Animal Advocates Watchdog

2006: The killing of 60 cats at the Comox SPCA: Questions re the SPCA's definition of critically ill *LINK*

-----Original Message-----
From: JCA OLSON
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2007 9:58 AM
To: Lorie Chortyk
Subject: Quote-The Record-New West Paper

October 1, 2007

To Lorie Chortyk

I felt a need to write after reading a quote from you in The Record - New Westminster's Hometown Newspaper. The article was Animal Shelter comes under fire:

http://www.canada.com/newwestrecord/news/story.html?id=fa469d41-d2dc-4d8a-8751-320f8edbf1c6&k=53682&p=1

Written in the paper was the following:

Lorie Chortyk, general manager of community relations for the BC SPCA, said the society doesn't euthanize healthy animals.

"When we do have to euthanize animals - which is only when they're so critically ill that we just can't save them or if they're so aggressive that they can't be placed back into the community - it's done by injection, euthanal injection."

Two things that stand out are critically ill or aggressive. This makes me more confused over the euthanasia of 60 cats in one day at the Comox Valley SPCA back in the summer/fall of 2006. The only reason I know about these cats is because Carol Shannon of the Cat Advocates Society locally made an announcement on the local radio station. I phoned Carol and she explained to me that when she went into the SPCA she was told of the fate scheduled for these cats. She offered her help but was declined. She told me a volunteer was able to place 10 cats by the end of the day in foster homes leaving the remaining 60 cats. Carol also said the orders came from Dr. Lawson and that the branch was just following orders. Shortly after Carol attended a meeting at the branch that was held with Dr. Lawson. Apparently the cats were ill. Now 70 cats is quite a few to begin with let alone sick/ill. I can't imagine they all came in to the shelter in one day. If they were indeed all so ill they needed to be euthanized it seems inhumane and abusive to me that they were left to linger in the shelter in the first place. Why would a branch allow so many ill animals to accumulate? This leads me to two conclusions. One, the cats were not all ill, or if the branch accumulated all these ill cats over a period of time then they were allowed to suffer which makes the shelter look inhumane and abusive.

I find the issue around these 60 cats very secretive, frustrating and sad. This makes it very difficult to believe your words quoted in the Newspaper. If you are able to shed some light on these cats I would very much appreciate it. It's becoming harder to support the BC SPCA.

I look forward to hearing from you.

From a very confused concerned person.

Charlyene Olson
Courtenay, BC

Messages In This Thread

2006: The killing of 60 cats at the Comox SPCA: Questions re the SPCA's definition of critically ill *LINK*
And then again in 2007: this time a threat to kill for space *LINK*
The good news is that the SPCA is starting to practice some limited surrender
Ms Chortyk says all the cats were critically ill
Something called "germs" kill, not overcrowding. We find the SPCA's reasoning questionable
This entire incident begs to be investigated thoroughly for all of its inconsistencies
I currently have several perfectly healthy, non-aggressive rabbits that just months ago were going to be put down
2005 - 91 cats killed at the Kamloops SPCA

Share