November 25/03 CHBC TV Okanagan News:
Salmon Arm puppy millers Vi and John Robinson pled guilty to charges of animal cruelty. John Robinson was fined $500 and Vi Robinson $1 and both are prohibited from owning any animals for five years
Vi and John Robinson were publicly adamant about their innocence when interviewed by the media after the seizure. The only reason we can find for their guilty plea is that they could not afford a lawyer.
During the entire time that Okanagan Animal Welfare Foundation (OKAWF) investigated the Robinson's ghastly puppy mill, Vi and John Robinson maintained the belief that they were doing nothing wrong.
The question begs to be asked: Did the Robinsons lie to the media about their guilt, or did they truly believe they were doing nothing wrong? We believe the latter.
According to Salmon Arm SPCA, the Robinsons had been operating their puppy mill since 1956. When OKAWF reported the Robinsons to both Salmon Arm and Vernon SPCAs, both branches said they were familiar with the mill, and had paid the Robinsons numerous inspection calls.
Vi Robinson herself told OKAWF that the SPCA visited regularly, and that she had taken the SPCA through her entire property on more than one occasion, and that "they never find anything wrong so I don't know what people keep complaining about."
So, knowing that the SPCA was familiar with the Robinsons, possibly as far back as 1956, and knowing that it had made frequent inspections, but only in reaction to complaints by the public over many years, not because of any concerns of its own, and never seizing any dogs, but permitting the Robinsons to continue their breeding practices, it does not surprise us that Vi and John Robinson believed themselves to be innocent.
The SPCA had allowed the Robinsons to run their squalid breeding operation without interference for so many years that they very likely did think that they had been operating within the law all this time. It must have been an incomprehensible surprise for them the day the SPCA suddently decided that what they were doing was not okay, and seized 27 of their dogs.
But luckily for the SPCA, and for the 27 dogs, the Robinsons likely did not have the resources to hire powerful legal representation, for if they had, it is possible that a lawyer could have argued that intent to commit a crime was absent due to the fact that the animal police (the SPCA) had allowed the criminals to believe they were operating within the law for so many years.
OKAWF and AAS are very happy that the SPCA seized the Robinson's dogs, and that a sentence has been handed down. We feel the sentence is a fair one, as we must keep in mind that most puppy millers are not dangerous criminals. The people who run puppy mills are typically undereducated and poor, and the way they treat animals is very often just a byproduct of the social dysfunction that comes with poverty and lack of education. Puppy millers need to be held accountable for their actions, but they do not necessarily deserve to be criminalized or fined exorbitant sums of money that they do not possess in the first place. The punishment must fit the crime, and the Robinsons were fairly punished.
However, were they able to retain a good lawyer, they may not have received any sentence, had that lawyer been able to prove that the SPCA's decades of tolerance had allowed the Robinsons to believe they were acting within the law.
The Robinsons aren't the only puppy mill that the SPCA has paid numerous visits to and found nothing wrong with. There is a high profile puppy miller in Kelowna who has been left to operate for many years. OKAWF included this puppy miller in the investigations that we shared with BC SPCA CEO and Manager of Cruelty Investigations Craig Daniell in January of this year. We have records of complaints about this puppy mill to Kelowna SPCA from as far back as three years to as recently as last month. The SPCA informs the complainants that it is still "gathering evidence", yet abundant evidence from numerous sources has been given already. This particular puppy miller is well known for her litigious behaviour though, so we can't help but wonder if the SPCA is just avoiding a hassle.
In short, the SPCA's decades-old tolerance of puppy mills has resulted in a significant number of puppy millers in our province who have believed for years that they are doing nothing wrong. Seizing their dogs now has an air of trickery to it, especially if seizing without a Notice of Offence. It's not wrong, it's just that it's not completely right, given the circumstances. It's cowboy justice, and what sort of organization uses the law in this manner?
The aboveboard and honest way to end puppy mills is to improve the law so that it is very clear that a law is being broken, THEN apprehend the lawbreaker.
But the BC SPCA has shown no interest whatsoever in advocating for any sort of control of breeding legislation in BC. And Mr. Daniell has told us that he will not be seeking to reword the definition of "distress" in the PCA Act so that it may be used more effectively to seize.
We can only conclude that Mr. Daniell approves of cowboy justice. It's unfortunate though, that using the law in this manner often results in some rather unprincipled decision making.
Jennifer Dickson
President: Okanagan Animal Welfare Foundation
Research: Animal Advocates Society of BC