Comes to defense of animal control officers

Dear Editor:

In regards to the article printed in The Gaffney Ledger, where Judy Wyles states that she is helping Laura and Joey Gunn, file a complaint against The Cherokee County Animal Control, I believe some more insight should be given about the situation.

For starters, the officers that she refers to as being undertrained, have in fact gone through extensive training, maybe not with the animal control division, but Cherokee County has paid a couple of thousand each for training when the two of them worked for the detention center.

One officer also has state training to add to his list of credentials. So I believe that the idea that they need to learn how to deal with the public can be dismissed. They both have plenty of experience in that area.

And since Judy Wyles is so concerned with numbers, here are a few more that the taxpayers may be interested in. Thanks to Keith Coleman of the South Carolina DHEC office in Spartanburg County, where all the records for animal bites in Cherokee County are kept, we found some very interesting things. I asked for records dating back to the year 2005. Here is what he found. Keep in mind, these numbers are for Cherokee County alone.

In 2005 there were 74 dog bites reported. Of that, 16 victims were children between the ages of 1 and 10. Twenty victims were between the ages of 11 and 20. In 2006, 86 dog bites were reported. Of that total, 25 victims were children between the ages of 1 and 10, and 10 were between the ages of 11 and 20. To date for 2007, 62 dog bites have been reported. Nineteen of these victims are children between the ages of 1 and 10, with 10 between the ages of 11 and 20.

There appears to be a significant increase every year as to the trend of dog bites, especially the ones involving children. Although the species of the dogs could not be determined for this report, I think that these numbers speak for themselves. To further my research, I was given permission by the Animal Shelter, to browse through work orders for the years of 2005, 2006, and 2007. I specifically looked for calls that involved "vicious" animals. Then I broke that down by how many of those calls involved pit bulls. The numbers are startling.

The woman that owned the dog said that it was just protecting its property and that was what they had trained him to do. Well, I think that if you know that you have a dog that might be aggressive towards strangers, that you might take a few more precautions to see that your dog is not a danger or threat to society. Has this woman ever considered what it would be like for her if 'Bruno' bit her neighbors child? People really need to weigh the possibilities when deciding on training their pets to be aggressive.

I have further asked animal specialists, veterinarians, and so forth, what constitutes an aggravated assault by an animal. It all boils down to the fact that animals are unpredictable. Different circumstances apply in almost every case that is reported. There is no way to determine exactly what can be done to prevent an attack by any kind of animal, dogs included. Once the animal has it in its head that their protective barrier has been breached, they go into defensive mode. How can a 1-year-old child know that it has just upset a dog just by playing too close to its food bowl?

The Animal Control Officers enforce animal containment or confinement laws every day, and every day they receive more and more calls about stray , roaming and destructive animals. As humans and law-abiding citizens, it is our responsibility to know how to care for our animals, how to keep our pets from being a nuisance to our neighbors and other citizens. But many people chose not to. The list for abandoned, stray, and neglected animalsgrows more and more out of control by the day. These officers see this on a daily basis and deal with the tragedies that result from others' negligence.

Officers have to make choices every day. They have to put everything into consideration before they take action. The biggest thing they have to consider is other people's safety. That's what they are here to do. To keep all of us safe. It is my opinion that the knowledge gained by the day-to-day experience these men have far supersede any "classroom" experience anyone can get. I further suggest that Judy Wyles ride along on some of their calls that involve "vicious" animals and see if her applied classroom skills can help capture an animal that is ready to attack. Without any blood being shed of course, by either her or the animal.

Then of course there is the question of what will you do with the animal once you have it in a cage? How would she suggest that it be removed from the truck, into a kennel? Then how are you going to feed and water it if it keeps trying to bite you? If and when the owner arrives, how long is it going to be before the Animal Shelter is called out again to deal with the same animal? What if that animal attacks a child? There are thousands of questions that I could ask, but the only answer to any of them is this. We will do what we can until there is no other option.

My biggest question to Judy Wyles would be have you ever had to look into the eyes of a 2-year-old child who has just been released from the hospital after having her face stitched up (25 stitches), after being mauled by a pit bull, and seen the hurt and fear that will forever be embedded in that child's memory? Being attacked by a dog not only scars their little bodies, but it scars their minds as well. And these Animal Control Officers have to deal with that every time they have a dog bite call that involves a child. So if you were to put yourself in their shoes, I am sure that you would vow to try and keep that from happening again. These men are nothing short of heroes to these children.

It is great to think that there are people out there willing to sacrifice for an animal. These men do that too. There are far many more animals saved by these men every day, that are adopted to good homes, than are shot. When it comes down to having to make a decision on their safety, as well as others' (children included), I believe that Officer Pearson made the right choice. Permitting that animal to run at large could have been a big mistake. Any one with God given common sense would have done the same thing. I may not have "training" on how to deal with animals, but if a dog, any dog, were to attack me or my child, you can bet that it would be one dead dog, and I wouldn't care if it was Fluffy or Muffin on a bad day, and it belonged to my mother.

Jessica Emery

Gaffney, S.C.