Questions about Blue's demise

California's Food and Agricultural Code requires that any dog suspected by Animal Control of being vicious is entitled to a hearing to determine its fate. The Acorn's article about Blue, the pit bull that was killed by the Los Angeles County Animal Control, does not state if this statute was followed or if Blue had a documented history that would warrant his immediate killing after a 10day quarantine. These decisions cannot be based solely on photos presented to Animal Control by the victim of the reported first bite.

Why did LACAC take custody of Blue if his owners had him rightfully quarantined under state law? All dogs become more fearful and aggressive in a stressful shelter environment where there are many other dogs and people that are strangers to the impounded animals. The victim of the reported first bite stated that a LACAC officer said Blue was a "sweet dog." Was Blue's temperament tested outside of the shelter by a qualified animal behavioralist?

LACAC must be held accountable for subjecting Blue to its stressful shelter environment, his escalated aggressive behavior and for failing to protect the public's safety after impounding Blue. LACAC Deputy Director Michelle Roache stated, "Unless the dog is extremely dangerous and lunges at people, we put them out there (the front kennels open to the public)." Had Blue been in the quieter quarantine kennels closed to the public, or at a vet hospital at his owner's expense, it is unlikely that he would have been set free by vandal(s) to kill a cat and attack others.

Finally, the Food and Agricultural Code prohibits Animal Control from discriminating against specific breeds. Roache's statement that LACAC won't adopt out any dog with a biting history "especially pit bulls" disregards state law and its public policy. Rebecca E. Arvizu Agoura Hills