Reward in Dog’s Death

Re “Panel Favors Reward in Dog’s Death,” April 22.

Public Safety Committee Chair Laura Chick was wise to question the precedent of increasing an already substantial reward with $5,000 of taxpayers’ money when there is no determination of a criminal act. It is sad this tragedy became an arena for flamboyant political grandstanding and self-righteousness, rather than a demand for cooperation from the dog’s owner, all examining veterinarians and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Los Angeles to share information. The only goal should be to immediately assess the situation in order to properly protect all animals from either humans or animal predators.

The time must soon come when the same small group of chronic accusers of our Animal Services personnel are held to some standard of expertise and accomplishment. We spend far too much valuable time and money defending against complaints by those who have little more to their credit than how many city spay/neuter vouchers they distribute.

The council should immediately demand that any pertinent information from every source be submitted to an independent team of experts, allow the comprehensive necropsy report of the city’s chief veterinarian to be reviewed publicly, and resolve this issue so that poor Pal can rest in peace and Valley residents can be alerted to the real dangers to their pets and possibly their children.

PHYLLIS M. DAUGHERTY

Co-Director, Animal

Issues Movement

Los Angeles

* I can’t understand why people just do not learn to protect their pets. Why was this little dog put outdoors for the night in the first place?

I blame the owners for some of the horrible acts that these poor animals face. Coyote or man, it’s a horrible end to life, and had he been kept protected indoors, this would not have happened. What does it take for people to protect their pets as they would their children, if they love them?

RACHEL DiBIANCA

Northridge