The Burnaby Now
Site updated Wednesday, August 17, 2005 02:57 PM
Attempt to help dog leads to frustration
In My Opinion by Elan Gibson
An open letter to: Craig Daniell, CEO, BCSPCA; Mary Lou Troman, president of the board, BCSPCA; and Mayor Derek Corrigan.
It's a beautiful Sunday morning outside and here I sit at my computer composing a letter to you. At my side, I have a dog - a 2005 licensed dog with Burnaby. There are several issues here and that is why this e-mail is addressed to all of you.
I brought this dog home last evening because it had been running free, in and out of a B.C. Liquor outlet for more than an hour, until staff were forced to tie it up outside for a further hour.
The staff had called the number on the licence - Burnaby City Hall - closed on the weekends. They called the SPCA - closed for the evening.
They called the emergency SPCA number - the dog is not considered an emergency. What are they supposed to do - let the animal run free until it is hit by a car and then becomes an emergency?
They called the RCMP - not their jurisdiction (unlike North Vancouver).
I am a financial supporter of the SPCA and I have faithfully bought licences for any dogs that I have owned (37 years in various communities).
And now I have a situation that tells me my donations and my licensing fees are worth nothing in terms of protecting my pet.
I have always been happy to pay for my dogs' licenses as I thought it would assist in their return if ever lost.
It would seem that the SPCA cannot afford to hire a 24-hour emergency person that could at least address the fact that a dog is licensed, belongs to someone and needs to be safely returned to its owner.
Instead the animal should run free, perhaps cause an accident and be injured or even killed.
And yet, SPCA can afford to pursue a court-ordered mediation (at great cost to both parties) with the Animal Advocates Society. So we have two organizations who wish to 'protect' animals spending money on legal fees.
It would seem that the discretionary funding the SPCA has for such court mediations could be better spent advocating for better contracts with various municipalities so that they can fulfill their mandate of protecting the animals.
This dog appears to be well cared for (there are occasions that a dog will get loose from its owner through no fault of the owner).
Surely, licensing is to protect the dog on such occasions as well as for the 'privilege' of living in this city.
The owner of this dog might be frantic and I can't get a hold of him/her (the dog is certainly missing its owner). Likewise, the owner would not be able to track his/her dog last night. A lose/lose situation!
Why is the Burnaby City hall number on the licence when it can't provide the information or help needed? If the SPCA has a contract to do animal control for the city of Burnaby, why doesn't the city pay them enough money to do their job adequately, put the SPCA number on the licence and provide a service to the pet owner who is law-abiding and paying for the licence in the first place.
I take issue with both the SPCA and my city on these matters and expect attention to be given by both parties.
Elan Gibson is a resident of Burnaby.
published on 08/17/2005