bc4ever Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Maybe this could have been handled better? http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/200...addogs0702.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue R Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 I would think so - why couldn't they have contacted animal control and let them deal with it, since that is their area of expertise and responsibility? What dogs wouldn't have hidden in the house, "under debris", or elsewhere when the shooting and killing started? Once again, the animals pay for the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRhodes Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 It was animal control that did the shooting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue R Posted July 4, 2009 Report Share Posted July 4, 2009 Sorry, I mis-spoke as I must have skimmed the article too quickly. If the Humane Society was willing and capable of dealing with the situation in a humane manner, then I'd have been all for it. If not, if animal control honestly felt it was too hazardous - well, I might not have agreed with their assessment but it was their responsibility to make that decision as I see it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImWithAlice Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Actually, in the article the Executive Director of the Humane Society in that area states: Rea said the shooting should not have happened. She said her agency could have dispatched a euthanasia technician, food, water and kennels to the site. She also said the Humane Society has enough vehicles and volunteers with trucks and trailers to transport large amounts of animals safely. Even if some of the dogs couldn't be moved from the site because they were too wild or too sick, she said the Humane Society had the resources to safely euthanize them at the site. She said the agency has received more than 40 animals in a single day previously. It has fielded at least 30 phone calls from upset residents who read about the shooting in a local newspaper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sue R Posted July 7, 2009 Report Share Posted July 7, 2009 Actually, in the article the Executive Director of the Humane Society in that area states: Rea said the shooting should not have happened. She said her agency could have dispatched a euthanasia technician, food, water and kennels to the site. She also said the Humane Society has enough vehicles and volunteers with trucks and trailers to transport large amounts of animals safely. Even if some of the dogs couldn't be moved from the site because they were too wild or too sick, she said the Humane Society had the resources to safely euthanize them at the site. She said the agency has received more than 40 animals in a single day previously. It has fielded at least 30 phone calls from upset residents who read about the shooting in a local newspaper Yes, I did read that but, if the problem was that Animal Control was responsible, then they may have made the decision that they felt was best and safest for all concerned. I am in agreement with all of you that I don't think that was the best way to deal with the situation, but I wasn't there and I wasn't the one making the decision and being responsible should anyone get hurt because of my decision. It is a sad case no matter what, and I wish Animal Control had felt comfortable choosing to let the Humane Society try and help. And I am giving AC the benefit of the doubt because I hope they were motivated by the right reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.