Skip to main content
CityRuleLookup
πŸ” Animal Ordinances/Animal Hoarding

Animal Hoarding: Everett vs Marysville

How do animal hoarding rules compare between Everett, WA and Marysville, WA?

Everett and Marysville have similar restriction levels.

Everett, WA

Snohomish County

Heavy Restrictions

Washington RCW 16.52 criminalizes animal cruelty and neglect statewide, providing the legal foundation for animal hoarding prosecutions when owners fail to provide necessary food, water, shelter, and veterinary care to multiple animals.

View full Everett rules β†’

Marysville, WA

Snohomish County

Heavy Restrictions

Washington RCW 16.52 criminalizes animal cruelty and neglect statewide, providing the legal foundation for animal hoarding prosecutions when owners fail to provide necessary food, water, shelter, and veterinary care to multiple animals.

View full Marysville rules β†’

Key Facts Comparison

FactEverettMarysville
StatuteRCW 16.52.207RCW 16.52.207
Second DegreeMisdemeanorMisdemeanor
First DegreeClass C felonyClass C felony
Seizure AuthorityRCW 16.52.085RCW 16.52.085

Highlighted rows indicate differences between cities.

Everett FAQ

Is animal hoarding a specific crime in Washington?

Washington has no standalone hoarding statute, but RCW 16.52.207 prosecutes hoarding situations as animal cruelty in the second degree when owners fail to provide necessary care to multiple animals.

Can authorities take animals from a hoarder before trial?

Yes. RCW 16.52.085 authorizes warrant-based seizure of neglected animals, and RCW 16.52.200 allows courts to require owners to post bond covering ongoing care costs pending case resolution.

Marysville FAQ

Is animal hoarding a specific crime in Washington?

Washington has no standalone hoarding statute, but RCW 16.52.207 prosecutes hoarding situations as animal cruelty in the second degree when owners fail to provide necessary care to multiple animals.

Can authorities take animals from a hoarder before trial?

Yes. RCW 16.52.085 authorizes warrant-based seizure of neglected animals, and RCW 16.52.200 allows courts to require owners to post bond covering ongoing care costs pending case resolution.

Want to add a third city?

Use our full comparison tool to compare up to three cities.

Open Comparison Tool