Who Was Dumping the Dead Dogs of Hamden, Connecticut?

The town police chief, that's who, and he had to answer for it at a recent town meeting:

Police Chief Thomas J. Wydra and the animal control officers were quizzed on why unclaimed, untagged dogs were dumped over a cliff at the landfill and transfer station.

Whenever I see the words "police chief" I reach for my Browning, I think about Chief Brown, Encyclopedia's dad, the Bull Conner of Idaville, Florida.

Beyond the seeming inhumanity (inhumaneness?) of the act, Chief Wydra said he dumped the dead dogs in the interests of taxpayers:

Wydra says all domestic animals will be cremated instead of buried. He says he wanted to save about $2,000 in yearly cremation costs.

So, libertarians, it's still all about tradeoffs. What do you want, good government or less spending? Arguably, that's not really a tradeoff. But would you be willing to spend more to treat dogs humanely? And in what other situations might greater expenditures be worth the added tax burden?

Whole story here.

reason on animal issues here.

Note: This story caught my eye because Reason Foundation Vice President (and former publisher of reason magazine) Mike Alissi lives there.

Comments

highnumber | February 28, 2008, 11:01am | #

Do I have to read the article, or can I just say that what happens to unclaimed animal corpses really is not important to me?

highnumber | February 28, 2008, 11:02am | #

Oh, but I love that Snoopy cartoon!

The Wine Commonsewer | February 28, 2008, 11:02am | #

Have to agree, there, son. If there's nobody there to mourn do we really need a Rosewood casket?

I'm surprised it's legal to dump dead dogs at the county landfill.

Tom | February 28, 2008, 11:06am | #

The real story here is what would happen to YOU if the local constabulary found you dropping off Fido's earthly remains at the dump, or anywhere else.

In my burgh, if you want to bury your pet in your own back yard, city specs used to say that you have to dig down 36 inches, apply a layer of clay cover soil, etc. Violations to be punished by fine, etc.

I don't think it's even allowed here any more to bury your own pets on your own turf. What about elsewhere?

MP | February 28, 2008, 11:09am | #

But would you be willing to spend more to treat dogs humanely?

They're dead. I couldn't care less if they were used for target practice.

Same goes for my dead relatives.

Shirley Knott | February 28, 2008, 11:09am | #

The problem lies in the way the question is phrased -- and this is essentially *always* the case.
"But would you be willing to spend more to treat dogs humanely? "
Yes, I would.
But that's not the material question.
The material question is:
"But would you be willing to force others to spend more to do as you would?"
And the answer there is a resounding 'NO!'

That is the litmus test of a libertrian.
The question you ask is the litmus test of a bleeding heart socialist.

hugs,
Shirley Knott

Chromepulse | February 28, 2008, 11:09am | #

Browning High-power?

highnumber | February 28, 2008, 11:13am | #

Tom,
To be fair, your city would have a lot to say about you starting a landfill in your backyard, too.

Marcvs | February 28, 2008, 11:26am | #

As long as it isn't a health hazard, I couldn't care less. I love animals, but once they're dead, they're dead. I'm more concerned about how they were treated while alive, and how they were put to sleep.

Reinmoose | February 28, 2008, 11:29am | #

Yes, if they had dumped living dogs over a cliff, I would have a lot of problems. In fact, I'm pretty certain that I wouldn't have even been able to call them with my complaint before someone else pushed them over that same cliff.

You do not mess with people's dogs, man. But if they're already dead and unclaimed... I don't see the problem.

Episiarch | February 28, 2008, 11:30am | #

I reach for my Browning

Browning Citori?

Episiarch | February 28, 2008, 11:31am | #

Maybe there was yellow matter custard dripping from their eyes.

Fluffy | February 28, 2008, 11:33am | #

Browning Automatic Rifle, or Browning verses?

I think the police chiefs would have dramatically differing reactions based on your answer.

emerson | February 28, 2008, 11:36am | #

So what about unclaimed corpses at the morgue? Should we force others to pay for their "proper" burials, or just dump their lifeless carcasses into the river?

Reformed Republican | February 28, 2008, 11:39am | #

emerson,

I would suggest burning, but that might contribute to global warming.

J sub D | February 28, 2008, 11:40am | #

But would you be willing to spend more to treat dogs humanely?

I assume the dogs were humanely gassed. Those weren't dogs anymore when they were dumped, they were organic waste that the landfill likely gets tons of weekly. This is all about people getting foolishly sentimental. It reminds me of the great horses for food brouhaha. I really don't give a damn about what happens to the remains of dead animals as long as they don't pollute the well. If Purina Inc. offers $5.00 for my corpse, I want the empty vessel sold.

Full disclosure - I've eaten both horse and dog meat. I have no remorse about it.

some dude | February 28, 2008, 11:45am | #

Full disclosure - I've eaten both horse and dog meat. I have no remorse about it.

TMI

highnumber | February 28, 2008, 11:49am | #

So, emerson, dogs are people too?

SugarFree | February 28, 2008, 12:01pm | #

Can anyone imagine a far-off fantasy parallel universe where the $2,000 is actually returned to the Hamden tax-payers rather than squandered on something else? Christmas lights for downtown, or heated seats in the chief's cruiser...

Randolph Carter | February 28, 2008, 12:03pm | #

I think highnumber is a robot.

Also, Hamden CT is way fucked up.

Randolph Carter | February 28, 2008, 12:03pm | #

and not just because of the dog thing.

rana | February 28, 2008, 12:17pm | #

Ah, so these dogs were already dead... not like in PR last year where living pets were thrown off a bridge.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/15/national/main3504503.shtml

jimmy smith | February 28, 2008, 12:30pm | #

My experience is that dead things left unattended in warm weather tend to disappear quickly. In winter it takes a little longer for the other critters to find 'em and eat/drag 'em off.

Mr. Nice Guy | February 28, 2008, 12:35pm | #

Can't Mangu-Ward just eat them?

highnumber | February 28, 2008, 12:36pm | #

I prefer to be referred to as a "replicant."

T | February 28, 2008, 12:37pm | #

My experience is that dead things left unattended in warm weather tend to disappear quickly.

Unless, of course, they are in the middle of the freeway. They can sit there for weeks.

The real story here is what would happen to YOU if the local constabulary found you dropping off Fido's earthly remains at the dump, or anywhere else.

If anybody else can drop a dead pet in the landfill, why is this a problem? If there's a law banning disposal of animal carcasses in the landfill, well, hold them accountable.

My last dog is in a tasteful urn next to the fireplace with an engraved plaque, some artificial flowers, and a candleholder. The current dog will join her up there when his time is through. And if I predecease the wife, I have no doubt I'll be up there as well.

sixstring | February 28, 2008, 12:43pm | #

Expert Texpert-

I just have this mental image of Nick Gillespie putting down his Sonnets from the Portugese and picking up Encyclopedia Brown and the Case of the Sleeping Dog.

Tonio | February 28, 2008, 12:56pm | #

MNG wins the thread.

Deckard | February 28, 2008, 12:59pm | #

No, Highnumber, the replicants of the "Bladerunner" universe had human emotions.
Which was the moral issue driving the plot.

Nick Gillespie Fan | February 28, 2008, 1:03pm | #

Why are they throwing out good food when there are still people on food stamps in this country?

highnumber | February 28, 2008, 1:09pm | #

Listen, Deckard, I've got my papers!

SugarFree | February 28, 2008, 1:19pm | #

Listen, Deckard, I've got my papers!

Sure you do, skinjob.

cgee | February 28, 2008, 1:58pm | #

You know, I had no idea that Leroy "Encyclopedia" Brown's dad was a racist police chief. Did you derive that from a literal reading of the source materials, or a Derridan deconstructionist analysis?

Jorgen | February 28, 2008, 3:26pm | #

There might be issues with disease in disposal of domestic animals that differs from the issues with wild animals. If you just leave a dead dog sitting around, it might allow disease to transfer to living domestic dogs. If that's not a problem, then, then I agree with everyone else that I'd like to see that 2000 go to improving the way living strays are kept if it's going to go to dogs.

Deckard | February 28, 2008, 4:56pm | #

Thanks for the link, Highnumber. Hilarious.

All hail Urkobold.

Mad Max | February 29, 2008, 2:48am | #

I just realized the significance of Encyclopedia's real name being Leroy.

Well the town of Idaville
Is a scary sort of town
And if you go down there
You better just beware
Of a man name of Leroy Brown

Now, Leroy is real smart
His IQ is out of this world
They call him "Encyclopedia"
All the mens just call him "Sir"

And he's bad, bad Leroy Brown
The smartest kid in the whole damned town
Smarter than old Einstein
Gets the answers right every time

[etc.]

LarryA | February 29, 2008, 9:57am | #

"All you folks who don't want dead animals dumped at the dump are hereby appointed to the Dead Animal Committee and charged with finding an alternative and the private funding to pay for it."

So what about unclaimed corpses at the morgue?

"Unclaimed corpses will be donated to the medical school. All you folks who don't like that alternative are hereby appointed..."

"Meeting adjorned."

If they rock the boat, hand them the paddle. And hide the keys to the treasury.

hanmeng | March 1, 2008, 5:38am | #

Maybe he was a fan of Under the Volcano; the last line of this over-rated novel reads:
"Somebody threw a dead dog after him down the ravine."