From: Craig Daniell
To: Patricia
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 1:59 PM

Hi Patricia:

Thank you for your email.

Can I ask why you did not contact me personally about this situation. I received no call from you at all.
You may find that I am and always have approachable and willing to discuss this and other situations with you and others.
I would be more than happy to tell you why the dogs were returned and the conditions that are attached to same, why we legally cannot sterilize animals that do not belong to us, why charges are in fact being prepared.
There are a number of factors relating to the investigation which I cannot reveal, but then again I do not reveal them even to other BC SPCA staff.
I'll leave the choice to you.
Regards,

Craig Daniell
Acting Chief Executive Officer
BC SPCA

Throw in the Downy, the spin cycle is on...this is always my favourite part of any confrontation with government, big business, or societies that are less than transparent with their motivations and actions..

Spin 1) Mr. Daniell asked today why I did not call him first with my concerns of the 10 dogs being returned to the so-called Hobby Farm...on the Friday the dogs were taken from us and were sent back. I called numerous people at the SPCA. Not one of the people we spoke to recommended calling Mr. Daniell nor was his name ever mentioned. When we called the public relations person, we were told she is on vacation and told to contact Eileen Drever. Finally, when one of the other fosterers (Amy) contacted Eileen Drever and was rudely hung up on, we as a group quickly came to the conclusion that no one was interested in speaking to us..

Spin 2) So now it seems the dogs were not in that rough shape, contrary to the article in the Chilliwack Progress that quotes the attending vet, and contrary to what Eileen Drever said when she seized the dogs and made an appeal for donations in the media.

Spin 3) We have to follow the law...well how about just keeping the dogs and seeing if the backyard breeder, aka hobby farm, has the wherewithal or balls to sue the SPCA...I doubt it. I would be more compassionate toward the SPCA if it was fighting tooth and nail to save these dogs. If I read in the paper that the SPCA was refusing to return these dogs or taking it to the legal level, I would be more inclined to support the tenacity of the SPCA rather than the mamby- pamby rights of the heartless breeder.

Spin 4) We could not sterilize the dogs as they are not the property of the SPCA...then make it one of the conditions of return that the dogs be sterilized. If you adopt from the SPCA you must sterilize the dog within a period of time,,,somehow I am sure the rule can apply to seized dogs that are so obviously not pets.

Spin 5) We are going to do follow up checks...were you there today in this heat wave to ensure these dogs were not sitting in their crates with little or no water? Are these dogs allowed adequate play area or are they back in the barn in the crates. Have they been treated with Advantage or other flea medications to ensure they are not eaten alive by fleas in this heat.

I could go on and on...a decent person or organization is only as good as it's actions..I am personally tired of hearing how defenceless the SPCA is...Then why do you exist? How many seizures a year actually go all the way to court? How often does the SPCA send reports to Crown to make sure that charges are laid? How can you make a strong case to the Crown when as soon as the media spotlight is on you, you start to back-peddle about the conditions of the dogs and their level of distress.

I am a little citizen and actually I am fighting harder for the welfare of these dogs than the SPCA seem to be fighting. We offered to the SPCA to buy these dogs outright from the breeder. I have been informed by a very reliable source that these dogs are bred until they are too old or too sick then merely given away. That's when we hear all about the limited resources.

Hey, I have limited time and resources, but as I stated, I am willing to pay for the dogs..and willing to raise money to pay for these dogs. Originally my first step, after trying unsuccessfully to get the SPCA to listen to me last Friday, was to speak to a lawyer and a vet. Both told me to make a public case first then a legal case. We plan on hiring a lawyer to represent us the foster parents fighting to save the life of these animals.

Spin...spin...spin...The owner paid the SPCA seizure costs, not legal fees, so the dogs are returned. Had she not had the resources, the dogs would default to the SPCA and be adopted and sterilized. So... in my somewhat cynical view, you are saying the SPCA will protect and sterilize the dogs of the abusive, but not-so-financially-well-off, but not the dogs of owners just as loathsome but with a better cash flow.

Hmmmm...something to ponder...I hate people or organizations that hide behind their supposed lack of power. Find a board of directors with the chutzpah to lobby for changes in the law or challenge the law in the best interests of animals or let someone else take over your role as true defenders animals, not just act as a pet store with a huge donating and naive money-giving public...

Patricia Josh Best