Animal Advocates Watchdog

Sunshine Coast SPCA suspends fostering program because of "controversy" around the return of seized puppymill dogs *LINK* *PIC*

Coast Reporter, Nov 1/03
SPCA suspends fostering program
By Maria Spitale/Staff Writer

The Sunshine Coast SPCA has suspended its animal-fostering program after some local residents publicly alleged that the dogs they received were in poor condition and that the shelter received $11,000 in fees from the owner of the seized animals.

One of the dogs seized from the Chilliwack puppymill
Back in May, 10 chihuahuas were seized from a farm in Chilliwack after SPCA officials executed a search warrant and found the animals stored in small crates. The dogs were sent for a veterinary check-up before being distributed to foster homes in the Lower Mainland and on the Sunshine Coast.

During the last week of July, the dogs were taken out of their foster homes and returned to their original owner, who is currently facing animal cruelty charges as a result of the seizure.

Patricia Josh Best, a Coast resident who fostered one of the dogs, said she was assured the SPCA would go to court and obtain an order of custody. She also said the foster families were shocked to learn the animals had to be given back.

“These dogs were sick, starving, filthy, covered in fleas, scarred and missing teeth,” Josh Best said in July, following the return of the animals.

Sunshine Coast SPCA manger Tim Kenna responded by saying the animals were returned because the legislation used to seize them, the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, provides a mechanism for owners to claim the return of their animals.

“This legislation currently does not give the SPCA the right to absolutely refuse to return animals,” Kenna said.

Kenna said a misconception that arose in the case was that the Sunshine Coast SPCA received $11,000 in fees from the dogs’ owner.

“The owner had to repay all costs incurred by the BCSPCA, which would include any veterinarian care,” Kenna said. “As the dogs were all fostered on the Coast, we did not incur any costs relating to the dogs, so we did not submit any costs.”

Eileen Drever, SPCA senior animal protection officer, said she was quite shocked to hear statements from the Coast foster families alleging that the animals were received in poor condition.

“Some foster families have made statements that these dogs were flea infested,” Drever said. “Wrong. Definitely not.” Earlier this week, Josh Best wrote a letter to Coast Reporter saying she was told by a person of respect in the animal community that the Sunshine Coast SPCA has been eliminated from the BCSPCA foster program because of the bad media that was caused by the Chilliwack foster dog fiasco this summer.

“I was told that our local SPCA has a group of small dogs on location that were part of a seizure,” Josh Best said in her letter.

“When asked why these dogs were not being fostered out, the SPCA employee explained it was because of all of the bad publicity I caused. Is the welfare of these small dogs being compromised because of bad press?”

Kenna has confirmed that his shelter is no longer participating in the fostering program, a decision that was made by management at the BCSPCA.

“Some issues came up,” Kenna said. “Some accusations were made against the SPCA about the handling of our chihuahua case. The comments were not true. It becomes a liability issue, especially if we don’t own the animals.”

According to Kenna, the dogs that are not being fostered out are part of a Texada Island seizure. He is hoping to put them in a commercial kennel where they will have more socialization.

“We were one of the first shelters that fostered out seized animals,” Kenna said. “We’re working on doing it again.”

Messages In This Thread

Sunshine Coast SPCA suspends fostering program because of "controversy" around the return of seized puppymill dogs *LINK* *PIC*
Mr Daniell's response
I was struck by several inconsistencies in the tales spun by the BCSPCA
Which is it gentlemen?
I would like to confirm that these dogs were not in good shape when we received them
This is a prime example, where the end definitely does not justify the means.
Clarification: only fostering of seized dogs has been suspended we have been told
How does that make it any better?

Share