Owners of small poodles refused to keep them contained; complain when Animal Control does their job

WASHINGTON -- Claudia Ollestad can't believe the paper she's holding in her hand.

"It's insane," said the Issaquah woman whose family is facing an $1,100 fine from King County Animal Services.

It all stems from an incident on Sept. 28. In a complaint filed to animal control, a mother claimed one of the Ollestad's dogs injured her daughter while it was off-leash and unsupervised at Harvey Manning Park.

"One of the dogs stood on its hind legs and attacked my 3-year-old's stomach," read the handwritten complaint. "My daughter's stomach was bleeding and she was screaming."

Ollestad said her family is appealing the attack allegation, calling it "ridiculous."

"We love them, they're our family pets," said Ollestad. "My dogs are not vicious, I mean, they're not vicious. They are little, happy dogs."

How little? Try 10 pounds.

Jacque and Fifi are miniature poodles that, on KING-5's visit to the Ollestad's home, spent more time lying against their owner's lap than running around the home.

The poodles belong to the Ollestad's 11- and 8-year old daughters, who have raised them since they were newborn pups.

"They each have a dog," said Claudia. "It's their responsibility to walk them and they earn allowance this way."

But the citation, in addition to requiring the Ollestads to confine the poodles to their home and to keep them at times in padlocked kennels, also prevents anyone 15 years or younger from caring for the dogs.

King County Regional Animal Services said they never know what can set off even a mellow, friendly dog, plus the complaint came with a photo of child's scratches.

 "In this case we did have physical evidence that a child was injured," said spokesman Cameron Satterfield. "So we had a duty and a responsibility to investigate that."

Satterfield said the family has the right to appeal the decision in a hearing, which is scheduled for Nov. 29.

Ollestad disagreed with the actual investigation, saying the animal control officer came by their house when neither parent was home.

"I was like, 'Wow, they interviewed my children when I wasn't there and assessed my dogs when I wasn't there,'" she said.

In addition to the $500 vicious animal violation against Jacque, the $1,100 ticket total includes fines for letting both dogs run around at large and for expired pet licenses.

Ollestad admitted the dogs were unlicensed and off-leash, but said they were "within vocal command" range of Paul, her husband, and that the 3-year-old was playing for several minutes with the dogs before she started crying.

 

Contact information for the mother who filed the complaint was not provided in time for this story's publication, but in her report she wrote, "I am furious that Paul had dogs off the leash at a playground, especially if he had concerns about one of them.  Now my daughter has bruises and red marks on her stomach and is afraid of dogs."

NOTE: It doesn't matter if your dog is 10-lbs or 100-lbs. All dogs have teeth and therefore can bite. The owner is completely at fault for not having her dogs leashed. The owner is completely at fault for not having the dogs' licenses up-to-date. The owner is completely at fault for allowing her animals around children that are not hers.

Now there may be some discrepancy as to what these dogs actually did -- sounds like they jumped on the kid and accidentally caused MINOR bleeding. Good Lord. However, I am really irritated at how this woman is acting -- Do you hear one word of sympathy to the child? Do you hear her apologizing at all for letting her dogs run loose at a playground? How about an apology for all the dog turds I'm sure they left under the swings b/c she was too lazy to keep the poodles leashed? Or an apology to the mother of the child? 

Maybe her dogs don't deserve this vicious label, but she certainly isn't winning any points with me.

(KING5 - nov 17, 2011)