Animal cruelty under the Canadian criminal code is a crime and convictions result in a permanent criminal record, but provincially, under the PCA Act, it is a summary offence only: there is no criminal record, but fines and prohibitions on owning animals can be imposed at the discretion of the judge.

The PCA Act was written to make a distinction between animal abusers and child abusers, murderers, terrorists, thieves, and rapists. One may argue that there should be no distinction, but that would be false. Most animal abusers do not directly abuse - they neglect, sometimes severely, but the PCA Act acknowledges that the intent is seldom to be cruel. Most animal neglecters are poor, uneducated, and of low intelligence, or they come from countries where neglect is the norm.

The Act requires the SPCA to inform animal neglecters what it considers cruelty and to give the owner an Offence Warning Notice, which is a list of things that must be done to correct the neglect, before the Act allows the SPCA to seize. Perhaps the Act was written that way because the drafters knew that animal neglecters are seldom intentionally causing suffering and to reflect the SPCA's duty to "educate".

It is Section 11 of the Act that requires the SPCA to allow the owner to correct the alleged offence of causing or permitting "distress":

Relieving distress in animals
11. If an authorized agent is of the opinion that an animal is in distress and the person responsible for the animal does not promptly take steps that will relieve its distress, the authorized agent may, in accordance with sections 13 and 14, take any action that the authorized agent considers necessary to relieve the animal's distress, including, without limitation, taking custody of the animal and arranging for food, water, shelter and veterinary treatment for it.

The Act says the owner must be allowed to take steps to relieve the distress. Only if the owner does not relieve the distress can the SPCA seize the animal(s).

The SPCA's Branch Operations Manual confirms and expands on this requirement:

"Many complaints may be resolved by issuing an Offence Warning Notice. When completing this form, indicate what the problem is and specify what you would recommend to correct or improve the situation. Allow a reasonable amount of time to implement these corrections or improvements and then make a follow-up visit to ensure that the person is complying with your recommendations.

Not all situations can be resolved with a warning, but it does give the Special Provincial Constable more room for discretion in dealing with borderline cases.

If an examination prior to action finds animals in good health, do not remove animals from owner's custody just because you have gone to all the trouble of obtaining a warrant.

Do not be "taken in" by the surroundings of the facilities in which the animals are kept. Cosmetics such as mud, filth, manure, garbage, etc. are all less important in your decision as to whether the animal is being deprived of necessities. The physical condition of the animal and its current health status are the prime factors upon which to base you opinion. All other issues can be dealt with later and by other appropriate officials such as the local Health Officer.

Remember that the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act is designed to improve the quality of life for animals deprived of proper basic care.