Public money for animal control is money well-spent

The fact that there are far more puppies and kittens than there are homes for them is a sad fact that is sometimes denied by folks who don't like to think about animals being euthanized.

When choices have to be made by the animal shelter about which dogs are killed and which dogs survive another day, it makes perfect sense to preserve the less dangerous ones and somebody has to decide which is which. The methods by which dogs are categorized as "aggressive" and therefore put on the hit list was questioned by a visitor to the county commissioners' meeting recently and thus became the subject of Gannett's Page One, causing a lot of chatter on the paper's web site.

It's dirty work, euthanasia. No way in hell could I face such a job. It takes special people and I'm glad some government employees are willing to kill dogs and cats that otherwise would meet prolonged and/or painful deaths.

Animal control personnel have stopped the packs of dogs that used to run through streets and yards in my neighborhood. Also, there is a workable animal-adoption mechanism in place and folks get dogs and cats that are properly (though maybe not infallibly) screened in return for a healthy fee.

The more they can get rid of all aggressive dogs in this city - and everywhere - the better society will be for it. In my opinion, folks are getting a good return on the money spent for animal control in this city.