Animal legislation and Cheech the pup

Barbara Yaffe
Vancouver Sun

July 6, 2004

Not a word was mentioned during the recent election campaign about the animal cruelty legislation that died in the last Parliament.

The legislation is gone, but certainly not forgotten by those looking out for the welfare of furry critters.

If by some miracle the law to toughen penalties for animal cruelty passes during the next Parliament, it wouldn't surprise me if animal welfare proponents use it against the B.C. SPCA!

The SPCA's image has been tarnished yet again by a Lab-Rottweiler-cross puppy named Cheech.

You'll recall, the 10-month-old pup was spirited away June 16 by two SPCA workers and a volunteer as he was being led to the euthanasia room at the Delta SPCA.

The society maintained Cheech was highly aggressive and had to be killed in the interests of public protection.

The two workers, however, knew him to be a gentle-natured pooch who deserved to live another day.

Only a handful of people now know where Cheech is. He's safe and happy, they assure.

Two SPCA staffers, Amanda Muir and Kirsten McConnell, were suspended and volunteer dog-walker Troy Hannafin was banned from returning to the SPCA.

Delta police have investigated but no charges have been laid.

SPCA CEO Craig Daniell isn't commenting on the workers' fate or the recent surprise resignation of two board members.

The Animal Advocates Society, a North Van rescue group, is holding a news conference today to alert the community to concerns flowing from the Cheech affair.

The group will release a behavioural assessment on Cheech by Ali Yazman, a retired airline service manager who once trained dogs for the Turkish military. It says: "I can confidently say, I have found no chinks in the armour to cause concern . . . . [Cheech] is a dog with unique qualities such as lots of self-control and correct decision-making."

Mr. Yazman found no hint of aggression, to the point where he provoked Cheech to bite, but the dog refrained.

He further told me he didn't know at the time the dog was the one that had caused the SPCA controversy; "I wondered why they (AAS) asked me for an assessment . . . . That dog never gave me any reason for concern."

The bigger issue here, of course, is: If the SPCA was ready to kill a dog others deemed perfectly fine, how many animals are being needlessly killed by the SPCA under similar circumstances?

The SPCA, by sticking to its guns and demanding Cheech's return so he can be put to death, has been its own worst enemy in this melodrama.

Instead of acknowledging it's not perfect, that if a rescue group in the community wishes to rehabilitate the pup that's fine, the society has dug in and taken job action against two employees whose motives sprung only from caring.

The SPCA has perhaps become desensitized to ending animals' lives. Clearly, interested parties in the community feel the behavioural assessment tests used on the homeless animals need review.

The SPCA for months has maintained it cannot provide The Vancouver Sun with euthanasia numbers because its operations aren't computerized.

If true, that's alarming; it has no way of keeping track of how many companion animals it's killing.

Late last week, Big Heart Rescue Society in Surrey pledged it will no longer work with the SPCA, until "SPCA assessment tools are used to save lives and not take them [and] the SPCA rescinds its order to kill Cheech."