| The person who brought Bear to AAS's
attention is Myriam Brulot, a lawyer, who saw Bear (and his then prison-mate) when walking
her dog. After weeks of dealing with the SPCA, Ms Brulot wrote the following letter
to the Vancouver Sun, January 17/00: "The
real issue is not whether the law is strong enough, but whether or not the Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is committed enough to make use of it. (Beef
up laws to protect animals, Letters, Jan. 7).
"For several weeks, I have been in contact
with the Vancouver SPCA to do something for two dogs in my neighbourhood. They are
tied outside to short chains, going for days, if not weeks, without any exercise, often
without water, and sleeping in their own feces.
"I saw them many times, always tied and
often standing and whimpering in the pouring rain. I called the SPCA, imagining that
they would take the matter over from there.
"I was wrong. I am amazed at how long
it took the SPCA to act, and how little, if anything, it would have done, had I not
pestered it to do more. The SPCA told me repeatedly that the law does not give them
the power to act (italics are ours). Yet the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act
gives the SPCA a lot of power to help animals "in distress". That is
defined as a animal "deprived of adequate food, water, or shelter",
"injured, sick, in pain or suffering" or "abused or neglected".
"These two dogs certainly were in distress.
Yet it is only after much persistence on my part that they have permanent shelter
from the rain, though none from the cold, in metal crates no bigger than a walk-in closet.
the SPCA continues to tell me that little can be done.
"How many animals are rotting away in
backyards today while the SPCA continues to tell us that there is nothing they can
do? It may be time to question whether the SPCA is still, in practice,the committed
and unimpeachable organization it once was."
(Signed) Myriam Brulot,
Lawyer,Vancouver
AAS comment: We have documented evidence going
back 50 years, that the SPCA was no better then than it is now. We have talked to
women who 30 years ago were forced to risk their safety to rescue a dog that the SPCA said
it couldn't help. (To read more on this phenomenon, see Release
the Hounds, Vancouver Magazine, September 2000, in which women known and assisted by
AAS tell how and why they stole a suffering dog.) And to women who have been writing
letters for just that long, to the heads of the SPCA, and to the Presidents, and to the
Boards of Directors, and in spite of all their selfless work to prevent suffering, things
have only got worse. And the SPCA stopped AAS from getting the inclusion of a clear
definition of neglect into the BC PCA act. (See how the SPCA stopped AAS from getting a definition of neglect
included in the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act - the act that governs the BC SPCA
and which they are charged to enforce, and how AAS got this irrefutable proof that the
SPCA was serving itself - not animals.) No clear definition means that the definition is
left to the SPCA, and thousands of times a year they choose to define it narrowly as only
a lack of food, water, and shelter. And if the neighbours are keeping the dog alive
by giving it food and water, the SPCA has said there is nothing they can do. And if
the shelter is a tree that the dog has been chained to for years, the SPCA has said
that is adequate shelter. AAS has been documenting and recording the SPCA's lack of
prevention of cruelty or relief of suffering for several years, and the stories are
shocking and revealing.
( See also: The SPCA and the Animal Welfare Business)
How can you help
AAS to really help animals?
Need cheering up? Read
our
BACK TO THE ALPHABETICAL LISTINGS PAGE click here
Please feel free to download and use all information in our web mag, but please remember
to attribute to AAS.
All materials and photos are copyrighted. |
|
