In response to the BCSPCA's press release of January 31, 2003 "Beaverdell Dogs Fail to Respond to Treatment for Extreme Aggression"
I can only ask what the SPCA's definition of extreme aggression is. If these dogs were so extremely aggressive, surely shelter volunteers would not have been allowed to routinely, and for many months, interact with them and walk them in public places.
I can understand that the SPCA "has a moral, legal, and ethical responsibility to ensure that the dogs that (they) adopt into families are emotionally, behaviourally, and physically healthy". That is only fair to everyone, including the dogs. But if the prognosis for the Beaverdell dogs was not good enough for the adopting public, why was it good enough for volunteers?
BCSPCA Regional Manager Robert Busch says that "the dogs have bitten staff on numerous occasions", yet we know of no record of these bites. Unless the SPCA can provide certification of vaccination against rabies for the dogs who allegedly bit staff, they are negligent in reporting these bites to the appropriate centers for disease control. Likewise, we are curious to know whether any of the alleged bite injuries sustained by SPCA staff were reported to the Worker's Compensation Board of B.C.
Busch allegates that "staff at the Kelowna shelter and animal behaviour experts from the Society have conducted on-going behavioural assessments on the dogs to measure the progress of the intensive rehabilitation efforts." This is the most disturbing part.The SPCA has attempted to convince the public that it is truly "moving forward in a new direction" by using its new "assessment tool" to legitimize euthanizing dogs for "behavioural problems".
All responsible rescue organizations "assess" the progress of their rescues on a daily basis. But the difference between responsible rescue groups and most SPCA "shelters" is that most SPCA "shelters" keep animals confined in cages, whereas rescue groups foster animals in a home environment. Truly neglected and desocialized dogs such as the Beaverdell dogs will almost certainly fail assessments conducted under stressfull SPCA conditions. Unaltered males and females, caged together or in close proximity to one another, further desocialized, taken into confined spaces with strangers and poked at with plastic hands by "assessors" are doomed to fail, as they are only further confused and terrified by the assessment process. Everyone who does true rescue understands this. Everyone who does true rescue gives a dog a chance to settle in to a secure home environment with a comfortable routine and no demands for at least a month before passing judgement on them. Anyone who has experience rehabilitating dogs knows that to "assess" a dog in a shelter situation is futile.
If the SPCA had only recently received tips, had seized Lapointe's dogs, only to find themselves laden with over 50 large breed desocialized dogs with little or no prospect for adoption into responsible and loving homes, it would have been been justified in euthanizing them. But the SPCA knew of Lapointe for years. It had plenty of time to prepare responsible foster homes. Moreover, it had plenty of time to lobby for legislation that would put Lapointe and others like him out of business.
Instead the SPCA chose to ignore what it had known of for years, until it used the seizure of Lapointe's dogs to grandstand via the media for donations and public support. The SPCA clearly exploited these dogs for money, neglected them by keeping them in cages for seven months, a confinement which is just as damaging as tieing them to trees as Gaston Lapointe had done for seven years, then attempted to absolve themselves of all guilt by subjecting them to assessment tests they knew they couldn't pass, and ultimately killing them.
Even the killing of these dogs is tainted. Mr. Busch states that they were "humanely euthanized", yet it is a fact that the dogs were killed on shelter property by shelter staff with no veterinarian present. Rumours abound regarding how humane the euthanizations really were. There is good reason to believe that Euthanyl was administered to the dogs by cardiac puncture, a process that involves sticking a needle directly into the animal's heart and injecting Euthanyl. Unless the animal is anaesthetized this is an inhumane process, and not condoned by the British Columbia Veterinary Medical Association.
One would think that with all the publicity and donations flowing through, the SPCA would pay the cost to have a veterinarian come to the shelter to perform the grim task. All other independant animal welfare groups use veterinarians if an animal must be put down. They don't do it themselves privately.
It would be refreshing to see an SPCA press release that acknowledges its mistakes and provides assurance that they won't be made again. That would be welcomed and acceptable. But instead we continue to be treated to a tired diatribe of excuses and unfounded allegations. When will the SPCA ever realize that honesty really is the best policy?
Jennifer Dickson
President, Okanagan Animal Welfare Foundation
Beaverdell Dogs Fail to Respond to Treatment for Extreme Aggression
Posted on 2/1/2003 at 06:45:52 PM by Anonymous
press release from SPCA website:
Beaverdell Dogs Fail to Respond to Treatment for Extreme Aggression
January 31, 2003. For Immediate Release: Ten of the dogs seized by the BC SPCA in a high-profile cruelty investigation last July had to be humanely euthanized yesterday after months of intensive rehabilitation failed to reduce their extreme aggression to humans and other animals. The dogs were among those seized by SPCA animal protection officers from Beaverdell resident Gaston Lapointe, who now faces two charges of cruelty to animals under the Provincial Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and one charge of cruelty under the Criminal Code of Canada.
Robert Busch, BC SPCA Regional Manager for the Interior, says staff at the Kelowna Shelter and animal behaviour experts from the Society have conducted on-going behavioural assessments on the dogs to measure the progress of the intensive rehabilitation efforts. "I commend the Kelowna staff for their diligence and tireless efforts to help these animals," he said. "They have devoted months of work desensitizing the dogs to the numerous sights and sounds that they might encounter with a new guardian. Most of these dogs had little or no socialization prior to the seizure. However, even with all the staff's efforts, obedience training, and drug therapy, these ten dogs had little or no chance of overcoming their extreme aggression and anxiety."
Busch says the dogs have bitten staff on numerous occasions and continued to exhibit dangerous behaviours, such as lunging aggressively at small children and engaging in vicious fights with each other. "We have made every effort to rehabilitate these dogs using the best remedial tools available but we are not seeing the improvements we had hoped. The BC SPCA has a moral, legal, and ethical responsibility to ensure that the dogs we adopt into families are emotionally, behaviourally, and physically healthy and pose no danger to the community. It is heartbreaking for all of us here because we have worked so hard with these animals, but we simply cannot adopt out dangerously-aggressive dogs."
Busch adds that while several individuals and animals rights groups in the community have contacted the shelter and the media about taking the dogs, the SPCA could not ethically place dogs in families where a serious attack might take place. "We do appreciate their concern for the dogs, but we could not jeopardize the safety of these individuals or risk the animals being at large in the community," he said.
Thirty-eight other dogs seized from Mr. Lapointe have either been adopted, fostered, or remain at the Kelowna SPCA shelter for further rehabilitation and training.
— 30 —
Further information:
Robert Busch, BC SPCA Regional Manger, Interior: (250) 212-3429.
Lorie Chortyk, Community Relations Manager, BC SPCA: