Local Surveys

  • Experiencing cancer

    Have you had cancer or do you know someone who does? Take our survey to share stories, advice and coping techniques.
  • Growing up

    Has being a youth changed much in the past decades? Take our survey to share your experiences and any advice you may have for those growing up today.

Blogs

Today's Front Page

E-edition Login:
Login:
Password:

Community News

"Photos and news submitted by
our readers."
Web site Index
Home Index Classifieds Basin Directory
Herald and News
Klamath Falls, Oregon • 800-275-0982 Make Us Your Home Page

Archives > Viewpoints > Letters

Print Version | Email this story | Comment (23 comment(s)) | Text Size

Police should not have shot, killed family pet

Friday, December 19, 2008 11:18 PM PST
 On Nov. 1, my dog Mia was shot down and killed by the Klamath Falls Police Department.

    My dog had been sick and my husband put her out on the porch while he cleaned one of her messes up and she wandered off. Twenty minutes later we heard a gun shot so loud I thought it was outside of our door.

    Startled, my husband and I rushed to the front door. We were not prepared for what we were about to witness.

    Our beloved dog Mia was convulsing on the sidewalk and seconds later took her last breaths in my arms. Mia died 10 to 15 yards from our front lawn. My son also stepped out on the porch and saw his dog dead.


    The police department had received a call about a dog wandering around and barking at people and so they came to check it out.

    Officer Mike Nork shot my dog before waiting for backup because he “feared she was going to attack him.”

    My dog has never attacked anyone and she was a great family pet. I need to mention that my dog was half Lab and half pointer. She was around 50 pounds and loved children. My neighbors can attest to that.

    Officer Nork stated that when he first tried to approach my dog she “snarled, bared her teeth and lunged at him,” but he didn’t shoot her the first time she allegedly did those things. He shot her the second time. 

    If the officer really felt threatened, why did he wait a second time to shoot her? Why didn’t he wait for assistance? Why did he fail to mention talking with me in his report?

    This was a senseless act of cruelty and no one should have to lose a pet this way.

Tanya Bergen

Klamath Falls


Police Chief James Hunter responds:

    Klamath Falls police were sent by 911 to the area of North 12th and Lincoln streets on a report of an aggressive dog running at large in violation of the leash law. Two witnesses said they had been chased by this dog on this day and were afraid of being bitten.

    Other witnesses stated this same dog had acted aggressively towards them two weeks prior and that they, too, were afraid of being bitten.

    Officer Nork located the dog, which began acting aggressive, growling, barring its teeth, lowering its ears and lunging. This occurred twice in a short time.

    Officer Nork feared for his safety as well as the safety of area residents and dispatched the dog as a necessary preventive measure on the dog’s second attack.

    The dog met the definition of a “dangerous dog” according to Klamath County Code. A dangerous dog by definition is one that “demonstrates menacing behavior towards any human beings or domestic animals.” Officer Nork felt he and the public at large, whom we are sworn to protect, were endangered by this dog.

     The dog’s owners filed a formal complaint with the department. A supervisor conducted an internal investigation and determined that the actions taken were justified and within department policy and procedure.

     The action taken by Officer Nork in his estimation was necessary, but I fully understand the questions raised.

    This incident has heightened our awareness of these types of incidents and we have taken steps to call in outside experts to train our officers on latest techniques available for controlling aggressive animals. 

    We have purchased two “control poles,” the type used by dog control, and will have them available for use after receiving training.

    I offer my sincere condolences to the family of this dog. I regret that this unfortunate, but necessary action had to be taken.

 James L. Hunter

Chief of Police

Klamath Falls Police Department


 



Previous   Next
Divided, we fail — our students   Butte Valley faces ambulance problems

Reader Comments

The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of HeraldAndNews.com. Comment Disclaimer: The editors of heraldandnews.com reserve the right to refuse publication of any comment posted for consideration. We may refuse for any reason, including use of profanity, disparaging comments, libelous comments, etc. Any reader who notices a comment they believe is particularly offensive, should notify us at webmaster@heraldandnews.com.

CC wrote on Feb 11, 2009 12:22 PM:

" I was attacked by three loose dogs while walking home from school when I was in junior high. One of those dogs, a rottweiler, bit me. I now have small children and see loose dogs, some of which are pit bulls, very often. It is the owner's responsibility to keep their pet(s) locked up.

As for dog control, that office is basically non-existent. It would be nice if they were available to take the calls and complaints, but more often than not they're non responsive. Police respond when someone feels threatened and then takes the route they feel is necessary to remedy the situation. Pepper spray does not always work. Sometimes it makes the animal more angry, and by that time the officer (or unfortunate citizen) has already been attacked. Local officers have been bitten many times. I don't blame Nork for shooting the animal. In fact, it really serves the owners right! Other more "humane" ways of dog discipline seem worse to me. Tasing means that the animal is flopping around for many minutes being shocked senseless, and then when he does recover attacks anyway. Now, if dog control actually showed up, then tasing might be an effective way to postpone capture, but what's the point? That same dog will continue to be a menace to society and will be called in the following week again. If you can't take care of your pet, DON'T HAVE ONE!! And don't attack the local heroes who are just trying to do their jobs and keep you safe.

(And yes, our local PD is very pro-active. Certainly more so than the county or many other agencies. This town doesn't realize how lucky we are to have such a great police force.) "

What a CROCK wrote on Dec 29, 2008 1:03 PM:

" To: NOT A COP.

I am sure more people in Klamath Falls and Klamath County would do as you suggest and Join the police force if they only had someone on the "inside" to grease the wheels for them..seems from what I am told..thats what it takes and If your a female, just forget it altogether.
As for protecting us from all the crimes you mentioned...thats a total farse..The police here are anything but proactive..they are only reactive and not very often are they even that.
People complain about the lack of traffic enforcement around here and then you'll get some "cop" spout off that they are too busy dealing with the harden criminals to enforce the traffic laws..BLA BLA BLA...they only enforce what and when they want to..they fail in the "protect and serve" area of thier jobs.
It all starts with the lack of leadership in both the city and county police departmants. "

Stupid Owner wrote on Dec 27, 2008 11:41 AM:

" The owner should have tied the dog up. It's their fault and everyone one who thinks they don't need to control their dog. "

NOTACOP wrote on Dec 26, 2008 9:49 AM:

" Paul C. - Russ -- sounds like the two of you feel you could do a much better job of protecting us. Please, go to the academy and pass the exams and join our local police dept. I am sure your years of training and experience could protect us from the rapists, murderers, robbers, child molesters, and also help solve domestic and civil disputes, help school children learn about protecting themselves from predators, and still find time to have families and be productive members of the community. If you people feel you could do such a better job dealing with the underbelly of our society, then by all means please apply. In the meantime....... let our officers do their jobs. If what happened was a mistake, then it is what it is. He is human. DO NOT let a small thing blot out everything else the officers for our community. I know several of our city police and call them friends. They work hard for you and care about our city and the people, no matter how ungrateful they are. SHAME on you for bad- mouthing them. Voice your opinions in a constructive way without demeaning those that are working hard to protect you. "

joefisherman wrote on Dec 24, 2008 10:01 AM:

" things keep going they way they are coyotes wont be the only ones eating pets.... "

joe wrote on Dec 23, 2008 8:12 PM:

" I have had these "lovely" pet dogs come at me in the city sidwalks and streets many times. Owners seem to think it is a joke! I have been bitten more than once. I don't like it. The owner is totally in the wrong, as many have said. The dog was coming at people including the officer aggressively...as it had before. I am glad the office shot it. If you live next to other people, it is your responsibility to keep your dog [and cat!] under control...or else accept the consequences. By the way, all the missing cats: Coyotes love to eat cats, by the way. "

RS wrote on Dec 23, 2008 10:29 AM:

" To begin with, Mrs. Bergen said herself that the officer waited until the second time the dog showed aggression to use deadly force. If I were the officer, I would not have waited a second time! I see too many stray dogs wondering around town, some of them pit bulls, and with all the kids being attacked by them, sustaining life threatening injuries and scarring them for life, I would not hesitate to do the same. As for the cops being above the law, I can assure you if you are in the same situation they will not charge you. However, they are paid by us (atleast some of us, some of you don't pay taxes!) to protect us and that is what he did. I thought what Chief Hunter said was very professional. Obviously, no one wants to kill the family pet, but when you let them wander, then bad things can happen. How many people do you know who own a dog have no fenced yard? What does that tell you? Either they defecate in the house, or they run loose, probably defecating in your yard! As for the dog control....they are an absolute waste of money. We should get rid of them and hire some real cops, but that's another issue! Lesson learned here, keep your dog under your control or someone will do it for you! "

joe wrote on Dec 23, 2008 10:10 AM:

" city police are glorified dog catchers anyway........ "

Paul C wrote on Dec 22, 2008 11:07 PM:

" Using Hunter's logic:
- K-9 Dog not under control by lease
- Meets "dangerous" dog criteria
- Growls at me, no officer present, then I shoot dog as a menance.

OK, works for me! Let's see how Hunter likes it when I drill his K-9 with a 45 slug. I have his statement above as a guideline. I guess he doesn't realize how many times his K-9's AREN'T under leash control as called out by city ordinance.

What was that saying...What's good for the goose....... "

MK wrote on Dec 22, 2008 10:21 PM:

" Can the officer sue if he had been bitten by the dog. Would the owners be responsible for medical bills? It was stated, the dog was sick. Would that mild mannerd dog be in his/her normal temperment? Could the dog possibly have been aggressive? Calling and waiting for "dog control" does take forever and that's even if they show up. What do they really do? "

Pet owner wrote on Dec 22, 2008 5:17 PM:

" So a cop can kill a pet because it acted agressively, but they can't put an injured animal out of their misery?? I had a deer with a broken leg on my property. I don't own guns so could not (and probably would not have had the nerve) do it myself. I was told as long as the animal could walk away they could not euthanize it. I guess the deer should have barred her teeth and growled at him. "

Curious wrote on Dec 22, 2008 4:39 PM:

" How come cops are allowed to act and be anyway they want to....and the rest of us have to obey the laws. Laws are laws...and there in place to be followed..by everyone...not just by some!! "

pril wrote on Dec 22, 2008 3:09 PM:

" Angel it IS the owner's responsibility to control their pets. Who else's could it be?! I have dogs on all sides of me and they are fenced and they don't get out and go wandering around. If you can't keep YOUR pets safe, maybe they should go to someone who can. "

Angel wrote on Dec 22, 2008 10:49 AM:

" Well I think the officer should have called dog control, thats their job to handle animals not the police officers. And for those of you that insist that it is the owners responsiablity and we should keep our pets locked up, animals are alot smarter then humans they can get out of anything. I know I have three and they are always pulling a huduny act on me. It was wrong for the officer to kill the dog, he should have used other precautions. "

tj wrote on Dec 21, 2008 5:48 PM:

" Have you ever called dog control? they go home at 4:30 pm and are rarely available to be called out. They do not work weekends either. They will also not take any action on a complaint from the citizens unless somebody comes to the Dog Control office and signs a complaint. Hardly a timely process.

Dog control is a joke. You would get more luck getting the bank to open on Christmas day. "

Ray W wrote on Dec 21, 2008 4:18 PM:

" You folks had no guts to print my letter on this matter because your didn't want to offend your good old buddy Hunter! "

dt wrote on Dec 21, 2008 9:17 AM:

" Keep in mind also that when an animal is sick (as noted by the writer) it may not act the way it does normally. Especially if it is away from familiar surroundings, confronted by strangers, and feeling confused.

I know even for myself, when I am sick, I am not nearly as cheerful and polite as I am when I feel "normal".

Yes it is tragic for this family, but the dog deserved better when they knew it was already sick and not feeling well. "

Russ wrote on Dec 21, 2008 9:08 AM:

" sounds like we have a ""dangerous"" police officer on our hands. shoot and kill, and then ask questions. wow!!!! looks like i am throwing away my tax dollars on this ""so called"" police dept. "

Archie B. wrote on Dec 21, 2008 9:00 AM:

" I guess Tanya Bergen found out the leash laws apply to her, just like they do to the rest of us. Keep your pets on your own property and you won't have any trouble with the neighbors or the police. I detest seeing cat racks across the hood of my car. As long as I pay the taxes on my property, I'm the one who chooses who (and that includes your dog or cat) can be on the property. "

Robert N. E. wrote on Dec 21, 2008 12:50 AM:

" While it is tragic to lose a pet, under most any circumstances, I do not find myself questioning the events, but more the timeline of them.

Why was there no animal control officer dispatched? If animal control has the capability to drive around the county, levying fines for animal licenses, I am sure that they should also be able to drive around answering potential animal hazards and complaints, or am I mistaken?

Although I can understand, even respect, to a point, Police Chief Hunter's stance, with respect to his officer's actions, there must be an understanding, an expectation, of mistakes being made, as police officers are trained to deal with human society issues, not humane society issues.

Other responses could have been used, most especially less-than-lethal, non-lethal is a misnomer, since even the most mundane of less-than-lethal, such as a taser or stun gun, can be used to a lethal level. But, that said, pepper spray is very effective against canids, as well as most mammals, and could have easily disabled or cowed the dog until properly tasked personnel could have responded.

Sadly, the family pet was slain through an overreaction, within reason or not, of the officer that is, in my opinion, equally attributable to the negligence of the owners, albeit accidental. Animals, when sick, even the most docile, are prone to reaction unexpectedly, moreso when confronted by strangers, and putting such an animal on an unsecured porch, unrestrained, wasn't of sound reason. It is understandable, as the frustration that led to it is something we've all experienced, but what if Mia would have bitten a child?

Hopefully everyone involved can learn something from the tragic loss, as the only true innocent here was the dog, a companion that relies on human's for protection, and hopefully her passing will make everyone think a bit more clearly the next time this happens.

Next time, someone might secure their sick dog. Next time animal control will be dispatched. Next time, maybe pepper spray will be deployed. Next time, perhaps, action instead of reaction will lead to a proper plan, instead of a knee jerk moment.

While the officer involved may not be liable, hopefully they're still reflecting on their actions, so as to improve and react better, next time. "

Frank wrote on Dec 20, 2008 7:31 PM:

" The only one at fault in this situation is the owner, who is directly responsible for this poor animal getting killed.

People think everyone should love their pets like they do. In reality, a lot of people consider them a nuisance or even a threat (I can't tell you how many aggressive encounters I've had with people's unsecured pets while out running on the sidewalks). It is the owner's responsibility for keeping their animal under their direct control or on their property. "

Lacr0ix wrote on Dec 20, 2008 6:13 PM:

" Almost daily, I see pets turned road-kill because the owner isn't keeping them contained as required by law.

In the end, it's the owner's responsibility to protect the pet - whether from traffic or from someone - anyone - with a gun.

Cops have much more important things to be doing than chasing or shooting someone's unkept domestic animal.

Unfortunate, yes - but hardly the officer's fault, regardless. Unguarded = unwanted. "

Peace over retaliation wrote on Dec 20, 2008 2:30 PM:

" India asked the US to intervene before they retaliated against Pakistan when their "out of control dogs" bit into Mumbai. Seems we need a more peaceful way of handling complaints, threats and reports to keep these unfortunate events from occurring. Too bad a stun gun wasn't used or some non-fatal weapon. Too bad some kind of warning wasn"t handed out when neighbors complained two weeks ago. You folks can probably report the incident to the IPCC (Improper Police Code of Conduct) for them using fatal methods in city limits and for not addressing earlier complaints. Just in case a similar incident has happened before and to prevent a similar one from happening again, a "higher power" or third party outside KF should investigate for ethical reasons. Otherwise, NO FAULT get compensation to replace your loss and build a new dream and the police force will faithfully make necessary shifts to power-with policies. As I too have paid the price of love-GRIEF. "

Submit a Comment

We encourage your feedback and dialog, all comments will be reviewed by our Web staff before appearing on the Web site.
(optional)
   
You must input the verification code (shown above as a picture) to submit your comments.
This feature stops computer generated advertisements from being posted as comments.
Return to: Letters « | Home « | Top of Page ^

Local Weather