SPCA under attack

Julie MacLellan - Staff Reporter
Burnaby Now

Donna Liberson is angry.

She doesn't understand how animals could be mistreated while in safe care - and how she couldn't get the answers she wanted when she asked questions.

Liberson is with the Animal Rights Coalition.

The group is going public with its concerns about the Burnaby SPCA shelter after a lengthy effort to obtain documents through the Freedom of Information process.

Liberson is raising concerns about incidents of apparent abuse and neglect at the local shelter in late 2002 and early 2003.

The incidents, which came to light after a former volunteer came forward with information, include instances in which animals didn't receive proper medical treatment for injuries.

A summary document the city provided to Liberson through Freedom of Information outlines facts about 22 separate incidents.

In the case of one cat: "Rotting flesh, maggots, bleeding. Received delayed treatment. Euthanized."

For one rabbit: "Taken into foster care with urine burns and swollen genitals."

And, of a dog, it reads: "Eye infection, hair loss. Received delayed treatment and eye surgery."

The list is concerning to Liberson, but she's more concerned about what it doesn't say.

"The summary was a whitewash," she said flatly during an interview with the NOW in January.

Liberson wants more detail about what was happening at the shelter.

Among the papers she received in response to her information request was a letter of concern sent to the city, dated Nov. 5, which begins: "I am writing to you with regards to the Burnaby SPCA. The purpose of this letter is to convey some of the concerns" - followed by a page-and-a-half of whited-out information.

Another letter, presented as correspondence at a closed council meeting in November 2003, was also provided to Liberson with parts whited out. It speaks of a dog with torn leg ligaments that was allowed to sit in a cage for almost three weeks before being taken for veterinary care.

"The dog was eventually euthanized. It is impossible to say whether this animal would have still had to be put down had he received immediate care, but at best he would not have had to suffer," the letter reads, in part.

In December, Liberson sent a letter to the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner saying she was unhappy with the way the city responded to her request for information.

Liberson is appealing to the commissioner to have further information released by the city.

She says she's left with more questions than answers about the 22 incidents.

For instance, of the rabbit with urine burns - "Where and how did this happen to the rabbit? At the municipal pound? How long was it in this condition before being taken into foster care? Did it ever receive medical attention prior to going into foster care?" she asked in her letter to the commissioner.

She wants more answers - and an explanation of why the city renewed the SPCA's contract with the city even though such concerns were in front of them.

In November 2003, the city renewed the SPCA contract for the term from Jan. 1, 2004 to Dec. 31, 2006.

A staff report dated Nov. 24, 2003 recommended renewing the SPCA contract at a cost of $451,415 for 2004. The city's council meeting minutes show that, on Nov. 24, council voted to renew that contract as recommended by staff.

In a letter dated Nov. 28, 2003, the city's chief licence inspector, Craig Collis, wrote to the branch manager of the Burnaby-Vancouver SPCA outlining concerns about the shelter.

The letter points out, in Collis's words, "22 situations, from 2002 October to 2003 January, in which animals were treated in a manner that fails to meet the City's reasonable expectations."

Liberson questions why the SPCA contract was renewed at the time.

"Council entered into a three-year contract knowing full well that the animals had been abused," she said.

"I don't know who to be more angry with. I think I'm more angry with the council because they had an opportunity to do something and they didn't."

Mayor Derek Corrigan, in an interview with the NOW in February, said he recalled complaints about the SPCA from some volunteers, particularly with respect to the condition of animals and the failure to get medical treatment for those animals.

But Corrigan said the city did take action when the concerns came to light.

He said city staff contacted the SPCA and told them they wanted the concerns resolved.

"The SPCA did do so," Corrigan said, noting that the shelter had a change of management.

"They did the things that staff thought were necessary."

Corrigan said it's challenging for the city to weigh situations when allegations are raised by volunteers, many of whom are "very adamant" about their point of view.

"It's always difficult to assess the legitimacy of complaints," he said, noting there is a "deep-seated hatred" of the SPCA from some quarters.

He said the city made sure that the SPCA understood that the city would not tolerate the behaviour in question if any of the allegations were true.

Since then, he said, "We haven't seen any more complaints."

Corrigan said the SPCA has done good work in the city and elsewhere.

"The SPCA is an organization that, for all of my life, has been an excellent organization in the prevention of cruelty to animals," he said.

Corrigan added that there was no attempt by the city to hide information about the conditions at the shelter.

He said it's important for people's concerns to come to light.

"I think there are important issues, and people need to bring those issues to the public attention," he said.

Corrigan said the difficulty, from the city's point of view, is that many of the complaints involved individual employees and the city is required by law to protect the privacy of those staff members.

"It was very personalized," he said, adding that some "ugly personal attacks" detract from the other concerns being raised. "At any time when you're dealing with employees, _ you simply can't release that information."

He said that may be hard for some animal advocates to accept.

"Sometimes, they get excited about it and they start to see a conspiracy. _ There isn't," he said.

Liberson, however, said she's not interested in pointing fingers at a particular individual or individuals.

"I don't need to know who did it," she said.

"I'm not really after one specific person. I guess what I would like is justice done."

For Liberson, part of that justice would have been having charges laid and, if found merited after a trial, having the guilty penalized as required.

"Otherwise, what's the point of having a law?" she questioned.

Liberson took her concerns to the Burnaby RCMP in January.

Cpl. Pierre Lemaitre, spokesperson for the Burnaby RCMP, confirmed that complaints had been received about cruelty at the SPCA shelter and that a constable had been assigned to investigate the file.

Lemaitre said police had forwarded the case on to Crown counsel for a decision.

However, Liberson noted that her recourse through the law ran out when it was found that the time limit to press charges for animal cruelty offences had expired.

That end frustrates her because, she points out, she was stalled by the Freedom of Information process for months while the time limit was ticking away.

The whole situation has left Liberson calling for a new structure for the SPCA.

As a former SPCA volunteer herself, Liberson said she sees a need to reform the way the system works. Her own experience with the SPCA - which included helping to set up a mobile 'pet squad' for cat adoptions - ended in disagreement with the board of directors over SPCA policies and a public dispute over Liberson's actions while working as a volunteer.

But Liberson says her concerns are larger than her own experience or even than what happened in Burnaby.

"It's a structural problem," she said. "These are symptoms of the problem."

She's concerned that it's the SPCA alone that has the right to enforce the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.

"There is no way to investigate the SPCA," she said.

"What we're looking for, ultimately, you have to have an independent organization that is government-funded, accountable to government, to investigate cruelty."

But Mark Takhar, manager of the Burnaby SPCA branch, said the SPCA did not, in fact, investigate itself with respect to the local incidents.

He arrived on board in May 2003, after the time period in which the incidents in question happened.

Takhar said the SPCA consulted with the RCMP at the time of the complaints to see if they wanted to become involved in the investigation. He noted that the branch hired an independent investigator to do a "proper investigation" of the shelter in April 2003.

"They didn't come up with anything," he said.

Takhar noted that the SPCA's management structure has also changed since that time, with individual branch managers put into place.

"The SPCA has come a long way from then," he said.

"Since I've been there, there hasn't been any public complaints."

But Takhar said the change in management was a "natural progression" and not the direct result of the complaints.

"This was all happening at the same time," he said.

Takhar said that, since his arrival, the local SPCA organization has changed - the group's volunteer base has grown and new programs have been added.

"If anybody has any issues, they are quite welcome to bring them to my attention," he said.

Takhar said it likely wouldn't be possible for the SPCA to satisfy everyone's concerns.

"There are some critics out there that are never satisfied," he said.

But he added that he's there to serve the public.

If anyone still has concerns, he said, he welcomes them to pop by the Burnaby shelter at any time - unannounced - to check it out.

"I'm open to that," he said. "We've got nothing to hide."