From the Kelowna Capitol News, Oct. 25, 2002:
"The Kelowna branch of the BCSPCA has successfully secured a conviction for animal cruelty against Arla Jack Lockard of Lakeshore Road in Kelowna.
Lockard pled guilty to animal neglect and cruelty following the seizure of four male rottweiler-shepherd cross puppies he was selling out of the back of his truck.
'We had received numerous reports about Mr. Lockard selling puppies from his truck in shopping mall parking lots during the two years prior to the seizure', says Kathy Woodward of the SPCA.
'This time there was enough evidence to remove the dogs and to recommend charges under the BC Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.'
When rescued, the four puppies were suffering from suspected parvo virus and were extremely bloated and lethargic.
'In addition to Parvo virus, they were infested with worms and were in considerable distress due to undernourishment'
The animals were treated at the Fairfield Veterinary Clinic.
Lockard is now prohibited from owning or having custody of animals for five years.
He was also required to pay a fine of $150."
Well good for you Kelowna SPCA! Thanks for taking action and using the PCA Act for what it was created to do!
BUT...a few questions:
I saw a CHBC TV news story on this man a year ago. At that time he already had notoriety as a puppy seller, and at that time the Kelowna SPCA confirmed that too many of the pups he sold were diseased. He was well known to Kelowna SPCA a year ago. The above article concurs, stating that the SPCA had received "numerous reports" about this man, over the span of two years. Why did it take two years to gather "enough evidence" to charge him? What was the evidence? What was he doing differently? Nothing, as far as I can tell. The pups he sold a year ago were in poor health too, according to the SPCA. As a matter of fact, the public was so outraged a year ago by what Lockard was doing that his truck was painted with the words "PUPPY KILLER" and was vandalized. http://www.chbc.com/news/articles_files/329/news_14_329.shtml
The SPCA did nothing for these pups, so an anonymous public was forced to take some kind of action, albeit an innefective and misdirected one. But I understand the frustration that led to that action- too many private citizens are forced to do something, anything, when the SPCA does nothing, often after being asked repeatedly, by many people, to help.
Again, what was the evidence that made seizure possible this time? Was it the "suspected parvo virus?" (Note that the reporter says "suspected" in the article, but that Woodward is quoted as saying the pups did have the disease- so which is it? This reminds me of the seizure of Gaston Lapointe's huskies this summer- the SPCA for a long time did not know if those dogs had Giardia, something a simple fecal analysis would confirm.)
Oh, and speaking of "suspected" parvo virus- remember last Christmas when the Kelowna SPCA killed that litter of pups found behind a dumpster because they SUSPECTED they had parvo virus? I sure hope they didn't kill these pups too. But the article doesn't say. http://www.theokanagan.net/story.html?story_id=1690_full&search=SPCA
Only those of us who live in the Okanagan (or who have satellite tv) were privy to the shameless scene put on by Russ Forand, manager of Kelowna SPCA, who took the CHBC tv crew to Mr. Lockard's residence. Forand heroically read Lockard his rights in front of God, the CHBC camera crew, and everyone, and the whole thing was broadcast on the evening news. It looked just like some reality cop show. What a show of force - and it only took two years to do it!
But that's not the point, the point is, why does the SPCA routinely choose to deal with only a handful of reported cruelty cases, and always turn them into a media blitz? For good PR and donations, is my guess.
Out of the countless cases of cruelty and neglect that are reported to them every day, how do they decide which ones to pursue? Do they draw them from a hat? I don't know. All I know is that they never fail to glorify themselves in front of the media. This is self-serving, not animal serving, and until I see the SPCA enforce the PCA act on a regular basis without huge media drama, I refuse to believe they are "moving forward in a new direction".
Jennifer Dickson,
Okanagan Animal Welfare Foundation