First let us say that this story is just the tip of a huge iceberg that the HMSPCA Titanic is sailing straight for. AAS began alleging that the SPCA was deliberately misusing the PCA Act more than a year ago. The new CEO has hired some people for his Enforcement Team that may turn out to be dangerous to the SPCA as well as dangerous to anyone they get in their sights, and dangerous to the animals that the SPCA seizes, some of which have died of neglect and/or illness while in its "care" and many of which it has outright killed.

AAS has spoken to Idella Schwab several times beginning soon after the horses were seized. Idella told us that Frank Schwab had been to see the mare on the morning of the seizure and noticed that her arthritis was acting up, but there was no heat and no swelling as there would have been if the mare had laminitis. He rubbed liniment on her leg and cleaned her hoof. Here is Idella's version of events which we find more believable than the SPCA's:

Brad Kuich, the SPCA cruelty investigator said "He asked the owners, Idella and Frank Schwab, to attend, but neither of them showed up."

Idella told us that Kuich told the Schwabs not to meet him at the pasture, that after the SPCA's vet, Dr Teresa Jacobsen had been to examine the mare, he would phone the Schwabs to tell them what the vet recommended. (Jacobsen has few years in equine veterinary medicine, nevertheless she is very active on behalf of the SPCA, appearing as an "expert witness" in court for the SPCA: more on this in future posts re another case of seizure of healthy animals by the SPCA). Kuich did not phone the Schwabs, instead seizing the mare and foal without a warrant .

Some witnesses did attend at the examination and seizure and they say that when they tried to take photos of the mare's unswollen foot, the SPCA turned the mare and blocked the view of her foot.

After Kuich got the mare and the foal loaded, instead of phoning the Schwabs, he gave his card to the tenant who lives on the pasture property and told her to phone the Schwabs. (He had not right to do this and this is very unprofessional.). When she refused, Kuich asked for her name. (He had no right to that information.) When she refused to give her name, Kuich menacingly said to her, "I will find out who you are." AAS has not been exaggerating when it accuses the SPCA of thuggish behaviour and misuse of its power.

Idella also told us that the experienced horse vet, Dr Sheila McDonald told her that the SPCA has been giving the mare two times as much phenylbutazone than is the correct dosage and this is very bad for her health as well as the insufficient food the mare has been given by the SPCA.

A person living very near the corral where they were kept was so concerned about the rapid deterioration and weight lose of the mare that she phoned the SPCA to make a complaint...not knowing that it was the SPCA itself that was the neglector.

The pieces of metal in the ground of the corral is especially revealing of the SPCA: it has used that very reason as a justification for seizing horses from owners, but it does it itself. AAS has alleged for years that the SPCA's treatment of animals is ignorant and dangerous to the animals in its "care". This also points up very clearly the arrogance as well as ignorance of CEO Daniell's enforcement team.

"On the vet's advice and without a warrant, Kuich took the mare and colt off the property for treatment." Seizing someone's property without a warrant is a very serious infringement of a person's Charter rights. Kuich shows that he is aware of the danger he has created for himself and the SPCA by pleading, "I (made the order) under the critical-distress protocol of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act," he said. "This animal was in critical distress. If it didn't get help, its condition would worsen, and the animal could possibly die."

The SPCA may only seize an animal without a warrant if immediate veterinary treatment cannot prolong the animal's life or prolonging the animal's life would result in the animal suffering unduly. In other words, the animal is so near death that it cannot be saved and has to be destroyed. There were witnesses who saw the mare peacefully grazing at the time of the seizure. Will any judge be gullible enough to buy into Kuich's pleading that he thought the mare was too far gone to save? And if that were true, why wasn't the mare put out of her suffering? Was there really no time to apply for a warrant, something that can take only a few hours? Was the mare so close to death that the Schwab's Charter rights could be over-ridden?

The SPCA may still weasel out of this one by making Dr Teresa Jacobsen the scapegoat. Did Jacobsen actually say the mare was in critical distress? Did Dr Jacobsen recommend immediate seizure, or did Kuich make that decision on his own? X-rays taken shortly after the seizure show no laminitis according to the experienced Dr McDonald. It would appear that the SPCA trampled the Schwab's right to reasonable search and seizure for a touch of arthritis.

Did Brad Kuich make an innocent mistake, honestly thinking he was acting in an animal's best interests? Or are Brad Kuich's actions a symptom of an SPCA that is out of control?