Animal Advocates Watchdog

Patricia Best supplies more information

How many of the dogs are being fostered in the community in all?

Ten, I believe though I heard one stayed at the SPCA the whole time.

Please list all the conditions the dogs were in when you received them. You have said they had fleas and skin conditions, and very few teeth. Can you describe any other conditions of ill-health that were untreated when you were given them?

The dogs were filthy, they had fleas. The two basenjis are scarred and had a heavy coat of dandruff stuck right to the skin, both basenji's and the yorkie chihuahua mix I had are missing many teeth. The dog I had, the teeth were rotted down. The basenji's looked like they were broken out or removed. The little dog my daughter had was hairless on the ears we thought this normal but after a few weeks the hair actual started to grow back. Our Vet said the teeth are missing in puppy mill dogs from gnawing at the cages.

What health conditions are still untreated or still not cured?

None, were treated other than us using Advantage, Bathing & Grooming...most improved with a healthy diet. We were not permitted to do any Vet work with out permission from the SPCA.

Are the dogs still unsterilized? If so, is there a medical reason for not sterilizing them yet?

All dogs were unsterilized....one basenji was in heat.

We were told that the fostering could take up to two years because the SPCA told us they were going to court. I know some charges may have been laid. They asked her to pay 11, 000.00 which I understand is being paid today. The SPCA worker said they chose not to go ahead with a possession order due to the lengthy court battle.

I was told that in case the dogs were up for adoption that I could not keep the one I had due to the fact I am at the bylaw limit of dogs...I accepted that, I had no problem with LOLA...going to a new home but back to the breeder is unacceptable...

Patricia Best

Messages In This Thread

SPCA to give dogs back to Chilliwack puppymiller after being paid "seizure costs".
Patricia Best supplies more information
letter to the BC SPCA Board of Directors
Letter to the BC SPCA Board of Directors from Nikki Boechler
Letter to the BC SPCA from Olivia Candille
A letter from Carol Sonnex
AAS will be getting a legal opinion
Legal opinion from Alexander, Holburn, Beaudin & Lang agrees with AAS interpretation
AAS letter to Craig Daniell asking that the SPCA not return the dogs to the puppy miller
Craig Daniell just told AAS that the sum paid by the Chilliwack puppymiller was not $11,000.
well to the SPCA..that I have supported my whole life..I say you are a fraud
The dogs came from a Chilliwack "Hobby Farm", seized May 13/0
More legal questions about custody orders. AAS will be looking for answers
News story - Coast Reporter
News Story, May/03 Chilliwack Progress
Thank God we are making a stand...someone has to...
Foster Home Fallacy
The SPCA contradicts itself
Eileen Drever says the PCA Act made them do it
Six months from seizure to conviction *LINK*
The point at issue is: Could returning animals make it doubtful a court would prohibit ownership?
Can the SPCA expect Crown to accept this case now that the SPCA has said the animals never were in that bad physical condition?
The public needs to know....
In April of this year, I very publicly condemned the Kamloops SPCA
SPCA Double Speak: This place is no benign "Hobby Farm": There is no legal definition of a puppy mill
I will definetly NOT support the S.P.C.A.
How does this solution benefit the animals? Or is the solution not supposed to?
SPCA double speak: justifying returning the Chilliwack Puppy Mill dogs
Is the SPCA going to say that the puppy miller can be trusted to meet its own definition of "responsible guardianship"?
Craig Daniell's "form answer" justifying the return of the dogs
Patricia Josh Best responds
Chilliwack Times, July 29/03
Throw in the Downy, the spin cycle is on. Patricia Best answers the SPCA
Patricia to meet with Craig Daniell
Chihuahua rescue: From what I can gather from talking to Eileen Drever, the SPCA sets its policies and it is due to money, budget restraints, and time.
The meeting was postponed *NM*
SPCA: back to blaming the law for what it does not do to protect animals
Bottom line is - the SPCA chose not to use the law and return the dogs. Why?
As a person who has personally rehabilitated puppy mill dogs for years, I question the "seizure costs"
Damage Control: Will the SPCA reseize the Chilliwack puppy mill dogs?

Share