LETTER: ‘Two recent experiences with CARES has left me filled with disappointment’

Print This Post  Email This Post

Dear Editor,

Two recent experiences with Burien CARES has left me filled with disappointment and discouraged. The animals and residents deserve service, support, and compassion. None is provided by CARES.

About two weeks ago I went to one of our foster homes to pick up kittens. The kittens were ready for adoption. The foster mom was clearly upset. She had taken a very sick kitten from CARES the evening before for fostering. CARES told her it might die. Well, it did. I offered to take it to CARES since the foster mom was upset and I was going that way. Once at CARES, I was informed coldly, that the foster mom knew it might die (correct). Staff then wanted to know how I got the kitten. This seemed like an odd question as the kitten was dead and I was standing in the lobby at CARES. I am left wondering why a dying kitten was not euthanized or fostered by a CARES employee rather than being given to a brand new foster home. I then asked if CARES would follow up to see if there were other kittens or a feral mom cat to be trapped. The woman I spoke with immediately said that such work is not in their contract. She did give me the cross streets so I could try to follow up. Sometimes it is about more than your contract, especially when you work with those who don’t have a voice. It is about compassion.

Today I took a call from a Burien resident about a persistently meowing and frantic cat that has been at her doorstep for two weeks. The rescue I work with is full so I reluctantly referred her to CARES. The woman told me that she had already contacted CARES, who told her that they would take the cat and then turn around and drop it back at her house! I decided to go to CARES and ask them about this directly. The first thing I noticed was about five employees/volunteers hanging out eating pizza and food from a local fast food restaurant. When I relayed my story to the dark haired young woman, I was informed tha there are free-roaming cats and yes, that CARES would just release the cat. I told her that that is standard procedure with feral cats, to alter and release them to their neighborhood, but not with friendly, stray cats. I tried to explain that other area shelters with contracts, take stray animals.

I encountered Ray (Helms) on the way out of CARES. He agreed that CARES would drop the cat back in it’s neighborhood after they checked to see that it was healthy and altered. He told me that I could quote him when he informed me that he believed that all animals HAVE homes. CARES employees seem ignorant of the fact that unfortunately people move and leave their pets behind fairly often. He said the alternative is euthanizing after 72 hours. I told him he could quote me when I said, “Fine, then euthanize.” Sending a pleading, hungry cat back to live on a busy road is the same as euthanizing. Ray just won’t have the unpleasant job of ending the cat’s life.

I also found it interesting that Ray went on about having to pay rent and utililties on the building and that as per their contract CARES doesn’t have to even provide a shelter. I wonder why then are they doing it if it is so expensive?

So once again an experience with CARES has left me sad and disappointed for the animals and residents of Burien. I told the same to Ray.

Earlier this year, Mike Martin said at a council meeting that he would arrange an independent audit of CARES. I am wondering if this has been done? If so, what was found? If not, why not?

Thank you,
Marianne Hudson

[Have an opinion or concern you’d like to share with our 70,000+ monthly Readers? Please send us your Letter to the Editor via email. Include your full name, and, pending our review, we’ll most likely publish it.]

Print This Post  Email This Post


52 Responses to “LETTER: ‘Two recent experiences with CARES has left me filled with disappointment’”
  1. JC says:

    I understand your frustration. I wrote a letter to the Burien City Council earlier this year – sometime in May I think. After the graphic details I described, their response was, “we’ll address this at the upcoming coucil meeting.” I haven’t heard another thing from them, although the letter did end up on the b-town blog and there was some fall-out from public outcry, it apparently has done no one any good to make official complaints to the city council. I don’t know what else can be done to fix the situation over there, perhaps just boycott the place all together so their funding is pulled when the contract runs out. It’s not like they’re doing any good over there for anyone.

    My experiences were similar in the two times I have gone into the CARES facility. Neither were pleasant, mostly just disturbing conditions, and the employees were uneducated and uncompassionate. I would imagine the city would be better without them, possibly funding private rescues in some sort of fashion…maybe giving them vouchers to cover expenses they incur instead of wasting money on some kind of hack kitty mill that’s answer is: “we’ll just euthanize them.”

  2. Feralcat says:

    We are also working with a police officer who doesn’t even want to bother with cares. Hell that certainly speaks volumes, now doesn’t it?

    Sadly again the reality of this situation will not get resolved at all till mike martian is fired and NEW council members are elected, ones that DO care about the animals and the rest of the city. It is apparent most do not care at all. Businesses are leaving, left and right.

    What is expensive? KILLING them is expensive. I wonder, if they are truly keeping track of all the animals they are killing after holding them for 3-5 days. ( Oh wait don’t all animals have homes? ) By law they have to too. Since the records have to be public. I would inquire to see the certificate that some one HAS TO HAVE to euthanize an animal and a Vet has to be present, so I have to wonder what Vet that is, but since they know me they probably won’t give it to me.

    The phone calls that both FCAT and FAF are receiving is leading us to wonder if at all that cares is taking any animals in. We are happy to deal with the ferals, but cares is responsible for the friendlies that are left behind.

    Again the animals are suffering for idiots running something they have NO qualifications for.


  3. Bryn K. says:

    I was disappointed when I called regarding the pitbull puppy story that was posted here, offering to foster it, and no one called me back to ask if I wanted to foster any other puppy (the puppy in questions was adopted out). Seems to me that if I were running a business that was intended to help animals in the community, I would call a resource like that back and ask if the offer was good for another animal. Very disappointing to have my call not acknowledged or followed up on.

  4. Shere'e R. says:

    There is a reason I call them CaresLESS. They claim to give a darn but the truth is, they don’t. Action after Action from them shows that no matter what press release they give out, no matter how much they try to claim otherwise, thier actions show that they don’t care about the animals of Burien.

    They are so bad at what they claim to do that I have heard more than once from 911 operators and other people in the animal welfare community that they are so sorry that we are in Burien. THEY can’t even get CARESless to do anything!

  5. John Poitras says:

    Does anyone know where we can take a stray cat that is very adoptable other than to CARES? It belongs to a neighbor and it has left its home because of the new dogs that one of the children introduced into the home a couple of months ago which he cannot tolerate.
    It is a beautiful cat and has had all of its shots and the previous owner has all her vet records. My mum been fostering it but she is 83 and has 3 cats and cannot take on another one. I would take it but we already are maxed out in our home with pets.
    I have taken pictures of it and it would be great if I knew somewhere I could post them so people could know he is looking for a home.
    I don’t trust CARES not to euthanize and he’s a young healthy cat so if anyone has a suggestion it would be appreciated. I did call CARES a few times to see if we could work out posting a picture of him but all I get is a recording.

    • Feralcat says:

      YES to be perfectly HONEST.

      If you know someone who lives in the KCAC or Seattle animal control area, have them take it to one of those shelters. Both shelter have space open. So NO he will NOT be killed.

      You can call the other shelter Humane society but there might be a waiting list. As for the “no kill” doubt they will take him.

      If worse comes to worse call FCAT OR FAF, our numbers are easy to find.


      • raven says:

        I would warn against Feral’s advice.
        It is unethical to lie about where the animals came from, and against King County code for RASKC to accept animals from cities that do not contract with the county. I’ve heard of people lying to RASKC about where they find their stray cats–which unfortunately puts a heavy strain on the shelter’s resources and possibly endangers the animals that are waiting for homes who are there legally. Many of the cats brought to RASKC from other jurisdictions bring Panleukopenia to a population of cats that may not have otherwise come into contact with the deadly disease.
        If someone says “Honestly”, they are preparing to tell you something that is less than honest. And, if Burien would contract with King County, the residents of Burien would always have a place to go when they need to help an animal.

        • huh? says:

          Telling people to lie shows a lack of integrity and understanding of RASKC’s Contracts, plus the current Contract Cities; financial situation. Yep, unfortunately it all comes done to money, which is tight.

          RASKC already has a heavy pet population burden. When people take animals into the shelter and lie about where the animal came from, that City is charged for the care of that animal. The cities are already unhappy about (finally) having to pay for the actual cost of their city’s animals that enter RASKC.

          By raising the cost to the Contract Cities, (which is what this ‘harmless’ lie does), it only encourages more cities to not renew their contracts with RASKC. The City’s will look for alternatives and they may go for something like CARES or to Tacoma Humane Society (kill rate = more than 50%). Think big picture here—how could that possibly serve the long term needs of animals in King County.

          Don’t lie. Find a way to fix Burien’s Animal Care and Control problem in the light of day; with the truth. The bandage approach does not solve the root cause of the problem.

          CARES has broken their Contract. What about seeing if there are animal loving lawyers that would be willing to bring a suit against Mike Martin & the Council for not firing CARES and going back to RASKC?

          • Feralcat says:

            Excuse me but if cares will NOT take an animal in what are they to do????? As Raven said some one from Burien was at KCAC turning in animal because cares would NOT. I would rather LIE than an animal die. it is more unethical to lie than to kill


          • Feralcat says:

            Rather it is more unethical to kill than to lie.

            Huh?and Raven. It is about the animal not the politics of using a resource(kcac) that can actually do something. It is very apparent that cares can not.

            John so what did you do with the cat in question?


          • huh? says:


            I know it is about the animals. Stop with your constant condescending statements to anyone that thinks differently than you. There are several paths to helping the animals.

            I don’t support lying. Lying to other shelters, is not the way to ‘fix’ this situation. If the shelters are knowingly taking in animals from outside their jurisdiction, then ‘yeah’! But telling people to lie is unethical.

            Does the new RASKC Manager, Gene, know you are telling people to lie? Does SAS’s Director, Don Jordan know?

  6. Anna says:

    Does Could CARE Less even have a real phone #? Like a land line where someone actually staffs it and answers the phone.. All they list on their web site is a cell phone#.

    • Laura Stiles says:

      I’m confused – the phone number listed on their website is (206) 81-CARES or (206) 812-2737, which is a land line. Why do you state they only have a cell phone? The office is staffed Tuesday – Saturday from 10 am – 6 pm and the phones are answered during that time unless they are already on the line, or assisting a citizen who has come in, or attending to an animal.

      • Joe Wills says:

        Dearest Laura,
        We all understand your confusion; after all we know you date the guy who drives the Animal Control van. So your opinion is ALWAYS going to be blinded by this abnormally. The phone issue goes way back to the beginning and still continues to this day. This is why so many good loving animal citizens of Burien have complained that no one answers the phone or returns calls. My wife and I have experienced this personally and so have some of our neighbors. So your statement that “the phones are answered during that time unless they are already on the line, or assisting a citizen who has come in, or attending to an animal” what a complete joke!!!
        Kind Regards

        • Laura Stiles says:

          Gosh Joe, your message to me is so condescending, I can almost feel you patting my head… and thanks also for completely dismissing my posting just because I have a relationship with the animal control officer. Do you drop by the shelter regularly unannounced and observe the goings on, as I do? Do you hear about CARES’s daily activities over your dinner table every night? Didn’t think so.

          The information I provided was not an opinion, by the way, but a statement of fact about the phones. And speaking of the facts – who started this urban legend about CARES being a high kill shelter? I have posted on this subject before – just because they can legally euthanize strays after 3 days doesn’t mean that they do. The few animals that have been put down due to medical or aggression issues have been euthanized by local vets, with the vet’s agreement. CARES staff do not perform euthanasia themselves, and most of the animals at the shelter are fostered, adopted, or returned to their owners. And then of course some are presently living in the shelter until homes can be found for them.

          If we might all get back to the original letter submitted, about the “friendly” cat that CARES turned away – those cats do fall into a gray area, as it is legal for cats to roam, unlike dogs. They don’t form a safety issue to the public in the way dogs can. So if the cat is healthy, and it might belong to someone, in my opinion it’s a judgement call about taking it to the local shelter.

          I expect that you will continue to treat me with disrespect, and continue to rant and rave about CARES, because that’s just what you do. What I do is put my side of things out here, with the information I can offer, so that the good citizens who read this blog will know that there is more to the story.


          • Btowngirl says:

            Actually Laura cara are not legal to roam. They are required to stay on the owners property as a dog is. If they step off the property to public or private anyone has the right to pick them up and take them in as a stray. By rcw Title 11 they are required to. Maybe you should get your facts straight.

          • Joe Wills says:

            Laura, Laura, Laura,

            I am so saddened by you being so taken by the dinner stories of the Animal Control van driver. Your post shows that you view CARES through rose colored glasses. The reality of things is that people care about their animals. Your stories of cats falling into the gray area are not acceptable to many. What CARES is doing is wrong, in so many ways. Your expectations of me treating you with disrespect are not true. I do respect you and your opinion, if it not were so clouded by your infatuation with the van driver for CARES. I really feel you would be onboard with the rest of us who really do care if you would just put aside those feelings and see the forest for the trees. I have read your posts time and time again, the information you submit is so clouded, and I feel for you. When you’re ready to leave the dark side, we will be waiting for you with open arms.
            Warmest Regards

          • Eaton B. Verz says:

            The big problem with cares is the have NO compassion. All they have is their “contract”. It’s just a business to them. So sad.

          • Laura Stiles says:

            To Btowngurl, regarding your posting below – I am trying to “get the facts” regarding cats roaming, and referred to Title 11 as you suggested. However, I’m not really seeing something as specific as what you stated – can you refer me to the exact subsection?

          • Terry says:

            Laura, I believe the reference to cats that Btowngirl had in mind was not RCW 11 but title 11 of the King County code (see http://www.kingcounty.gov/council/legislation/kc_code/14_Title_11.aspx#_Toc320003771).
            In particular “11.04.230 Nuisances defined” includes :
            “K. Any domesticated animal that enters upon a person’s property without the permission of that person”.

          • btowngurl says:

            Yes thanks Terry!! KC code Title 11.04.230

          • Laura Stiles says:

            I stand corrected – Thank you Terry for the specific reference, although I presume that not all roaming cats create a nuisance. All the more reason for cat owners to chip and license their cats so they can be returned home.

      • huh? says:

        Perhaps the ‘phone’ problem is that there is not enough staff/volunteers to:

        Answer the phone and/or return messages in a timely manner
        Talk to people on the phone
        Assist citizens that come in
        Attend to the animals’ needs.

  7. Joe Wills says:

    Marianne, and others her,
    What you experienced is the norm for CARES. It is so so sad that our city Manager Mike Martin will not do a thing nor does he really care to do an anything about CARES. Many people have had similar bad experiences, others worse With CARES. Pray and hope that your animals or your neighbor’s animals NEVER become lost. If caught by CARES they will be subjected to the 72 hour rule that they follow.
    To the best of my knowledge the independent evaluation that was supposed to happen didn’t. I contacted the city and was told they didn’t know anything about it? So once again the issue is swept under the carpet. WE as a community need to rally around Jack, Lucy and Bob to help them be successful. AND we need to vote the others out, and replace them with good people like Jack, Lucy and Bob. Maybe then we could get a mayor elect that must perform their job and be held accountable for their action and decisions. Not like the current situation.

  8. Feralcat says:

    OK I have just confirmed that YES an “audit” person has been selected. Her name is Deb McVicktor(sp) she is a deputy director of Tacoma Humane a very HIGH kill shelter. Just like cares. I question this person very much. I guess it is to happen some time after the year. It is mentioned in a council meeting so it is PUBLIC record.

    FYI: there is the City run Tacoma humane society, then there is Pierce county humane and humane society of tacoma which is the high kill. I am pretty sure these are “right” but the numbers of animals they kill is kinda hard to find.


  9. Feralcat says:

    EDIT Denise NOT Deb is her name.

  10. Joe Wills says:

    Thank You FCAT for the info. I do agree that having one high kill shelter “audit” another is redundant. What should have happened is: The Human society of American who has MANY years of experience should be the ones to have been selected for the audit. Even Posada’s would have been a good choice. So once again Mike Martin will most likely skate the issue.


    • Vicki Hurley says:

      Joe, I for one, have appreciated your thoughts and concerned input on the non-animal control situation in Burien. If you wouldn’t mind, I would like to correct the information in this post. I believe you were thinking of the “Humane Society of the United States”. I understand why you would think they were a good organization. They have a terrific PR program. However, it is generally known in the dog community that the goal of HSUS is to end all pet ownership and bring about the complete extinction of dogs and cats. Their CEO has made public, documented statements to that effect. Pasado’s Safe Haven that you also mentioned was founded by a woman named Susan Michaels who has an absolute obsession with being an “animal cop” — even though her organization is merely a privately run rescue and has NO law enforcement authority. On several occasions she has actually compromised evidence in important animal cruelty situations with her efforts to “investigate”. Ms. Michaels is no longer with Pasado’s and I have heard that the new management is working to make it a credible rescue organization. However, I don’t believe Pasado’s would have the necessary credentials to do an audit of a publicly funded animal rescue. I’m not sure who would. MY choice would be the shelter manager of RASKC, but that might be viewed as a conflict of interest since they are the agency that many Burien citizens would prefer to have doing animal control here. Perhaps Don Jordan, the pretty much universally respected head of Seattle Animal Shelter (an animal control and sheltering agency operated by the city of Seattle) would be a good choice. A couple of years ago, when a radical group was attacking the King County shelter (now RASKC), RASKC had people come from the University of CA, Davis to do an inspection because they were recognized as being knowledgeable and impartial. However, a city that refuses to fund animal control is unlikely to spend the money it would take to hire UC Davis to do an audit. I am not trying to be critical, Joe, but you appear to be sincere in your desire to see the best for the animals of Burien and I thought you might want this information.

      • Hotrodgal says:

        Vicki, you stated ” it is generally known in the dog community that the goal of HSUS is to end all pet ownership and bring about the complete extinction of dogs and cats. Their CEO has made public, documented statements to that effect.” sounds more than a tad far-fetched to me. Would you please site your source of information with a link?

        Any audit, by anybody, is better than none.

        • Vicki Hurley says:

          Hotrodgal, your request for information on the Humane Society of the United States’ agenda is reasonable. Their CEO, Wayne Pacelle, has been quoted in interviews as saying he would like to never see another puppy or kitten born again — ever. He has also stated that his goal is “one generation and out”. That’s a little incoherent, but what he was saying was that he wants to push mandatory spay and neuter laws to such extremes that there will never be another generation of companion animals. His followers adhere to the notion that “dogs and cats are unnatural creatures resulting from human interference in the process of evolution” and therefore they should be eradicated. All of this information has been circulated through the dog community for many years as a call to dog owners to arise and fight back before it’s too late. So, although I saw links, it was sometime ago and I cannot remember where I saw them. I would recommend going to the HSUS site and reading over their philosophies with a careful eye. For obvious reasons (they rely on donations for their existence) they don’t make a lot of noise about their hatred of companion animals, but if you look through their propaganda, it’s there. A very helpful site would be http://www.humanewatch.com (possibly .org?). They are a group dedicated to exposing the HSUS agenda. If you do a search on “Humane Society of the United States”, you will probably find the quotes I am referring to without much difficulty. Another site would be the National Animal Interest Alliance (NAIA). They are not directly concerned with HSUS, but rather with welfare of all animals. They are a reliable national group that sometimes has observations on the adventures of HSUS.

          Incidentally, to avoid confusion — the term “humane society” is a generic term that is used in the names of many animal rescue agencies both private and publicly funded. The Humane Society of the United States has no connection to Tacoma/Pierce County Humane Society, Seattle Humane Society, Kitsap Humane Society, etc. Sadly, many people donate money to HSUS thinking that it is the parent organization of all the local ones I just named. Not so! If someone wishes to donate to animal rescue, their best bet is to choose a local organization whose work they admire and donate directly to that.

          I understand the frustration behind your statement that any audit by anybody is better than none. However, if an audit is done by a person or group with a motive to slant that audit to make it seem that all is well at CARES, then it does no good. I feel that it’s important that we have an audit done by an authorized group with a track record of integrity and impartiality. I don’t know what the rules are about choosing an auditting group, but I do know it can’t just be any group that claims to be a rescue. I believe it would have to be another city, county, or state run agency — such as Tacoma/Pierce County Humane Society, RASKC, Seattle Animal Shelter, etc. Another possibility would be a state university such as University of CA, Davis or WSU, both of which are well known for their animal related study programs.

      • Joe Wills says:

        Dear Vicki,
        You are completely correct in stating that I want the best for our animals. I only mentioned these people for the audit because of my concern that Mike Martin will go with the first person who agrees with him. I don’t feel that these people are connected with him in any way. So having stated that, I feel many of us here in Burien want someone who is nonbiased not influenced by Mike Martin, Debra George and WILL give us a real audit of their practices. This whole CARES issue has been a problem from the get go. I did support it when the three people with real experience were involved. After they left and were fired, for whatever reasons were, we still don’t really know, my wife and I have made a point to follow how CARES is doing since they have no experience in Animal Control at all. We have heard time and time again from many people who have experienced their dismay with CARES. No one in our city government seems to want to do anything about it. Recently our neighbor lost their dog. This dog was a chow mix named buddy. We found out from calls to CARES they had the dog and euthanized it because they didn’t have space. They only keep dogs like this for 72 hours. When I told this to our neighbors they were broken hearted and couldn’t believe that this happened to their dog. So please understand that I have the very best intentions for the animals of Burien. I just hope that the audit is done by someone who really cares and is nonbiased.

        • jim clingan says:

          Was the dog chipped? Did it have a license?

          • Hotrodgal says:

            Does C.A.R.E.S. now have a chip reader?
            Was the dog mentioned on the Burien Blog as being lost?
            Was the dog offered for adoption before euthanasia?

            I do see some of these type postings from C.A.R.E.S. (there’s one for a parakeet on the front page right now) but it seems not nearly often enough.
            C.A.R.E.S. should be posting ALL lost animals here, on Craigslist, at the local vet offices. Maybe even at the police station prior to the animals nearing it’s 72-hour time limit.
            When possible and as a public service, a description of dead animals found should also be publicly posted so the owners can get some closure.

            I’m beginning to wonder if C.A.R.E.S. biggest shortfall is common sense.

          • jim clingan says:

            Not trying to be argumentative with you, Hotrodgal, but do pet owners not have some responsibility to license and/or chip their pets? I’m sympathetic to those who lose their pets. I’ve had several dogs over time. As a responsible pet owner, the first thing I did when I got these dogs was to license them and then get them an ID tag. How is CARES or any other agency supposed to locate the owners if they’re not licensed, chipped, or identifiable in some way? As for your question about CARES and whether or not they have a chip reader, I am told they do, in fact, have a chip reader. Good luck to you.

          • Joe Wills says:

            No the dog wasn’t chipped, nor did it have its collar on that had the name tag. And No it didn’t have a license which I told my neighbors it should have had. Maybe it might have found its way home????? No they didn’t contact CARES because they didn’t know about them; instead they contacted RASKC which had no record of their dog. They gave up hope. By the time I found out about Buddy missing, it was too late. I called CARES and was told they had the dog I described, but was put down due to space and time. You can blame the people for their neglect, but I blame CARES. Lack of judgment and experience, end of story. How many more stories like this are we as citizens of Burien willing to endure before something happens?

          • jim clingan says:

            Hey, Joe, the story about Buddy is a shame. But had the dog been identifiable with a license, chip or name tag, Buddy would have been returned to the owners. Right?

        • Laura Stiles says:

          Joe, it is such a shame that your neighbor’s dog was euthanized because they did not take the common sense steps of licensing and/or chipping their dog, or simply contacting the CARES shelter to see if their dog was there. The shelter does have a chip reader, and they do post the animals on their own website, Craig’s List, and Petfinder.

          Also, again, you don’t know me, so you don’t know that in fact I am a huge “pet person” who has nursed several dogs through old age and cancer at considerable expense of time and money. So I will thank you to not make assumptions about my motivations and to limit your commentary to the issues at hand.


        • ACO Ray Helms says:

          Joe, Your comment about the Chow Mix is a complete lie.

          • elizabeth2 says:

            Roy – Just a little hint: As an employee of the city, I would watch my words, my tone, and my language when posting and responding on this side. You come across to some as an angry and beligerant man. This is NOT a good image for someone in your line of work. It does not seem to represent someone who has good judgment, patience, and a PROFESSIONAL manner.

          • Joe Wills says:

            No Ray, It’s not. And you know it.

          • huh? says:

            Ray, what is the story about this dog. Was it euthanized or not? If it was, why?

        • Vicki Hurley says:

          You and I agree on many points, Joe. I am SO sorry to hear the terrible story of what happened to your friend’s dog. As other posters have stated, yes, it was the owner’s responsiblity to at least have the dog wearing an ID tag and license and it would be best if the dog was also micro chipped. However, there is such a thing as compassion. One of the reasons I favor RASKC over having an individual animal control agency for each city is because RASKC gives us a comprehensive system. For example, on the 4th of July, a dog that is frightened by fireworks might run for a mile or more before he calms down. By that time, he might be in the jurisdiction of a different city. Sometimes an animal gets lost and some well meaning stranger picks him up, takes him somewhere else, and he gets away. Just because you live in a certain city doesn’t mean your lost dog will be FOUND there. If all of the cities contract with RASKC, there is ONE animal control, one computer system, and one shelter or system of shelters. If animal control finds your dog, you know where it will be. It is wise to go to the shelter in person every day or 2 to look for your dog because someone looking at your young Irish setter might be describing it as “a large brown spaniel”. If your dog could possibly be at CARES or RASKC or Auburn Humane Society, that’s a lot of ground to cover. As I see it, that was what happened in the tragedy you described — your friends looked for their dog where they thought he would be, not realizing that he could be at some smaller, more obscure agency. The idea of a comprehensive, county wide animal control and sheltering system being better than individual agencies is just my personal opinion that I couldn’t resist sharing. My main point is that what happened to your friends was terrible. My heart goes out to them.

    • huh? says:

      Actually, UC Davis should audit CARES for the sheltering/animal health portion. RASKC has been audited by them several times and thus, continues to improve their animal care practices. Mike and the Council should contact Dr. Kate Hurley for more information.


  11. fyi says:

    FYI Debra George is not the owner of the Mark Restaurant
    . The owner of Mark has nothing to do with careless

    • Joe Wills says:

      You are correct, Debra doesn’t own the Mark Restaurant, Chris Mark is the sole owner; I called the MARK Restaurant myself. The fellow whom I will not name told me that Chris is the owner, who also owns the Optimark next door. Sounds like someone is riding on someone’s coat tails to me!!!

  12. Sandra Baker says:

    The sad, but true, situation is that most residents of Burien, animal owners and non-animal owners alike, have no need to contact CARE and so know nothing about the substandard animal services program that the City of Burien provides. Until a majority, or at least a vocal group, of what the city would describe as “non-animal nuts” come forward and communicate that the city could do a bit better with it’s animal services, nothing will change.

Share Your Opinion

By participating in our online comment system, you are agreeing to abide by the terms of our comment policy.

...and oh, if you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!