|Title||Citation||Alternate Citation||Agency Citation||Summary||Type|
|WA - Buckely - Breed - Chapter 9.10 (Pit Bull Ordinance)||BUCKELY, WA., MUNICIPAL CODE §§ 9.10.020, 9.10.260 - 9.10.300 (2008)||
In Buckely, Washington, pit bulls are defined to be “dangerous dogs." Such dogs are considered to be a public nuisance and shall be humanely destroyed or removed from the city.
|WA - Cathlamet - Breed - Chapter 6.10
PIT BULL DOGS||CATHLAMET, WA., MUNICIPAL CODE §§ 6.10.010 - 6.10.030 (1991)||
It is unlawful to keep, or harbor, own or in any way possess a pit bull dog in Cathlamet, Washington, with exceptions for dogs licensed before the effective date of this chapter. Such dogs are subject to certain requirements, such as proper confinement, the use of a leash and muzzle, posting “Beware of Dog” signs, the use of special orange collars, photographs and tattoos for identification purposes, keeping $100,000 liability insurance, and vaccinating the dog against rabies. Any pit bull dog found to be the subject of a violation may be confiscated and even destroyed.
|WA - Coyotes - 9.41.185. Coyote getters||West's RCWA 9.41.185||WA ST 9.41.185||This Washington law provides that the use of "coyote getters" is not a violation of law when their use is authorized by the state department of agriculture and/or the state department of fish and wildlife in cooperative programs with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. The purpose must be to control or eliminate coyotes that are harmful to livestock or game animals.||Statute|
|WA - Cruelty - Consolidated Cruelty Laws (Chapter 16.52)||West's RCWA 16.52.010 - 350||WA ST 16.52.010 - 350||This section of statutes contains Washington's anti-cruelty provisions. Under the section, "animal" means any nonhuman mammal, bird, reptile, or amphibian. Sections 16.52.205 and 16.52.207 are the primary anti-cruelty provisions that categorize cruelty in either the first or second degree. A person is guilty of animal cruelty in the first degree (a class C felony) when he or she intentionally inflicts substantial pain on, causes physical injury to, or kills an animal by a means causing undue suffering, or forces a minor to inflict unnecessary pain, injury, or death on an animal. A person is guilty of animal cruelty in the second degree (a misdemeanor) 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. An owner of an animal is guilty of animal cruelty in the second degree the owner knowingly, recklessly, or with criminal negligence 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 if he or she abandons the animal.||Statute|
|WA - Dangerous Dog - 16.08.040. Dog bites. Liability and Dangerous dogs and related provisions.||West's RCWA 16.08.010 - 110||WA ST 16.08.010 - 110||This Washington statute outlines the state's dangerous dog laws. Under the law, the owner or keeper of any dog shall be liable to the owner of any animal killed or injured by such dog for the amount of damages sustained in a civil action. Further, there is strict liability for the owner of any dog that bites any person while in a public place or lawfully on a private place including the property of the owner of such dog, regardless of the former viciousness of such dog or the owner's knowledge of such viciousness. However, proof of provocation of the attack by the injured person shall be a complete defense to an action for damages.||Statute|
|WA - Dangerous Dog - 16.08.070. Dangerous dogs and related definitions||West's RCWA 16.08.070||WA ST 16.08.070||This Washington statute provides the definitions related to dangerous dogs, including dangerous dog, potentially dangerous dog, severe injury, and owner, among others.||Statute|
|WA - Dangerous Dog - 16.08.090. Dangerous dogs--Requirements for restraint||West's RCWA 16.08.090||WA ST 16.08.090||This Washington statute outlines the state and local provisions related to dangerous or potentially dangerous dogs. It first provides that it is unlawful for an owner of a dangerous dog to permit the dog to be outside the proper enclosure unless the dog is muzzled and restrained by a substantial chain or leash and under physical restraint of a responsible person. Potentially dangerous dogs shall be regulated only by local, municipal, and county ordinances and nothing in this section limits restrictions local jurisdictions may place on owners of potentially dangerous dogs.||Statute|
|WA - Disaster Planning - Washington State Emergency Operations Plan||Washington State Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan||
The Washington State Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) includes Emergency Support Function #6 and #11, which concerns service animals and pets. The EOP also defines "animal," "household pet," and "service animal."
|WA - Dog - Consolidated Dog Laws||West's RCWA 4.24.410; 9.08.010 - 90; 9A.76.200; 9.91.170 - 175; 16.10.010 - 40; 16.54.010 - 40; 16.70.010 - 60; 36.49.020 - 070; 77.12.315; 77.15.240, 245, 440; 77.32.525; 77.32.540||WA ST 4.24.410; 9.08.010 - 90; WA ST 9A.76.200; WA ST 9.91.170 - 175; 16.10.010 - 40; 16.54.010 - 40; 16.70.010 - 60; 36.49.020 - 070; 77.12.315; 77.15.240, 245, 440; 77.32.525; 77.32.540||These Washington statutes comprise the state's dog laws. Among the provisions include vaccination requirements, dog control zones in municipalities, dangerous dog laws, and provisions concerning hunting with dogs.||Statute|
|WA - Domestic Violence - 26.50.060. Relief--Duration--Realignment of designation of parties--Award of costs, service fees, and a||West's RCWA 26.50.060||WA ST 26.50.060||This Washington law reflects the state's provision for protective orders in cases of domestic abuse. In addition to other forms of relief, a court may also order possession and use of essential personal effects. Per subsection (l), personal effects may include pets. The court may order that a petitioner be granted the exclusive custody or control of any pet owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by the petitioner, respondent, or minor child residing with either the petitioner or respondent and may prohibit the respondent from interfering with the petitioner's efforts to remove the pet. The court may also prohibit the respondent from knowingly coming within, or knowingly remaining within, a specified distance of specified locations where the pet is regularly found.||Statute|