« The case of the dog who ate the non-food item. | Main | "Letter to the Editor"? Did not see that coming. »

November 20, 2014


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Don Cannon

If a person has a pet and loves it, it will not be runing loose.


Hello, Don,

I absolutely agree that it won't be running loose habitually.

Unfortunately, pets do escape. Often, the owners call veterinary clinics and the animal control officer as soon as they can. Sometimes the pet doesn't wind up in custody right away, and they don't think to keep checking the same places.

It's good to know that Officer Petix works very hard to return pets to their homes when she can locate them.

Thanks for reading and writing.

Kay Collier

Thank you for being a voice of reason. This is the only way we can move forward as a council and community working together.
I would like to form a committee of concerned citizens to work with the City's Safety Committee (that KHD falls under), Tena Petix and Kayla Gozell to be a sounding board to help get various needs met, from finding possible contractors needed for jobs for bid that the council can vote on, to fundraising, getting volunteers to make "off the floor" dog beds, walk the dogs, help with transport both electronically and physically (as I have done)and even clean cages. I feel it's one thing to want a great Humane Dept. and another to actually help to make it happen. This may involve certain liabilities and background checks, but well worth it because citizens will buy in to how the department runs when everything runs smoothly and when it doesn't. That said, what do you see as possible drawbacks to this?
Again, thank you for this post!


Hello, Kay,
The only drawback I see is that sometimes volunteers are so caught up in their emotional response to the animals that they aren't the best at long-range planning and working with folks who don't share their viewpoint. This has been a problem in the past. Not a deal-breaker, but sometimes a difficulty.

Kay Collier

Thanks for the advice, Doc. Emotions and the need to be right are a real problem. I will persevere. Collecting research from other non-profits right now. Although short-term is the immediate issue, long-range is the goal. I appreciate any advice.


Come April 2016, in the UK it will be mandatory for all pets to be microchipped. Pet owners need to take responsibility and not leave 'reuniting strays' up to the shelters, who then often euthanize perfectly healthy pets due to the owner's lack of attention or funds. At least provide incentive for change by fining owners for not having a 'registered microchip' and then return the amt of the fine AFTER owner returns with proof of a registered chip. Also free spay neuter would be cheaper for communities than the eternal merry-go-round of new born puppies doomed for the shelter. If you want help with these ideas contact the No Kill Advocacy Center (FB page). Thank you.


I'd like to know why Missouri is always behind the curve when it comes to updating animal care policies. Currently there are 15 GAS CHAMBERS still in use in MO. WHY??? How can such an inhumane procedure still be in use? As for the shelter system, I highly recommend consultation with Nathan Winograd of the No Kill Advocacy Center. His policies not only save animals, create happy shelters that attract people to adopt, but also save taxpayer money.


Hello, Rivergull,

It is possible to provide humane euthanasia with a gas chamber, but it needs to be very precisely administered. The question is whether the facilities in question are properly supervised.

If you are interested in how this works (or doesn't), you can read about it here. When you look at the PDF for 2013 guidelines, check out pages 18 through 24.

The comments to this entry are closed.