Resident wants animal control changes, funds
Nov 11, 2012 | 383 views | 0 0 comments | 2 2 recommendations | email to a friend | print
To The Editor:

I don’t understand how [Cleveland Animal Control] can pick up a “found” animal and within a few days put the animal down if it has not been claimed.

These pets belong to someone. Most of them are healthy, spayed or neutered, and many with collars.

Such behavior, killing someone’s pet, should be against the law. If someone who works for the [animal control] finds a person’s billfold or purse full of money, is the billfold or purse, and contents, destroyed after a few days because the owner did not come forward to claim it?

How much more do some of these animals mean to the person who owns them than a billfold?

Our [animal control] has the wrong idea. If there is not enough room to house the animals, keeping them until they are claimed, or until someone goes back to the street where they were picked up and locates the owner, then we need to make more room.

And it will be said it costs a lot to make more room and to keep the animals longer than a few days. We don’t have any problems with money when it comes to stacking the asphalt higher and higher and higher until the mailboxes are touching the road (and I appreciate the nice roads and have no problem with the road commissioner) or beginning a ballpark on Minnis Road only to stop the project in the middle.

But more money should be put in animal control and to care for our animals. It is ludicrous to kill healthy animals — [those with] collars, spayed and neutered — just because the owner can’t find the animal in a few days.

I believe if it were proposed to increase the sales tax by 1/2 cent for money to go to animal control and Cleveland for a No Kill [City] it would pass.

— Trecia Watson