to someone who would be responsible, loving, and caring for them, with restitution being paid to the hospital by the moron owners.

36094429
Flag this comment

lilredcv said on January 21, 2010 at 3:44 PM

norwegiandave - With the exception of the (wild) deer, the animals killed or maimed weren't roaming free off the vets property. They were secured on fenced premises. The dogs were trespassing and terrorizing anything inside the vets fence without a means of escape. The dog owners did NOT fence in their dogs (even a wireless fencing with control collars could have sufficed) or keep them on tie-downs. They let their dogs run loose and off their personal property - even admitted they hadn't seen them in a couple of days! In my book? That makes them totally responsible for this regretful situation and they need to be held accountable for their (lack of) action to secure their dogs.

36093074
Flag this comment

haylee said on January 21, 2010 at 2:56 PM

You have got to be kidding norwegiandave. Responsible animal parents make good animals. It is absurd that they would leave them unattended and not in a controlled environment. Now the innocent animals paid and so will the dogs.

36090182
Flag this comment

coreyntac said on January 21, 2010 at 2:53 PM

I say kill the owners and save the dogs. And hold the vet responsible also the farm animals - no pet sheep and goats - had those animal in their possession. Vets are crooks anyway

36090022
Flag this comment

norwegiandave said on January 21, 2010 at 2:20 PM

By NO MEANS should the dogs owners be prosectuted. They killed ANIMALS, not people. This is a waste of taxpayer money. The dogs should be returned to their owners, and the vet should get an electric fence. She is partially to blame... her animals were unattended as well.

36088017
Flag this comment

__m96__ said on January 21, 2010 at 1:31 PM

organdonar no i'm not cereal I had my soul surgically removed to make extra room for more sarcasm.

36084904
Flag this comment

sumithryo said on January 21, 2010 at 1:28 PM

I'm with clothyard, and organdonor - you really need to learn to recognize sarcasm. I'm wondering what kind of vet thinks it's in an animal's "primordial nature" to KILL FOR SPORT????" Not the sharpest knife in the drawer. She must have missed the semester where they warned against anthropomorphizing critter's actions and thoughts.

36084667
Flag this comment

organdonor said on January 21, 2010 at 12:58 PM

Are you serious m96... I own a St. Bernard and its the best dog I ever owned. I'm gonna have to blame it on the mix since its not a pure bread. Especially since many animal trainers agree a St. Bernard is one dog that can be very trusted around kids. Trained as rescue dogs by monks, they bread out any aggression. Not saying you can't get a bad seed, especially if neglect is an issue. That being said you can't really blame the dogs, once the chase is on its hard to stop them. Living in the country when I was a kid I watched a pack of dogs maul a cat. By the time I stopped it the cat had already sustained internal injuries and couldn't be saved. I didn't blame the dogs.

36082529
Flag this comment

clothyard said on January 21, 2010 at 12:27 PM

Owners should be euthanized instead of the dogs.

36080234
Flag this comment

intell said on January 21, 2010 at 12:17 PM

I see blood on one dog

36079387
Flag this comment

krazkat said on January 21, 2010 at 11:41 AM

I agree, the owners shoudl be held responsible (not in fenced yard, allowed to run freely/wild). These are not the kind of dogs that usually attack other animals, they usually protect them; especially Austrailian Sheperds, the herd sheep, they don't kill them. For them to have done something like this, I would have to guess they had been mistreated (have seen it before in a usually mild/caring animal) and turned mean. Unfortunately, AGAIN, the animals will pay for the owners msitakes.

36076412
Flag this comment

justme70 said on January 21, 2010 at 11:37 AM

How sad all the way around...

36076124
Flag this comment

try2binformed said on January 21, 2010 at 11:32 AM

No kidding...who'd of thunk it, eh?

36075754
Flag this comment

__m96__ said on January 21, 2010 at 11:32 AM

ban st bernards and australian shepherds quickly they are out of control!

36075749
Flag this comment

__m96__ said on January 21, 2010 at 11:27 AM

look at that, their not pitbulls!

36075464
Flag this comment