Story downplayed the loss of beloved pets

Story downplayed the loss of beloved pets Re Dead Dogs Question Gun Laws and He Had The Right To Kill Dogs, Says Shooter: Once again, you have published an article which misrepresents our side of the story. In the second article, we are made out to be c

Re Dead Dogs Question Gun Laws and He Had The Right To Kill Dogs, Says Shooter:

Once again, you have published an article which misrepresents our side of the story.

In the second article, we are made out to be cold-hearted, uncaring people whose only concern is our rights and the money we make from our chickens.

This is so far from the truth.

Your reporter took everything we said and turned it around to create another “sensational” story.

She conveniently left out words and context which would have given readers a better picture of what we went through.

Nice work, Vivian Belick.

First of all, our name was spelled wrong even though I spelled it for your reporter twice. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out why you would make a “typo” error like that.

You failed to mention the fact that, on June 9th, John drove into our yard to find these two dogs in our chicken run killing our chickens. It’s not a pretty sight. They tear these birds apart while they are still alive. I am still finding body parts of my chickens in the run and it is sickening. What would you have a person do? Wait til the dogs were finished their dirty deed then gently leash them and return them to their owner? I hardly think so.

After they were done at our place, where would they be going next? John did the right thing in shooting the dogs. He probably saved the lives of countless small animals (including nesting grouse) in our subdivision.

Face it – these dogs were killers. At least the dogs died right away and didn’t suffer the terrifying and savage death my chickens did.

Yes, as John and I both said, you should have the right to protect your property and livestock, a word which you omitted when quoting John.

You failed to apologize to John for falsely reporting that he walked up to Kirsten’s door with a shotgun threatening to shoot her other dog and implying that he shot the dog right in front of her on her property.

This was an absolute lie made up by Kirsten to get sympathy, and you reported it without getting the facts.

The fact is, both of the dogs were shot on our property in a safe and responsible manner and the gun was left at home when John took the dogs and chicken carcasses to their property.

There was a man there who John talked to and Kirsten was nowhere in sight. The man told John the owners were in Beaver Creek and would not be back until the weekend.

You also misrepresented me when you failed to report that when the initial attack took place in November, I did not know who the owner was until three days after, when my friend was visiting and she told me that she knew who owned the dog.

She offered to talk to them for me. I admit that I was wrong in not going over myself to talk to them.

But this friend is a trusted friend and I know that the message was relayed to the owners.

I thought that the owners would contact me with at least an apology if not restitution for the loss of my birds.

When I did not hear from them, I just let it go, stupidly assuming they would at least make sure their dog was kept tied up and not return.

Even if your dog was only “suspected” of killing someone’s chickens, would you not make sure they were kept under control?

You also misrepresented me when you said that I told you that my birds were worth thousands, when in fact what I said was they were worth at least $2,000, but that I had not actually sat down and figured out exactly what my costs were yet.

What those birds were actually worth to me can not be measured in dollars and cents, though, because I loved them with all my heart. They were my beloved pets!

And what is this line you quoted me as saying: “Of course we figured they weren’t going to be happy, but you’ve got to bite the bullet.”

Can you explain to the readers what this is in context to?

Well, I can.

You asked me what I thought of the devastation that Kirsten was feeling over the loss of her dogs. I said to you, ” What about my devastation?

The heartbreak and pain and nightmares that I have had to endure not once but twice over the loss of my beloved birds?”

I have had to bite the bullet myself to stop the pain in my heart.

All of this could have been avoided if Kirsten would have just tied up her dogs.

And one last thing: John has been handling weapons safely for 40 years.

We spoke to our immediate neighbours about the fact that John shot two marauding dogs in our yard and not only did they not have a problem with that, they all said they would have done the same thing themselves.

Let’s face it ,the only “innocent” ones in this story are the chickens and turkeys.

They did nothing to deserve what they got!

Dee Teertstra

Tagish