Posted By: AAS
Date: Saturday, 21 August 2004, at 8:10 a.m.

The BC SPCA again misleads the public into thinking that the SPCA is successfully seizing dogs for "psychological distress". (AnimalSense magazine, Spring 2004: Backyard Prisoners, page 9)

Here are the phrases that give a clear impression that a dog was successfully seized for psychological distress when in fact the only accepted charges by Crown were for inadequate care: (food/water/shelter) which is all the owner pleaded guilty to.

"She was exhibiting typical signs of psychological distress...social interaction...recommended charges for failing to provide for her well-being... dogs are pack animals who require social stimulation both with other dogs and with their human companions. Bonnie received none of this social contact...dogs also have an innate need to play...Bonnie was denied these needs...Signs of psychological and emotional distress can include constant barking, pacing, lethargy, continuous licking of one area on the body, circling most of the day, continuous tail-chasing, obsessive chewing of objects to the point that the dog's gums bleed, or running back and forth on a tether... If you observe a backyard dog repeatedly exhibiting any of the above symptoms, please report the case to your local SPCA for investigation.

"Recommended charges for failing to provide for her well-being".

The case was heard in September 2003. This article was written in Spring 2004, so the SPCA knew that charges of psychological distress had not been accepted by Crown counsel yet this article makes no mention of that, which leads readers to assume that the charge of psychological distress was successful.

"When Bonnie's guardians ignored orders to provide her with proper exercise and social interaction, the SPCA took custody of the distressed dog...."

Our information is that Bonnie was immediately surrendered by the owner, Yin Song Su. "Took custody", the term the SPCA chose to use, is strictly accurate but not honest. It gives the impression that the SPCA was heroic and that it actually seized Bonnie for psychological distress. It did not seize Bonnie at all, for anything, not for the filth, or the isolation. Bonnie was handed over without a fight. And Yin Song Su was only charged with physical neglect, not psychological distress, as this article misleads readers into believing.

Bonnie suffered for six long, dark, lonely years in her pen. AAS's unfailing experience of ten years of listening to reports of dog neglect, is that the SPCA has been told, over and over, for many years. We don't believe for one minute that this time was the first time that the SPCA had been told about Bonnie.

AAS has years of documentation of yard dogs left to suffer by the SPCA. We still get many reports of the SPCA's refusal to seize isolated dogs, even sick ones.

This is the kind of dishonesty the AAS wants the SPCA to stop. It leads people to believe the SPCA is doing something that it is not doing at all. It leads people to think that the SPCA is "taking care of this problem".

But the SPCA isn't taking care of the problem of backyard dogs. It is very busy making media-attracting puppymill seizures that attract millions in donations. Some of the dogs seized from so-called puppymills were healthy and were suffering no psychological distress at all. Some were actually living in homes with the owners, sleeping in bed with them, being played with by neighbourhood children. All the animals the SPCA seizes are inflicted with extreme psychological suffering in its "Alcatraz-like" cells. Some of them die of diseases in SPCA pounds. Others are killed by the SPCA, even though they are healthy.

Please look at our video of yard dogs at http://www.animaladvocates.com/VIDEO/videos-lp.htm

And our reports here http://www.animaladvocates.com/ItsTIME-cruelty-reports.htm

This is where Bonnie endured, unhelped, for six years.....