Letters to the Editor

City of Kirkland should explore further options for animal control | LETTER

Submit your letter to: letters@kirklandreporter.com - File art
Submit your letter to: letters@kirklandreporter.com
— image credit: File art

Further options should be explored prior to the City of Kirkland taking over the task of animal control as proposed by Lorrie McKay.

If Kirkland has experienced low-use animal service, it would not appear to be cost effective to establish a new city facility, position and equipment at $100,000, with recurring cost of more than $100,000 per year.

I suggest exploring readily available commercial services from firms like Critter Control to handle those animals more dangerous than guinea pigs or rogue rabbits.

Only when an animal has attacked someone, should  it be necessary for the Police Department to be involved. Sheltering at local veterinarian facilities, PAWS or Human Society makes sense.

My first glance at the March 23 article, I thought I was reading the April Fools’ Day edition.

King County Animal Control sure appears to be ripping off the taxpayers of our fine city.

Reading further, the proposal put forth by the City of Kirkland Intergovernmental Relations Manager fares no better.

Bob Campbell, Kirkland


We encourage an open exchange of ideas on this story's topic, but we ask you to follow our guidelines for respecting community standards. Personal attacks, inappropriate language, and off-topic comments may be removed, and comment privileges revoked, per our Terms of Use. Please see our FAQ if you have questions or concerns about using Facebook to comment.

Read the Oct 21
Green Edition

Browse the print edition page by page, including stories and ads.

Browse the archives.

Friends to Follow

View All Updates