Animal Advocates Society of BC has over 5000 supporters, many of them residents of Vancouver. Our web site, www.animaladvocates.com gets almost 6000 internal hits a day, meaning that our web site is thoroughly read.
AAS cannot endorse any political party or candidate, but after speaking on the issue of Vancouver's isolated yard/guard dogs at the candidates' meeting on October 15th at SFU Centre, and listening to the opinions and promises of the candidates who attended, we will publish which candidates who we believe are most likely to take a strong stand for isolated yard dogs in Vancouver on our NewsRoom WebBoard where we have published our question to you that we asked at that meeting. "AAS speaks to Vancouver Council Candidates" http://www.animaladvocates.com/cgi/messageboard.pl/read/1602
Please tell us that if elected, you will or will not vote to adopt a bylaw to prevent the prolonged keeping of dogs in yards, in pens, on chains, in garages, and in other forms of isolation, and that if the City Charter is found to prevent the adoption of animal welfare laws, that you will vote to ask the provincial Government to amend the Charter. The link to Animal Advocates' reports on Vancouver's suffering dogs, is below.
Reason One to adopt a bylaw prohibiting the keeping of dogs in isolation: That you would not permit the keeping of other companion animals in the way that you permit the keeping of dogs.
Under current federal and provincial laws it is permissible to chain cats outside their whole lives with a minimum of food, water, and shelter. To put this issue into perspective, ask yourself, if the SPCA told you that it could do nothing to prevent this because there is no law against it, would you hesitate to pass a bylaw to prevent this being done to cats in Vancouver?
That there is no law against keeping animals this way is the reason the SPCA cannot relieve the suffering of dogs in Vancouver that the City is saying the SPCA will do*; because chaining animals, keeping them in cages, keeping them in garages, keeping them isolated and deprived of all social contact their whole lives, is not illegal. The SPCA, which the City says is going to do something to improve conditions for Vancouver's dogs, cannot do what the City says it will do. Not unless you adopt a bylaw that the SPCA and the City's own Animal Control Officers can enforce.
Reason Two to adopt a bylaw prohibiting the keeping of dogs in isolation: That it is morally indefensible.
Dogs are chained in Vancouver simply because it is common practice. That is the reason why legislators hesitate to pass laws against the chaining of dogs - because historically dogs have been chained.
But this is an acceptance of the same historical mores that treated women as chattels. The fact that many people commit an evil does not legitimise the evil; if it did, there would still be slaves.
Reason Three to adopt a bylaw prohibiting the keeping dogs in isolation: That you would not permit the keeping of livestock animals in the way that you permit the keeping of dogs.
Currently there is no distinction in law made between companion animals and livestock animals. But this begs the question, Would the City permit other livestock to be kept in this way? The City permits the keeping of horses. Would it turn a blind eye to the life-long chaining of a horse in a field in Southlands with minimum shelter, because there is no law against this that the SPCA can enforce? A lack of laws is quoted by the SPCA to explain its inability to relieve the suffering of terribly neglected horses. (See: http://www.animaladvocates.com/horseabuse.htm) Wealthy horse-owners would certainly make their anger known and the City might very well have to do something. Yet there are hundreds of dogs living lives worse than this in Vancouver.
Provincial and federal laws need to separate companion animals from livestock animals, but until this happens Vancouver can adopt laws against the inhumane keeping of dogs - if it so chooses.
The argument that the City's Charter does not permit the City to enact animal welfare laws is specious; plausible to the uninformed, but not genuine. The Charter, as worded, permits the City to adopt laws pertaining to the keeping of animals*, but if in fact the Charter does not permit the City to adopt animal welfare laws, the Charter can be changed by an application to the Provincial Government. The City was prompt to apply and receive changes to the Charter to prevent it from being sued for leaky condos.
Would you vote to instruct the City to apply to the Provincial Government for changes to the City Charter, if that is necessary?
We look forward to your earliest response,
Judy Stone
President, Animal Advocates Society of BC
*AAS can confirm that since presenting council with our reports, beginning June 13, 2001, the SPCA has not acted in the way the City has said it expects it to. The SPCA's report into the dogs in the AAS reports, the Eccles Report, submitted to the City on April 23, 2002, we believe confirms the SPCA's inability, or lack of will, to address the problem of Vancouver's suffering dogs: http://www.animaladvocates.com/its-time-eccles.htm
*Chapter 55, Section 324A: Keeping of Animals: (g) for regulating the keeping of horses, dogs, cows, goats, swine, rabbits an other animals, and for defining areas within which such animals may be kept or which the keeping of them is prohibited.