Wednesday, August 29, 2007

Is It Just Me?

or.....

Does anyone else see a lot wrong with this from the Gloucester Times..........?

Rockport Police/Fire

  • A resident called police Monday morning to report that a black Labrador with a purple collar was loose in Happy Tails Pet Supply. Police notified dog officer Mindy Trafton. Trafton went to the shop and recommended that the dog be released from the store because it did not have identification tags. The dog was later hit by a car and injured. Trafton was notified by police of what happened. Trafton says the town has no place to legally hold stray dogs and if she had picked up the dog she would have been obligated by law to keep it at least 10 days.
I have come up with a minimum of eight problems with this incident.
How about you?

What is wrong with this system? I was going to write, "what is wrong with this town?", but that may be a bit too inclusive of folks that have nothing to do with the situation.

So, my eight....
  1. Trafton's recommendation just doesn't make sense. Where is enforcement of our licensing and leash (haha) laws?
  2. Trafton's statement "no place to legally hold strays...". What law is this? How can we enforce any animal regulations without a legal holding area? Why don't we have one?
  3. Trafton's comment that she would be "obligated by law to keep it at least 10 days". Well, isn't she the dog officer? Isn't that part of her job?
  4. If the dog is not held in hopes of the owner appearing, how can any non-license fines be charged? To whom?
  5. If the dog was hit by a car, as stated, who is to be held responsible for damage to the car if the dog's owner is not sought out. If the dog were placed "in custody" an owner might come forth to claim their animal.
  6. What about the trauma to the driver of the car having hit the dog?
  7. If the dog was injured, as stated, was it taken to a vet? Who's paying?
  8. Why are we paying for a dog officer (whose part time pay is more than my annual full time salary, and also has municipal employee benefits) who is legally unable or for some other reasons isn't performing the function of the position?
This situation could have been far worse. Consider the "what if's". What if the driver had swerved to miss the dog and had instead hit another car. Or worse had hit a pedestrian?

5 comments:

dckiebo said...

Absolutely no doubt about it, Deb, you must become a 'Selectman'. I'll start campaigning for you.
BTW; how about 'cruelty to animals?'
This really offends us dog-lovers!

deb said...

Puleeease, I never want to be a politician! If I were one of those I would have to compromise my ideals and beliefs (and morals). I'll stick to being an irate citizen.

Yep, there you have it...Nine. Cruelty to animals.

Elizabeth said...

And you know what this town would do in response? Make MORE leash laws, not just enforce the ones they already have!!!!!!!!!!!! Imagine me angrily pounding on my shift-1 key with those exclamation marks... People always seem to think more restrictive laws are going to fix things when there are perfectly good rules and regulations that, if enforced, would keep the community safe and happy...

deb said...

I couldn't agree with you more.

I'll be posting an update this evening based upon the latest on the situation. When I grabbed a GDT this morning I was hoping the update story would alleviate my ire. No such luck!

I have no ill feelings towards Mindy nor towards the police dept.,yet it seems that there is much more departmental conflict involved than the public is aware of.

Today's article only made me feel worse. I'm beginning to think there is a mountain to be said for 'ignorance is bliss'.

deb said...

Just checking something.
:-)