UPDATE: and some people REALLY think that this piece of garbage deserves to have people forgot what he did?? Check out this story. So I already had heard about the electocuting, the beatings, the fightings, drownings ... but had missed out that he also threw family PETS into the pit of fighting dogs and found it amusing to watch them be torn to pieces... and that he and his friends took one dog that didn't mee their "exacting" standars and seized the poor wee dog and repeatedly slammed it into the pavement until its back, neck and legs were broken...
I reiterate - this is not straying from the light side to the dark side. This is a deeply disturbed, psychotic, sadistic sack of shit that NEVER deserved to get his goddam life back.
________________________________
Anyone who cares about animals is pretty familiar not just with the atrocities vested on innocent dogs by Vicks et al but the subsequent efforts to whitewash, excuse and deny the absolute ATROCITIES vested on dogs they deemed "useless" - from hanging to electricuting to using already injured, frightened and abused dogs as target practice, what occurred at the horror house of the Vicks Estate was not negligible. It was not "ignorance". It was not "acting out" or "youthful follies". It was and is and will always be pathologically sick behaviour of an evil, disturbed man who is CELEBRATED for acting out his violent tendencies.
And you, Mr. president - you think that we should FORGIVE him?
We're not talking about some kid kicking a dog. We're not talking about dog owners who are "ignorant" in the true sense of the word and think tethering and tying out their dogs is accetable. We're not talking about people who don't understand the needs of dogs and fail to meet them deliberately.
We're talking about an intelligent, ambitious, canny athlete who systematically, happily, with enjoyment (they were LAUGHING in some videos as dogs were tortured) , and with impunity tortured, killed, maimed and destroyed the poor pathetic lives of a lot of innocent animals.
No, you do NOT get to say "sorry" and all is forgiven - or you shouldn't be ALLOWED to.
Perhaps most indicative of the rot that infests our society is society's willingness to overlook evil in their slavish adoration of the gladiators of today. Again and again you read about "stars" beating up their wives or girlfriends, hurting animals, cheating, fighting, and yes, torturing animals and even people and again and AGAIN society 'forgives' them as if somehow athletic, acting or some other form of prowess exonerates them from decency and responsibility.
Why?
Can someone explain to me why money chumps morality? Why the ability to generate revenue excuses sadism? Why having a star next to your name releases you from societal imperatives which have been created, agreed to and legislated to make this world habitable for us all?
And it is not just the piece of shit team owner that took that disgusting, sadistic, piece of shit BACK but every single person who supports the team, every single person who turns on the NFL and watches a game when they are playing, every single fan, individual and supporter is equally guilty.
The public was given the chance to make their will known.
They were provided with the opportunity to boycott, reject and say NO to Vicks coming back but they did NOT.
Our society truly is a sad one.
Forgive Michael Vicks? NEVER - any more than I would forgive, exonerate or overlook the other sick psychotic "stars" out there (hear me, Charlie Sheen? Sound familiar Mel Gibson?) yeah and all the others who think (and unfortunately seem to BE) above the law, above society's level of tolerance.
You'll never find me watching you. You'll never see me supporting you nor anyone who in your business career supports you.
I just hope there are a lot more of us out there.
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Monday, November 22, 2010
anxious dogs...
I wonder sometimes whether dogs, like people, differ in personalities to the extent that some are "naturally" anxious and others are not?
I know that certain characteristics, while not the exclusive purvue, are often breed-specific. For instance, talking to a terrier owner this summer, doug found the perfect description of a terrier - ALL that HUGE personality SQUISHED down into that tiny body ... sure describes the Darcy man!
Each of my three dogs come with their own set of issues. All rescues, it is inevitable that previous life experiences have left some scars. While I realize some people assert dogs live for the present and simply accept - there are just too many dogs who reflect the experiences they had in their early days to make me entirely agree. While I believe that they do not dwell on past experiences (negative in particular) in the same manner as humans - the experiences nonetheless leave an indelible impression that is not easily remedied.
Llyr was a backyard dog. From early puppyhood he was denied the social interaction that ALL dogs crave and need so badly. Ostensibly "well taken care of"- he had one of those fancy dancy igloos dog houses, adequate (if not very high quality food) and water... what he lacked was interaction.
He was 2 and a half when we got him more than 2 years ago now. Highly anxious, no manners to speak off, prone to throwing his 92 lbs + into your arms, he was also a thief, unsure how to comport himself in the house and highly aggressive with strangers. He was and remains an inveterate barker - I assume a result of trying to get some attention and fear because he was relegated to the back and incapable of perceiving what was going on in "his" house.
Llyr is terrified of being locked out again; he has huge issues staying out for any length of time in the backyard. He has improved - now he will stay out and happily play (to the best of his ability - we have spent the past two years teaching him how to "play" - and he still has some distance to go to completely understand the concept) if he has one of his people WITH him. This is a vast improvement over his first year when he would run out at top speed, pee and then frantically try to come back in.
If left by himself or even with the other dogs, he still reflects huge anxiety and between barking and whining at the door, is pathetically eager to get back into to the safety of the house. At times this summer we saw glimmers of self-sufficiency when he would actually stay fairly quiet and hang out in the garden without immediatley demanding re-entrance.
Inside the house he exemplifies Kealin's nickname for him "Mr. Destruco Pants" ... from stealing and consuming 9 frozen chicken breasts, inevitably destroying and strewing garbage everywhere... chasing cats, obsessing on the guinea pig and sticking his big nose into EVERYTHING (inevitably knocking it down, over or off), he is a great big lunk with a shell of "tough dog" which doesn't really work (how can you be Mr. Macho when you trip over your own feet and your tail sweeps everything in sight off the table?). He is like a little boy trying to assert dominance - somehow it rings false - although outside the house people seem to take him seriously ....
Llyr out of all my dogs can irritate me to no end - he just does not LEARN ... yet I know that he WANTS to do what is right, he wants to please and most of all, he desperately, passionately WANTS to be a "lap dog" .... He will crawl up on my lap and roll around (and usually off) with little twitterings and whines, begging to pets and love.
A dog's place is in the home.
A dog's place is with its people
A dog does NOT belong in a backyard, ignored and rejected - no matter how benign the neglect.
2 years later we're still trying to convince this boy that he will never again be locked out.
I know that certain characteristics, while not the exclusive purvue, are often breed-specific. For instance, talking to a terrier owner this summer, doug found the perfect description of a terrier - ALL that HUGE personality SQUISHED down into that tiny body ... sure describes the Darcy man!
Each of my three dogs come with their own set of issues. All rescues, it is inevitable that previous life experiences have left some scars. While I realize some people assert dogs live for the present and simply accept - there are just too many dogs who reflect the experiences they had in their early days to make me entirely agree. While I believe that they do not dwell on past experiences (negative in particular) in the same manner as humans - the experiences nonetheless leave an indelible impression that is not easily remedied.
Llyr was a backyard dog. From early puppyhood he was denied the social interaction that ALL dogs crave and need so badly. Ostensibly "well taken care of"- he had one of those fancy dancy igloos dog houses, adequate (if not very high quality food) and water... what he lacked was interaction.
He was 2 and a half when we got him more than 2 years ago now. Highly anxious, no manners to speak off, prone to throwing his 92 lbs + into your arms, he was also a thief, unsure how to comport himself in the house and highly aggressive with strangers. He was and remains an inveterate barker - I assume a result of trying to get some attention and fear because he was relegated to the back and incapable of perceiving what was going on in "his" house.
Llyr is terrified of being locked out again; he has huge issues staying out for any length of time in the backyard. He has improved - now he will stay out and happily play (to the best of his ability - we have spent the past two years teaching him how to "play" - and he still has some distance to go to completely understand the concept) if he has one of his people WITH him. This is a vast improvement over his first year when he would run out at top speed, pee and then frantically try to come back in.
If left by himself or even with the other dogs, he still reflects huge anxiety and between barking and whining at the door, is pathetically eager to get back into to the safety of the house. At times this summer we saw glimmers of self-sufficiency when he would actually stay fairly quiet and hang out in the garden without immediatley demanding re-entrance.
Inside the house he exemplifies Kealin's nickname for him "Mr. Destruco Pants" ... from stealing and consuming 9 frozen chicken breasts, inevitably destroying and strewing garbage everywhere... chasing cats, obsessing on the guinea pig and sticking his big nose into EVERYTHING (inevitably knocking it down, over or off), he is a great big lunk with a shell of "tough dog" which doesn't really work (how can you be Mr. Macho when you trip over your own feet and your tail sweeps everything in sight off the table?). He is like a little boy trying to assert dominance - somehow it rings false - although outside the house people seem to take him seriously ....
Llyr out of all my dogs can irritate me to no end - he just does not LEARN ... yet I know that he WANTS to do what is right, he wants to please and most of all, he desperately, passionately WANTS to be a "lap dog" .... He will crawl up on my lap and roll around (and usually off) with little twitterings and whines, begging to pets and love.
A dog's place is in the home.
A dog's place is with its people
A dog does NOT belong in a backyard, ignored and rejected - no matter how benign the neglect.
2 years later we're still trying to convince this boy that he will never again be locked out.
Monday, November 8, 2010
BSL IS BS
PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION..... LET'S SAVE THIS DOG!!
For a very long time, I have been following the tragic case of Ginger, a sweet dog who has the misfortune to "look" a certain way in a province (Ontario) with misplaced, pointless, unfounded and shrill horror of a breed of dog that TRADITIONALLY was considered one of the best family pets ever - and at points in their history, were revered for their traits of affection, loyalty, protectiveness and yes, goofiness.
Brindle Stick says it best so read here.
That the Courts and the Province continue to perpetuate outright lies and misinformation is atrocious; that hundreds (thousands over the years) of innocent, loving dogs have been slaughtered because of their appearance is a travesty of justice.
I hope this current government goes down in FLAMES... between the G20 debacle to the slaughter of innocents they have made Ontario a far worse place than when they took over the reins.
For a very long time, I have been following the tragic case of Ginger, a sweet dog who has the misfortune to "look" a certain way in a province (Ontario) with misplaced, pointless, unfounded and shrill horror of a breed of dog that TRADITIONALLY was considered one of the best family pets ever - and at points in their history, were revered for their traits of affection, loyalty, protectiveness and yes, goofiness.
Brindle Stick says it best so read here.
That the Courts and the Province continue to perpetuate outright lies and misinformation is atrocious; that hundreds (thousands over the years) of innocent, loving dogs have been slaughtered because of their appearance is a travesty of justice.
I hope this current government goes down in FLAMES... between the G20 debacle to the slaughter of innocents they have made Ontario a far worse place than when they took over the reins.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
In a perfect world...
no animal would be without a home. No cat, no dog, no rabbit or other living, breathing creature with love to give, with feelings and wants and needs and a right to live a good life would suffer because of neglect, deliberate cruelty or the as heartless, lack of compassion or knowledge.
The ugly reality is that there is no such thing as a perfect world. So we have to work with what we have - with the legions of individuals who DO care, who DO understand, who bring passion and dedication and a belief in jousting at the slow thwup thwup of windmills...
The Toronto Humane Society is metamorphasizing ... it is 'becoming' - and while the final product remains yet to be seen, there are some very positive indications that the direction in which it is heading is a positive, animal-friendly, caring one. Slowly but surely the cages and pens are filling, the building itself expanding into animal-friendly environments, the staff learning, trying, training and caring.
It is inevitable that there are those who will compare the "new" THS to the "old" one; it is human nature to look behind and to colour with softness the memories of yesterday. I have said and say again, not everything was as horrendous as claimed by the OSPCA and bolstered by the yellow journalism of the Globe. Was there cruelty? Irrefutably, keeping animals from a humane and kind death due to a misplaced sense of authority was horrific. There were times the cages were dirty, the animals neglected although with respect to the dogs, NEVER to the extent claimed (in my opinion) - and usually short-term. I also always passionately embraced the THS' willingness to take all comers - dogs and cats and other creatures no one else - not individuals, not organizations, not groups - would touch.
Yet the "new" THS appears to me to be embracing many of the 'good' things from the past management, while rejecting the 'bad' ones.
It is inevitable, however, that controversy has, will and most likely, will continue to raise its head in terms of perceived injustices, decisions and policies.
Euthanasia is one of those subjects that create an outpouring of belief and passion, a subject almost impossible to reconcile between individuals and guaranteed to create dissension, controversy and anger whenever policy arises. At the moment, the current arrangement at the THS requires a medical person (veterinarian), management and an animal expert (i.e. canine expert Shas vis-a-vis dogs) to concur on the need for euthanizing a particular animal. While I reserve the right to retain some reservations until I see this policy actively working, I believe it is an excellent response to an arbitrary and sometimes arrogant decision on the part of one individual or one group of individuals retaining the sole right to make these kind of decisions.
With stated policy reflecting a concerted and determined movement toward a 'no kill' shelter (and I say again, that does not mean 'NEVER' kill), I believe the team making the decisions on who lives and dies are doing their best to keep compassion, reality and the best interests of the animal in question to the forefront. The balance of decision-makers, by their very nature, provide a relatively sane mixture that will confront and deal with all arguments for and against - medical, quality of life, adoptability and the emotional and mental stability of the animal.
I have been assured - and believe - that every chance will be given to each and every animal from both medical and behavioural standpoints, that rehabilitation, behaviourial modification and medical intervention will all be provided in order to give an animal a viable and real chance at finding a home.
Sadly, reality can and does intrude and there are times that the issues which face an animal are beyond fixing - either from a medical standpoint but also from a behavioural and emotional one. What happens then? What if everything possible has been done to redeem an animal who through no fault of its own, has medical issues that cannot be addressed, or behaviour problems that make it inevitable that it will never ever be in a position to be found a home?
IF every avenue has been explored, if serious and extended efforts have been made to rehabilitate the animal, if experts have concurred on courses of actions which are subsequently followed, if in fact, that animal has been given every chance and yet remains unable to be rehabilitated, what then?
Languishing in a cage in a back hall is not an answer - not to me anyway.
It is not that I am against long-term placement at certain types of shelters - given the animal has adjusted (and many do) and has a rich, caring environment, I think it entirely humane to keep any animal long-term and wait for that perfect home. But that is given the animal is simply hard to adopt - not impossible to adopt due to medical or behavioural issues that make it impossible to even put them up for adoption.
And then, yes, then, hard decisions sometimes have to be made.
I do not for one moment believe that each individual making that decision does so lightly - but rather, with a heavy heart but the inevitability of reality intruding, must make that choice. The balance of individuals who must concur provides a reasonable certitude that the decision made will be a balanced one. Until I see otherwise, I will continue to hope and put my trust in those individuals I DO know who are involved at the THS - for while I don't know all of them, I have enough knowledge of several that I have full certainty that the decisions they make will only be made as a last resort.
The ugly reality is that there is no such thing as a perfect world. So we have to work with what we have - with the legions of individuals who DO care, who DO understand, who bring passion and dedication and a belief in jousting at the slow thwup thwup of windmills...
The Toronto Humane Society is metamorphasizing ... it is 'becoming' - and while the final product remains yet to be seen, there are some very positive indications that the direction in which it is heading is a positive, animal-friendly, caring one. Slowly but surely the cages and pens are filling, the building itself expanding into animal-friendly environments, the staff learning, trying, training and caring.
It is inevitable that there are those who will compare the "new" THS to the "old" one; it is human nature to look behind and to colour with softness the memories of yesterday. I have said and say again, not everything was as horrendous as claimed by the OSPCA and bolstered by the yellow journalism of the Globe. Was there cruelty? Irrefutably, keeping animals from a humane and kind death due to a misplaced sense of authority was horrific. There were times the cages were dirty, the animals neglected although with respect to the dogs, NEVER to the extent claimed (in my opinion) - and usually short-term. I also always passionately embraced the THS' willingness to take all comers - dogs and cats and other creatures no one else - not individuals, not organizations, not groups - would touch.
Yet the "new" THS appears to me to be embracing many of the 'good' things from the past management, while rejecting the 'bad' ones.
It is inevitable, however, that controversy has, will and most likely, will continue to raise its head in terms of perceived injustices, decisions and policies.
Euthanasia is one of those subjects that create an outpouring of belief and passion, a subject almost impossible to reconcile between individuals and guaranteed to create dissension, controversy and anger whenever policy arises. At the moment, the current arrangement at the THS requires a medical person (veterinarian), management and an animal expert (i.e. canine expert Shas vis-a-vis dogs) to concur on the need for euthanizing a particular animal. While I reserve the right to retain some reservations until I see this policy actively working, I believe it is an excellent response to an arbitrary and sometimes arrogant decision on the part of one individual or one group of individuals retaining the sole right to make these kind of decisions.
With stated policy reflecting a concerted and determined movement toward a 'no kill' shelter (and I say again, that does not mean 'NEVER' kill), I believe the team making the decisions on who lives and dies are doing their best to keep compassion, reality and the best interests of the animal in question to the forefront. The balance of decision-makers, by their very nature, provide a relatively sane mixture that will confront and deal with all arguments for and against - medical, quality of life, adoptability and the emotional and mental stability of the animal.
I have been assured - and believe - that every chance will be given to each and every animal from both medical and behavioural standpoints, that rehabilitation, behaviourial modification and medical intervention will all be provided in order to give an animal a viable and real chance at finding a home.
Sadly, reality can and does intrude and there are times that the issues which face an animal are beyond fixing - either from a medical standpoint but also from a behavioural and emotional one. What happens then? What if everything possible has been done to redeem an animal who through no fault of its own, has medical issues that cannot be addressed, or behaviour problems that make it inevitable that it will never ever be in a position to be found a home?
IF every avenue has been explored, if serious and extended efforts have been made to rehabilitate the animal, if experts have concurred on courses of actions which are subsequently followed, if in fact, that animal has been given every chance and yet remains unable to be rehabilitated, what then?
Languishing in a cage in a back hall is not an answer - not to me anyway.
It is not that I am against long-term placement at certain types of shelters - given the animal has adjusted (and many do) and has a rich, caring environment, I think it entirely humane to keep any animal long-term and wait for that perfect home. But that is given the animal is simply hard to adopt - not impossible to adopt due to medical or behavioural issues that make it impossible to even put them up for adoption.
And then, yes, then, hard decisions sometimes have to be made.
I do not for one moment believe that each individual making that decision does so lightly - but rather, with a heavy heart but the inevitability of reality intruding, must make that choice. The balance of individuals who must concur provides a reasonable certitude that the decision made will be a balanced one. Until I see otherwise, I will continue to hope and put my trust in those individuals I DO know who are involved at the THS - for while I don't know all of them, I have enough knowledge of several that I have full certainty that the decisions they make will only be made as a last resort.
Friday, September 17, 2010
Interesting Friday 'stuff'
I really enjoy reading certain blogs that often round up animal-related information from news and internet sources - giving a good overview of what issues are paramount, what atrocities are being perpetuated and what gains are being made. So I'm going to aim for something similar on my own blog (although will decide the frequency as I move along).
Want some great deals? A fan of yard sales? Scratch your itch AND benefit the animals. R.A.I.N. is hosting a yard sale TOMORROW, Saturday, September 18 at RAIN FUNDRAISER/YARD SALE REMINDER: This Saturday September 18th from 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. 75 Lawton Blvd. (St. Clair/Yonge St. area). Household goods, odds and ends, curios, antiques, books, baking and of course petitions! Drop by if you are in the neighbourhood. Rain date is Sunday Sept. 19th.
TORONTO HUMANE SOCIETY news ... at a volunteer dog-walking meeting a couple of weeks ago, Canine guy Shas reported that the NEW policy on euthanasia in the THS will be based on a decision made by three people; canine person (or cat/small animal person), management and medical expert (as in vet) - a MUCH welcome decision and one I, among many others, will be watching with interest. There is a definite movement within the THS to continue striving for a 'no-kill' shelter. Negotiations are continuing with Toronto Animal Services and other organizations towards the resumption of the THS' authority to take in strays. Since the OSPCA debacle, the THS has legally been banned from accepting anything other than owner surrenders. As this is hardly the extent of what the THS envisions for itself - this is ongoing and I for one will be watching hopefully for a resumption of their role as a saviour and refuge for the lost, abused and discarded animals of Toronto.
Yes Biscuit has an excellent discussion on PETA's much reported exposure of the research industry: to wit, while it is all well and fine that PETA exposed the atrocities, as per their usual hysterical trumpeting of their wonderfulness, they ah, sorta forgot to you KNOW, actually RESCUE the animals....
Dovetailing into the PETA party is excellent news from Animal Alliance.. not only have all the latest batch of University of Guelph beagles and cats found homes, but NO MORE lost pets will be taken from pounds and shelters to be used for research by the University of Guelph, including the Ontario Veterinary College (OVC). This is particularly close to my own heart as my Lass - the BEST, the MOST wonderful dog that ever trod the earth was a research rescue. A flat coated retriever/shepherd mix, her sweet, submissive, affectionate nature and her size and overall temperment made her "perfect" for the research labs - but we snatched her first. She was 29 lbs at 2 and a half when we got her (her proper weight turned out to be 80 lbs), emaciated, frightened and so pathetically grateful to have been rescued she spent the next 13 years proving that some dogs are simply just perfect. Four years gone and I still cry.
K.C. Dog Blog always has terrific insights as well as pithy and balanced comments respecting a wide variety of articles to and about dogs and the issues which affect them. I was particularly interested to read his take on media bias in reporting dog bite and attack stats - which confirms what I have asserted for a long time - that half the issues we face today with the bias against pit bulls and other breeds can be dirctly attributable to the kangaroo courts and fear mongering by media of a credulous public which is ready to believe the lies. Today's entry was fascinating as it exposes a conundrum for Denver (which really isn't as the law IS the law) as council grapples with innate and created prejudices and tries to maintain a ban on certain breeds of service dogs.
Want some great deals? A fan of yard sales? Scratch your itch AND benefit the animals. R.A.I.N. is hosting a yard sale TOMORROW, Saturday, September 18 at RAIN FUNDRAISER/YARD SALE REMINDER: This Saturday September 18th from 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. 75 Lawton Blvd. (St. Clair/Yonge St. area). Household goods, odds and ends, curios, antiques, books, baking and of course petitions! Drop by if you are in the neighbourhood. Rain date is Sunday Sept. 19th.
TORONTO HUMANE SOCIETY news ... at a volunteer dog-walking meeting a couple of weeks ago, Canine guy Shas reported that the NEW policy on euthanasia in the THS will be based on a decision made by three people; canine person (or cat/small animal person), management and medical expert (as in vet) - a MUCH welcome decision and one I, among many others, will be watching with interest. There is a definite movement within the THS to continue striving for a 'no-kill' shelter. Negotiations are continuing with Toronto Animal Services and other organizations towards the resumption of the THS' authority to take in strays. Since the OSPCA debacle, the THS has legally been banned from accepting anything other than owner surrenders. As this is hardly the extent of what the THS envisions for itself - this is ongoing and I for one will be watching hopefully for a resumption of their role as a saviour and refuge for the lost, abused and discarded animals of Toronto.
Yes Biscuit has an excellent discussion on PETA's much reported exposure of the research industry: to wit, while it is all well and fine that PETA exposed the atrocities, as per their usual hysterical trumpeting of their wonderfulness, they ah, sorta forgot to you KNOW, actually RESCUE the animals....
Dovetailing into the PETA party is excellent news from Animal Alliance.. not only have all the latest batch of University of Guelph beagles and cats found homes, but NO MORE lost pets will be taken from pounds and shelters to be used for research by the University of Guelph, including the Ontario Veterinary College (OVC). This is particularly close to my own heart as my Lass - the BEST, the MOST wonderful dog that ever trod the earth was a research rescue. A flat coated retriever/shepherd mix, her sweet, submissive, affectionate nature and her size and overall temperment made her "perfect" for the research labs - but we snatched her first. She was 29 lbs at 2 and a half when we got her (her proper weight turned out to be 80 lbs), emaciated, frightened and so pathetically grateful to have been rescued she spent the next 13 years proving that some dogs are simply just perfect. Four years gone and I still cry.
K.C. Dog Blog always has terrific insights as well as pithy and balanced comments respecting a wide variety of articles to and about dogs and the issues which affect them. I was particularly interested to read his take on media bias in reporting dog bite and attack stats - which confirms what I have asserted for a long time - that half the issues we face today with the bias against pit bulls and other breeds can be dirctly attributable to the kangaroo courts and fear mongering by media of a credulous public which is ready to believe the lies. Today's entry was fascinating as it exposes a conundrum for Denver (which really isn't as the law IS the law) as council grapples with innate and created prejudices and tries to maintain a ban on certain breeds of service dogs.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Good things shaking down at 11 River Street with the THS
As noted in the blog preceding this, I am cognizant that there is lots GOOD happening at the THS and Red Star Cafe does her usual awesome job summing it up.
I am not out to "get" the THS; rather, I yearn for what many animal lovers yearn for, I ache for what I KNOW many Board members passionately believe in, I BELIEVE it can happen with the dedication, the drive, the desire and the good will of staff, management, vets, board members and most of all, the PEOPLE in this City who for so many years have BELIEVED that every animal has a chance.
To that end, SUPPORT the new Toronto Humane Society in becoming the BEST it can be - a beacon and an example for a humane society that exemplies Nathon Winograd's no-kill movement.
As Red Star relates below in her always articulate words....
The Toronto Humane Society invites you to a lively evening of Cuban music, dancing, snacks and mojitos at the Boulevard Club on the lakeshore. The event takes place on Monday, September 13.
Please come out and support THS as it moves forward with projects to help the animals, including the building of a high-volume spay/neuter clinic for the urban Toronto community at River Street, alliance with Toronto Animal Services and cat rescues for trap/neuter/return of feral cats, re-opening of the kitten nursery, and improved socialization and training of dogs to help them get adopted into loving homes. THS is also consulting with Bill Bruce, director of Calgary Animal Services, to learn about the successful Calgary model of no-kill sheltering. Bill attended Hershey’s Rally to oppose breed-specific legislation this past weekend with THS volunteers and members of the board.
THS is funded entirely by members and donors, but donations are down this year. These good people need your help to continue to work for the animals and the community.
If you aren’t able to make it to the Cuban Dance Party, please consider donating online or by snail mail to THS. If you are specifically interested in supporting the spay/neuter clinic, just indicate on your cheque that the donation is “for spay/neuter clinic only” and your funds will be earmarked.
I am not out to "get" the THS; rather, I yearn for what many animal lovers yearn for, I ache for what I KNOW many Board members passionately believe in, I BELIEVE it can happen with the dedication, the drive, the desire and the good will of staff, management, vets, board members and most of all, the PEOPLE in this City who for so many years have BELIEVED that every animal has a chance.
To that end, SUPPORT the new Toronto Humane Society in becoming the BEST it can be - a beacon and an example for a humane society that exemplies Nathon Winograd's no-kill movement.
As Red Star relates below in her always articulate words....
The Toronto Humane Society invites you to a lively evening of Cuban music, dancing, snacks and mojitos at the Boulevard Club on the lakeshore. The event takes place on Monday, September 13.
Please come out and support THS as it moves forward with projects to help the animals, including the building of a high-volume spay/neuter clinic for the urban Toronto community at River Street, alliance with Toronto Animal Services and cat rescues for trap/neuter/return of feral cats, re-opening of the kitten nursery, and improved socialization and training of dogs to help them get adopted into loving homes. THS is also consulting with Bill Bruce, director of Calgary Animal Services, to learn about the successful Calgary model of no-kill sheltering. Bill attended Hershey’s Rally to oppose breed-specific legislation this past weekend with THS volunteers and members of the board.
THS is funded entirely by members and donors, but donations are down this year. These good people need your help to continue to work for the animals and the community.
If you aren’t able to make it to the Cuban Dance Party, please consider donating online or by snail mail to THS. If you are specifically interested in supporting the spay/neuter clinic, just indicate on your cheque that the donation is “for spay/neuter clinic only” and your funds will be earmarked.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Anatomy of a Death: Why did Icy Die?
The issue of euthanasia is fraught with controversy and passion and inevitably gets mired in personal beliefs and subjective notions on when and why an animal should die. The College of Veterinarians of Ontario (the “CVO”) recognizes to a limited extent (my emphasis) the dilemma faced by many vets and published Guidelines on Veterinary Euthanasia (the “Guidelines”) in October 2008 (on its website).
Under the Law
A spokesperson for CVO (“Fischer”) recently indicated to me in response to an email I sent with a number of questions respecting the practice of euthanasia a number of helpful links and with specific reference to vets employed by humane societies or shelters .
The unique position of a veterinarian employed by a humane society or shelter is addressed through a provision of the OSPCA Act, and more specifically in the Veterinarians Act/Loi sur les veterinaries R.R.O. 1990, Regulation 1093 (the “Act”):
I want to point out here the words in the proviso “health of the subject animals” – so this provision does not deal directly with the reasons for euthanasia but rather could be construed to refer to (in the CONTEXT of euthanasia), the health of the animal.
Further, the Act states in Section 43:
Again, to me, when exploring the rationale behind euthanizing an animal, Subsection 43(4)(e) again refers to the member being responsible for “all decisions relating to the quality and promotion of the member’s professional services and the health of the subject animals”. No doubt there are those that can read that provision as encompassing almost autonomous powers to the vet, but again, to me, it more clearly refers to “health” of the subject animals which does not rationalize the euthanasia of a healthy dog or cat!
So those provisions deal with the legalities. Specifically, it clearly states that while the shelter is the veterinarian’s employer, said employer cannot under the law interfere with the vet’s decision with respect to the health of the animal. I do NOT believe it necessarily codifies the vet`s complete and utter right to make unilateral decisions about anything OTHER than the medical condition and health of the animal. Specifically, it does not as far as I can see give any vet the unilateral right to euthanize an animal based on behavior, age (given the animal is healthy) or other factors apart from and separate from HEALTH issues.
The employer/member conflict which this law was designed to avoid is alleged to have occurred under the auspices of the previous Board and President Tim Trow. I do have to ask, if indeed that WAS the case where WAS the CVO during the MANY years Mr. Trow spearheaded the organization and ostensibly dictated to Shelter vets how do to do their job?
Medical versus Subjective Reasons for Euthanasia
But while those provisions deal with the legalities, they do NOT address specifically what set of factors determine an animal SHOULD be euthanized. Because the reality is, it is not a straightforward.
I think it inarguable that a vet can and SHOULD have the final say if there are clear cut and solid medical reasons why the animal should be euthanized. Inoperable tumors, degenerative diseases that have or are reaching a critical stage, continuing pain which cannot be alleviated, animals who have had accidents where it is impossible to provide a reasonable guarantee of quality of life.
BUT, and this is a HUGE caveat – euthanasia is not always about putting an animal out of pain or humanely assisting it to die.
The reality is that medical issues are FAR from the only reason an animal is euthanized. In actual fact, it is highly likely that in our society among the many shelters, humane societies, pounds and other organizations that deal with the sad reality of abandoned, neglected and abused pets – it is probably the LEAST likely reason in those settings.
In exploring the issue of euthanasia in a shelter setting, I continually came across well-meaning individuals who harbour an unrealistic and unsubstantiated belief that vets are vets because of their deep and enduring love of animals.
As in any profession, I think the actualities are far different. I believe some vets do take up the profession because of their love of animals; equally I believe there are as many that enter it due to the lucrative nature of the practice. Add to that the vast differences in philosophy, outlook and viewpoints among vets (who are all individuals after all) - and what is considered a “legitimate” reason for euthanasia becomes problematic and impossible to agree upon.
CVO Guidelines
I have provided a link to these Guidelines but there are a few pertinent points I want to make. As noted before, these guidelines take into account the unique relationship between a veterinarian who is employed by a humane society or shelter.
However, having noted that, the Guidelines can and do apply to that scenario as well. Under the sub-heading “Client Preparation”, the CVO clearly urges a dialogue between the shelter and/or humane society (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Client”) and the veterinarian to minimize “the chance that the owner’s values will diverge from the veterinarian’s when a decision needs to be reached regarding an animal’s situation.”
That clearly indicates that a decision on euthanasia is not a unilateral one but one that requires communication and discussion between all parties who are at law and morally, responsible for the animal in question.
Also noteworthy is the Guidelines’ advice respecting Client Support- something that was sadly and tragically absent from the Toronto Humane Society during the past several months. Animals, some of them long-term members of the THS, much beloved and cosseted by staff and volunteers were summarily executed with NO chance for goodbyes or intervention and absolutely no sympathy for the resultant agony of mind and spirit on the part of those who loved them.
But, in the context of who decides whether an animal lives or dies, the Guidelines clearly favour:
Which leads us rather elegantly to the next consideration .
The THS in Flux
Under the former management of the THS, euthanasia was not only a last resort but misguided “compassion” resulted (alleged but more than likely true) in the cruel and unnecessary suffering of animals that should have been provided a dignified and kind way out of their pain and suffering. To date, under the auspices of executive director Garth Jerome, the new “THS” describes itself as “low-kill”. The current Board appears to concur, however, that a change in policy to a “no-kill” is hopefully in the offing. (I would also point out that from Mr. Jerome’s email and his willingness to work with the new Board, he appears to be open to change).
However, as things stand at the moment there is no appreciable movement toward a no-kill policy in the THS. More worrisome is the continued lack of transparency as to the policies, decisions and procedures actually implemented at the time.
In early July, two Siberian huskies – a bonded pair – were surrendered to the THS. Due to extenuating circumstances and the last minute failure of a foster home, their owner Steve N. had no choice but to surrender them – and in the full belief they would be safe – he did so to the THS. Within HOURS of their arrival, Icy was euthanized. To date there has been NO explanation as to why nor have the THS staff, Board or management owned up as to who made the decision.
I know there is a tremendous amount going on behind the scenes at the THS. The reality is that there are contracts, legalities and no doubt, a jockeying of position as individuals and groups seek to come to terms with a radically different reality within the walls of 11 River Street.
I also know that NO ONE has admitted to making the decision to kill Icy (and other animals) – yet someone DID kill her – and while no one is saying whom, it did happen. I do not believe – and feel that most rational people would concur – that any ONE individual (or collective group of individuals such as vets, management, staff etc) has the right, the rationality, the expertise or the perspective to decide which animal lives or dies when the issue of euthanasia is NOT related to an unequivocal medical issue.
Veterinarians are medically trained. Ethically speaking, however, they are as individualistic and subjective as any other human being, with their own set of internal guidelines, morals and imperatives. Nor are veterinarians necessarily behaviouralists. Animal behaviorists are highly trained and competent in assessing behavioral issues in animals and the potential of those animals to be rehabilitated.
Ageism is another issue in many shelters, many of which operate on the premise that only young, healthy animals have the possibility of being adopted, and as such, older (even if relatively healthy) animals should be refused or if surrendered regardless, euthanized as being “unadoptable.
The reality of course is far different.
As Nathan Winograd has successfully proven again and again, there is a home for every animal.
In my three years of volunteer work with the dogs at the THS, I have been astonished, humbled and ecstatic at people and the compassion and genuine love they can show to even the oldest, most fragile – and yes, smelliest! dogs that have come in and are subsequently (often quickly) adopted out.
As I have noted before, Icy was a healthy, well-behaved if older dog that SHOULD have been given a chance to enjoy her twilight years as a cosseted and loved member of a family. What she did NOT deserve was to be labeled a “problem” or “unadoptable” (my surmise only) and summarily executed.
If the “new” THS is to find its feet, it MUST start showing the people of Toronto that in rejecting the negative aspects of the old regime, it also embraces some of the positive reasons why Tim Trow was successful in running a shelter where the public KNEW the old, the infirm, the sick, the abused, the neglected and the unwanted at least had a chance.
While there is no question that there were MANY thing wrong with the “old” THS, Icy would be alive under that regime.
Death is final. Making that decision requires more than a medical degree. It requires compassion, balance and a willingness to do whatever can be done to rehabilitate, treat (medically or otherwise), and give an animal TIME to adjust and make changes.
For decisions OTHER than clear-cut medical ones – I implicitly believe that decisions on euthanasia at the “new” THS must and should require a balance of perspective. A veterinarian, absolutely, an animal behaviourist (of which there are several on staff) as well as input from management. As a group, based on clearly delineated policies (hopefully soon to reflect the no-kill mindset), decisions can be made.
The THS has as its new Board some wonderful people with a solid background in animal rights and care - further, some excellent strategies are planned - such as this week`s brainstorming with Calgary`s very impressive Bill Bruce who has done wonders within that city for the no kill movement and the reopening of the kitten nursery.
For more 100 year, the THS represented the best in animal welfare to the people of Toronto. It has stood as the beacon for animal rights, the voice that speaks up for those who cannot speak for themselves, a haven for those rejected and abused by those who should cherish them. It has, above all, epitomized “sanctuary”.
If the THS is to survive, let them show the people of Toronto they continue to be a place where future Icy’s will find solace and safe haven.
[UPDATE: This has been edited to remove material that might be potentially legally contentious- nothing of import is changed however]
Under the Law
A spokesperson for CVO (“Fischer”) recently indicated to me in response to an email I sent with a number of questions respecting the practice of euthanasia a number of helpful links and with specific reference to vets employed by humane societies or shelters .
The unique position of a veterinarian employed by a humane society or shelter is addressed through a provision of the OSPCA Act, and more specifically in the Veterinarians Act/Loi sur les veterinaries R.R.O. 1990, Regulation 1093 (the “Act”):
43(2) (4) A member may practice veterinary medicine as,
(a) …
(e) an employee of a humane society operated in accordance with the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act if, in the course of the employment, the member provides professional services under a written contract that provides that the member is responsible for all decisions relating to the quality and promotion of the member’s professional services and the health of the subject animals;
(my emphasis)
I want to point out here the words in the proviso “health of the subject animals” – so this provision does not deal directly with the reasons for euthanasia but rather could be construed to refer to (in the CONTEXT of euthanasia), the health of the animal.
Further, the Act states in Section 43:
(3) For the purposes of subsection (2),
(a) …
(b) a member employed by a humane society operated in accordance with the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act or by a pound operated under the Animals for Research Act who performs a veterinary service for an animal seized by, or irrevocably surrendered to, the society or pound shall be deemed to perform the service to his or her employer. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 1093, s. 43 (3).
(4) A member may practice veterinary medicine as,
(a) …
(e) an employee of a humane society operated in accordance with the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act if, in the course of the employment, the member provides professional services under a written contract that provides that the member is responsible for all decisions relating to the quality and promotion of the member’s professional services and the health of the subject animals;
(my emphasis)
Again, to me, when exploring the rationale behind euthanizing an animal, Subsection 43(4)(e) again refers to the member being responsible for “all decisions relating to the quality and promotion of the member’s professional services and the health of the subject animals”. No doubt there are those that can read that provision as encompassing almost autonomous powers to the vet, but again, to me, it more clearly refers to “health” of the subject animals which does not rationalize the euthanasia of a healthy dog or cat!
So those provisions deal with the legalities. Specifically, it clearly states that while the shelter is the veterinarian’s employer, said employer cannot under the law interfere with the vet’s decision with respect to the health of the animal. I do NOT believe it necessarily codifies the vet`s complete and utter right to make unilateral decisions about anything OTHER than the medical condition and health of the animal. Specifically, it does not as far as I can see give any vet the unilateral right to euthanize an animal based on behavior, age (given the animal is healthy) or other factors apart from and separate from HEALTH issues.
The employer/member conflict which this law was designed to avoid is alleged to have occurred under the auspices of the previous Board and President Tim Trow. I do have to ask, if indeed that WAS the case where WAS the CVO during the MANY years Mr. Trow spearheaded the organization and ostensibly dictated to Shelter vets how do to do their job?
Medical versus Subjective Reasons for Euthanasia
But while those provisions deal with the legalities, they do NOT address specifically what set of factors determine an animal SHOULD be euthanized. Because the reality is, it is not a straightforward.
I think it inarguable that a vet can and SHOULD have the final say if there are clear cut and solid medical reasons why the animal should be euthanized. Inoperable tumors, degenerative diseases that have or are reaching a critical stage, continuing pain which cannot be alleviated, animals who have had accidents where it is impossible to provide a reasonable guarantee of quality of life.
BUT, and this is a HUGE caveat – euthanasia is not always about putting an animal out of pain or humanely assisting it to die.
The reality is that medical issues are FAR from the only reason an animal is euthanized. In actual fact, it is highly likely that in our society among the many shelters, humane societies, pounds and other organizations that deal with the sad reality of abandoned, neglected and abused pets – it is probably the LEAST likely reason in those settings.
In exploring the issue of euthanasia in a shelter setting, I continually came across well-meaning individuals who harbour an unrealistic and unsubstantiated belief that vets are vets because of their deep and enduring love of animals.
As in any profession, I think the actualities are far different. I believe some vets do take up the profession because of their love of animals; equally I believe there are as many that enter it due to the lucrative nature of the practice. Add to that the vast differences in philosophy, outlook and viewpoints among vets (who are all individuals after all) - and what is considered a “legitimate” reason for euthanasia becomes problematic and impossible to agree upon.
CVO Guidelines
I have provided a link to these Guidelines but there are a few pertinent points I want to make. As noted before, these guidelines take into account the unique relationship between a veterinarian who is employed by a humane society or shelter.
However, having noted that, the Guidelines can and do apply to that scenario as well. Under the sub-heading “Client Preparation”, the CVO clearly urges a dialogue between the shelter and/or humane society (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Client”) and the veterinarian to minimize “the chance that the owner’s values will diverge from the veterinarian’s when a decision needs to be reached regarding an animal’s situation.”
That clearly indicates that a decision on euthanasia is not a unilateral one but one that requires communication and discussion between all parties who are at law and morally, responsible for the animal in question.
Also noteworthy is the Guidelines’ advice respecting Client Support- something that was sadly and tragically absent from the Toronto Humane Society during the past several months. Animals, some of them long-term members of the THS, much beloved and cosseted by staff and volunteers were summarily executed with NO chance for goodbyes or intervention and absolutely no sympathy for the resultant agony of mind and spirit on the part of those who loved them.
But, in the context of who decides whether an animal lives or dies, the Guidelines clearly favour:
Communication between and among veterinarians and staff…. to ensure that the veterinary team is clear on its policies and procedures, so that consistent information is given to clients. Practitioners should maintain a euthanasia policy within their practices that clearly outlines the position of the practice and/or the veterinarians who work there. This policy should be developed and periodically reviewed with staff and made available to all clients at an $appropriate point in the VCPR.
Which leads us rather elegantly to the next consideration .
The THS in Flux
Under the former management of the THS, euthanasia was not only a last resort but misguided “compassion” resulted (alleged but more than likely true) in the cruel and unnecessary suffering of animals that should have been provided a dignified and kind way out of their pain and suffering. To date, under the auspices of executive director Garth Jerome, the new “THS” describes itself as “low-kill”. The current Board appears to concur, however, that a change in policy to a “no-kill” is hopefully in the offing. (I would also point out that from Mr. Jerome’s email and his willingness to work with the new Board, he appears to be open to change).
However, as things stand at the moment there is no appreciable movement toward a no-kill policy in the THS. More worrisome is the continued lack of transparency as to the policies, decisions and procedures actually implemented at the time.
In early July, two Siberian huskies – a bonded pair – were surrendered to the THS. Due to extenuating circumstances and the last minute failure of a foster home, their owner Steve N. had no choice but to surrender them – and in the full belief they would be safe – he did so to the THS. Within HOURS of their arrival, Icy was euthanized. To date there has been NO explanation as to why nor have the THS staff, Board or management owned up as to who made the decision.
I know there is a tremendous amount going on behind the scenes at the THS. The reality is that there are contracts, legalities and no doubt, a jockeying of position as individuals and groups seek to come to terms with a radically different reality within the walls of 11 River Street.
I also know that NO ONE has admitted to making the decision to kill Icy (and other animals) – yet someone DID kill her – and while no one is saying whom, it did happen. I do not believe – and feel that most rational people would concur – that any ONE individual (or collective group of individuals such as vets, management, staff etc) has the right, the rationality, the expertise or the perspective to decide which animal lives or dies when the issue of euthanasia is NOT related to an unequivocal medical issue.
Veterinarians are medically trained. Ethically speaking, however, they are as individualistic and subjective as any other human being, with their own set of internal guidelines, morals and imperatives. Nor are veterinarians necessarily behaviouralists. Animal behaviorists are highly trained and competent in assessing behavioral issues in animals and the potential of those animals to be rehabilitated.
Ageism is another issue in many shelters, many of which operate on the premise that only young, healthy animals have the possibility of being adopted, and as such, older (even if relatively healthy) animals should be refused or if surrendered regardless, euthanized as being “unadoptable.
The reality of course is far different.
As Nathan Winograd has successfully proven again and again, there is a home for every animal.
In my three years of volunteer work with the dogs at the THS, I have been astonished, humbled and ecstatic at people and the compassion and genuine love they can show to even the oldest, most fragile – and yes, smelliest! dogs that have come in and are subsequently (often quickly) adopted out.
As I have noted before, Icy was a healthy, well-behaved if older dog that SHOULD have been given a chance to enjoy her twilight years as a cosseted and loved member of a family. What she did NOT deserve was to be labeled a “problem” or “unadoptable” (my surmise only) and summarily executed.
If the “new” THS is to find its feet, it MUST start showing the people of Toronto that in rejecting the negative aspects of the old regime, it also embraces some of the positive reasons why Tim Trow was successful in running a shelter where the public KNEW the old, the infirm, the sick, the abused, the neglected and the unwanted at least had a chance.
While there is no question that there were MANY thing wrong with the “old” THS, Icy would be alive under that regime.
Death is final. Making that decision requires more than a medical degree. It requires compassion, balance and a willingness to do whatever can be done to rehabilitate, treat (medically or otherwise), and give an animal TIME to adjust and make changes.
For decisions OTHER than clear-cut medical ones – I implicitly believe that decisions on euthanasia at the “new” THS must and should require a balance of perspective. A veterinarian, absolutely, an animal behaviourist (of which there are several on staff) as well as input from management. As a group, based on clearly delineated policies (hopefully soon to reflect the no-kill mindset), decisions can be made.
The THS has as its new Board some wonderful people with a solid background in animal rights and care - further, some excellent strategies are planned - such as this week`s brainstorming with Calgary`s very impressive Bill Bruce who has done wonders within that city for the no kill movement and the reopening of the kitten nursery.
For more 100 year, the THS represented the best in animal welfare to the people of Toronto. It has stood as the beacon for animal rights, the voice that speaks up for those who cannot speak for themselves, a haven for those rejected and abused by those who should cherish them. It has, above all, epitomized “sanctuary”.
If the THS is to survive, let them show the people of Toronto they continue to be a place where future Icy’s will find solace and safe haven.
[UPDATE: This has been edited to remove material that might be potentially legally contentious- nothing of import is changed however]
Monday, August 23, 2010
Do YOU know a woman with a rottie named Zoe and pug named Guiness?
Then get in touch with police in Innisfil ASAP. You know what I REALLY hate? Irresponsible pet owners who give all dog owners a BAD name
SEE NEWS STORY FROM CANOE news
Ontario girl, 4, attacked by dogs on beach
Painful rabies treatments could be next
By QMI Agency
A 4-year-old Innisfil, Ont. girl is facing painful rabies treatment — 25 needles in the stomach — after she was attacked by two dogs on a beach.
Ekaterina Smrek was with her two sisters, her friend and her mother at Innisfil Beach Park on Aug. 18 when two dogs, a black rottweiler-type and a pug, attacked her. Olga Smrek said she had seen a woman with the two dogs at the beach just before her daughter was attacked. The woman put lifejackets on the two dogs and then played with them in the water in the same area where children were swimming.
The woman with the dogs was later seen talking on her cellphone away from the dogs and that's when Olga said she saw the larger dog jump on her daughter. After Ekaterina was knocked down, the smaller dog attacked and the little girl was bitten on her side.
"I just saw my daughter lying on the grass, and two dogs standing over her. I just ran and hugged her ... I was crying. There is blood on her bathing suit," she said, adding the woman who was with the dogs didn't immediately do anything. "When it happened she continued talking on the phone."
Olga said at first the woman attempted to discount the incident — but when she saw the blood, apologized, gathered up the dogs, and left the scene without leaving any contact information.
Ekaterina was taken to a clinic, where she received a tetanus shot, and antibiotics. That's when Olga learned that, if the dog owner couldn't be found to present information on the medical history of the pug, the little girl would need to begin rabies treatment.
Olga and her husband began a search for the owner of the rottweiler named Zoe and the pug named Guinness. They have plastered the park with posters asking for information, contacted local veterinary offices, Innisfil animal control, town by-law and police, but have so far been unsuccessful in discovering any information.
Olga said she isn't interested in making trouble for the owner. All she wants is information, so that her little girl won't have to go through lengthy, and painful treatment for the bite.
SEE NEWS STORY FROM CANOE news
Ontario girl, 4, attacked by dogs on beach
Painful rabies treatments could be next
By QMI Agency
A 4-year-old Innisfil, Ont. girl is facing painful rabies treatment — 25 needles in the stomach — after she was attacked by two dogs on a beach.
Ekaterina Smrek was with her two sisters, her friend and her mother at Innisfil Beach Park on Aug. 18 when two dogs, a black rottweiler-type and a pug, attacked her. Olga Smrek said she had seen a woman with the two dogs at the beach just before her daughter was attacked. The woman put lifejackets on the two dogs and then played with them in the water in the same area where children were swimming.
The woman with the dogs was later seen talking on her cellphone away from the dogs and that's when Olga said she saw the larger dog jump on her daughter. After Ekaterina was knocked down, the smaller dog attacked and the little girl was bitten on her side.
"I just saw my daughter lying on the grass, and two dogs standing over her. I just ran and hugged her ... I was crying. There is blood on her bathing suit," she said, adding the woman who was with the dogs didn't immediately do anything. "When it happened she continued talking on the phone."
Olga said at first the woman attempted to discount the incident — but when she saw the blood, apologized, gathered up the dogs, and left the scene without leaving any contact information.
Ekaterina was taken to a clinic, where she received a tetanus shot, and antibiotics. That's when Olga learned that, if the dog owner couldn't be found to present information on the medical history of the pug, the little girl would need to begin rabies treatment.
Olga and her husband began a search for the owner of the rottweiler named Zoe and the pug named Guinness. They have plastered the park with posters asking for information, contacted local veterinary offices, Innisfil animal control, town by-law and police, but have so far been unsuccessful in discovering any information.
Olga said she isn't interested in making trouble for the owner. All she wants is information, so that her little girl won't have to go through lengthy, and painful treatment for the bite.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Dog Training Seminar this weekend at the THS -
Last chance to sign up for an indepth training seminar with uber trainer Sam Malatesta, to be held at the Toronto Humane Society this weekend, Saturday and Sunday, August 21 and 22. Thanks to Garth Jermome and THS staff who have agreed to make the facility available. Kudos also to Mr. Jerome for encouraing his staff to attend.
Sam has worked with dogs his entire life. His approach is unique, provocative and most of all WORKS. My own dogs, two german shepherds and one demented terrier are entering their fourth month of Sam's program and the improvement in their behaviour is simply unbelievable. Each of my dogs is a rescue and thus comes with their own unique set of issues. Finn, my black and tan was found starving on city streets, full of parasites, cuts, contusions and bruises, bald from a brutal case of mange and a commensurate skin infection. Llyr was a backyard dog - spent 2 and half years of his life tied up with minimal contact and no socialization. Darcy was a THS dog - came in abused (horribly) and lived his life in a frenzy of terror (making him a serious biter).
Put the three together as I did and inside the house (after working with them - I acquired each of them at different times) they were AWESOME ... let someone walk near the door and the Hounds of Hell were let loose.
I had them at various trainers - we did the prong thing (AWFUL - I jettisoned it as soon as they finished their course), we did the alpha roll thing (WORSE - nothing like taking an already insecure dog and FORCING him into something that doesn't even HAPPEN in the wild), we did the too many treats thing, the ignore thing and the result was three messed up dogs ...
I attended Sam's last seminar in May and despite being Sam's "bitch" (sighs - the perfect example of the bad owner and bad dog) - I LEARNED ... and got insight and illumination. A month later I began his program.
Still in the program as the older the dog the longer it takes to fix the issues - my guys are happy, relaxed and a PLEASURE to have around. For the first time in the 10 months I have had him, Darcy walks with his head in the air, his tail over his back, wagging mightily (he used to slink with his head down, shaking with anxiety, scavenging for food). In the past month, TWO strangers at different times walked into the backyard when he was having his time to play and he DID NOT BITE. That is unbelievable!
Llyr's anxiety is less than half of what it used to be. He has stopped jumping (for the most part) on people, he ignores people walking by on the street (he used to just about go through the window - typical screwed up territorial issues from being a backyard dog). Finn used to go ballistic when she saw other dogs or people, now she might yap for a second but settles down quicly and ignores them.
The program runs at the THS from 9:30 to 5:30. If you would like to sign up, email me and I can put you in touch with the co-ordinator OR turn up at the door Saturday morning. You are also welcome to come for one or the other of the days if you don't want to go to both.
Cost is $150 for the two days or $75 for one.
Visit Sam's website for some excellent blogs on his philosphy.
Sam has worked with dogs his entire life. His approach is unique, provocative and most of all WORKS. My own dogs, two german shepherds and one demented terrier are entering their fourth month of Sam's program and the improvement in their behaviour is simply unbelievable. Each of my dogs is a rescue and thus comes with their own unique set of issues. Finn, my black and tan was found starving on city streets, full of parasites, cuts, contusions and bruises, bald from a brutal case of mange and a commensurate skin infection. Llyr was a backyard dog - spent 2 and half years of his life tied up with minimal contact and no socialization. Darcy was a THS dog - came in abused (horribly) and lived his life in a frenzy of terror (making him a serious biter).
Put the three together as I did and inside the house (after working with them - I acquired each of them at different times) they were AWESOME ... let someone walk near the door and the Hounds of Hell were let loose.
I had them at various trainers - we did the prong thing (AWFUL - I jettisoned it as soon as they finished their course), we did the alpha roll thing (WORSE - nothing like taking an already insecure dog and FORCING him into something that doesn't even HAPPEN in the wild), we did the too many treats thing, the ignore thing and the result was three messed up dogs ...
I attended Sam's last seminar in May and despite being Sam's "bitch" (sighs - the perfect example of the bad owner and bad dog) - I LEARNED ... and got insight and illumination. A month later I began his program.
Still in the program as the older the dog the longer it takes to fix the issues - my guys are happy, relaxed and a PLEASURE to have around. For the first time in the 10 months I have had him, Darcy walks with his head in the air, his tail over his back, wagging mightily (he used to slink with his head down, shaking with anxiety, scavenging for food). In the past month, TWO strangers at different times walked into the backyard when he was having his time to play and he DID NOT BITE. That is unbelievable!
Llyr's anxiety is less than half of what it used to be. He has stopped jumping (for the most part) on people, he ignores people walking by on the street (he used to just about go through the window - typical screwed up territorial issues from being a backyard dog). Finn used to go ballistic when she saw other dogs or people, now she might yap for a second but settles down quicly and ignores them.
The program runs at the THS from 9:30 to 5:30. If you would like to sign up, email me and I can put you in touch with the co-ordinator OR turn up at the door Saturday morning. You are also welcome to come for one or the other of the days if you don't want to go to both.
Cost is $150 for the two days or $75 for one.
Visit Sam's website for some excellent blogs on his philosphy.
Monday, August 16, 2010
There is no victory - not in this or anything since -
Reading today that all charges were summarily dropped against Tim Trow et al, arising from the outrageous, unsubstantiated and illegal occupation, search and seizure of the Tornonto Humane Society by the OSPCA last Spring do not leave me happy. No one who had spent any time at the THS prior to the militant, ignorant and confrontational takeover by the OSPCA would NEVER deny for one moment that there were NOT issues. But conversely, most of us who had spent LOTS of time there (and I can only speak for the dogs) spoke in vain about the SEVERITY of the allegations - and denied they were anywhere NEAR as bad as was bleated and puffed and yelled by the OSPCA, followed by their tame media sources like Kate Hammer and the Globe.
Again and again the issue of that poor wee cat in the ceiling is brought up and that indeed IS unforgiveable. My own sense of what went so tragically wrong there was that Trow et al. did one of their frequent mass firings. Without a doubt, things HAD deteriorated in the three years I volunteered there - I believe implicitly that Tim Trow had many GOOD years there but I for one saw a progressive decline in rationality - and watched in dismay as almost a "hoarder" mentality began to pervade the building.
But having (as I have said before) a tragic familiarity with the heavy-handed, arrogance of the OSPCA I was beyond upset when they took over - and for good reason. To this day, HUNDREDS of animals are unaccounted for. When confronted about where all the animals went during their occupation, vaguely worded assurances that they were in 'foster' or "rescues" have NEVER been substantiated.
Dismissing the charges doesn't bring back our animals.
Dismissing the charges won't allow me to feel the hot, sweet warmth of Peti curling up in my lap. It won't allow me to laugh again when Smokey runs back to his kennel when I come to get him for his walk, and snuffling and snorting brings his toy. It doesn't give Captain - who was SIX MONTHS OLD when he came to the THS and barely a year when he was killed, a chance to live his life.... or Tiger with his boundless energy his opportunity to find his home with Rosanna who was ready, willing and able to take him.
It doesn't bring back the HUNDREDS of cats the OSPCA deemed "unadoptable" or all the other animals that were summarily executed.
All it does is highlight that politics, self-absorption, arrogance and a twisted belief in THEIR opinion permeates even the animal care field. It shows that NO ONE seems to have the interests of the animals as the first and most important goal. From hoarding, over-crowding, interference by the former management to the self-righteous arrgance of the serial killer OSPCA, the losers in this are STILL the animals.
Then and to my sorrow, now.
The "new" THS for all the vaunted promises stonewalls. The "new THS" for all the will in the world is merely a sad, pathetic shadow of what it could be.
An email to executive director Garth Jerome respecting euthansia policies, owner surrenders and other issues was promptly and politely returned quickly and with good information. A direct request to explain then the summary and unnecessary euthanization of Icy has been ignored.
Tomorrow I will pursue the matter by telephone with another individual and hope to get some resolution of a tragedy that has dragged on for too long.
But, I admit it, I am not hopeful...
The ACRB reviewed a June 2009 OSPCA inspection of THS animals. The Crown said that the ACRB’s final decision, which concluded that cages were clean, ventilation was adequate, and animals were being fed, would have made it “difficult for the Crown to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that senior officers of the THS willfully permitted animal suffering by failing to exercise reasonable care.”
Again and again the issue of that poor wee cat in the ceiling is brought up and that indeed IS unforgiveable. My own sense of what went so tragically wrong there was that Trow et al. did one of their frequent mass firings. Without a doubt, things HAD deteriorated in the three years I volunteered there - I believe implicitly that Tim Trow had many GOOD years there but I for one saw a progressive decline in rationality - and watched in dismay as almost a "hoarder" mentality began to pervade the building.
But having (as I have said before) a tragic familiarity with the heavy-handed, arrogance of the OSPCA I was beyond upset when they took over - and for good reason. To this day, HUNDREDS of animals are unaccounted for. When confronted about where all the animals went during their occupation, vaguely worded assurances that they were in 'foster' or "rescues" have NEVER been substantiated.
Dismissing the charges doesn't bring back our animals.
Dismissing the charges won't allow me to feel the hot, sweet warmth of Peti curling up in my lap. It won't allow me to laugh again when Smokey runs back to his kennel when I come to get him for his walk, and snuffling and snorting brings his toy. It doesn't give Captain - who was SIX MONTHS OLD when he came to the THS and barely a year when he was killed, a chance to live his life.... or Tiger with his boundless energy his opportunity to find his home with Rosanna who was ready, willing and able to take him.
It doesn't bring back the HUNDREDS of cats the OSPCA deemed "unadoptable" or all the other animals that were summarily executed.
All it does is highlight that politics, self-absorption, arrogance and a twisted belief in THEIR opinion permeates even the animal care field. It shows that NO ONE seems to have the interests of the animals as the first and most important goal. From hoarding, over-crowding, interference by the former management to the self-righteous arrgance of the serial killer OSPCA, the losers in this are STILL the animals.
Then and to my sorrow, now.
The "new" THS for all the vaunted promises stonewalls. The "new THS" for all the will in the world is merely a sad, pathetic shadow of what it could be.
An email to executive director Garth Jerome respecting euthansia policies, owner surrenders and other issues was promptly and politely returned quickly and with good information. A direct request to explain then the summary and unnecessary euthanization of Icy has been ignored.
Tomorrow I will pursue the matter by telephone with another individual and hope to get some resolution of a tragedy that has dragged on for too long.
But, I admit it, I am not hopeful...
Sunday, August 15, 2010
STOP the cruel and inhumane slaughter of horses in canada
Banned in the United States, but a growing industry in both Mexico and Canada, this practice MUST be stopped.
First and foremost, it is horrifically cruel to the horses. I am not including videos because frankly I can't stomach them but google or go on youtube and you will note that it is highly questionable whether the Canadian Food Inspection Agency really monitors the industry in order to ensure protocols are followed.
If the absolute reality of the cruelty isn't enough of an issue, there are major health concerns as well. Because horses are not typically raised as food meat - a banned chemical called phenylbutazone (short form, "bute") can often be found in their systems. This cheimical is toxic to human beings.
Please read this petition and sign and send a message to your MP (all information is provided).
Our horses deserve a better end than a horrific, terrifying and physically sadistic end to lives spent serving human beings.
First and foremost, it is horrifically cruel to the horses. I am not including videos because frankly I can't stomach them but google or go on youtube and you will note that it is highly questionable whether the Canadian Food Inspection Agency really monitors the industry in order to ensure protocols are followed.
If the absolute reality of the cruelty isn't enough of an issue, there are major health concerns as well. Because horses are not typically raised as food meat - a banned chemical called phenylbutazone (short form, "bute") can often be found in their systems. This cheimical is toxic to human beings.
Please read this petition and sign and send a message to your MP (all information is provided).
Our horses deserve a better end than a horrific, terrifying and physically sadistic end to lives spent serving human beings.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
from craigslit ... an animal lover after my own heart! Happy Birthday Sasha!
It's been 2 years since I found you in the big metal garbage bin behind our duplex. You see, I hope you don't remember this, but you had a family before us. I guess they didn't want you though, because they literally threw you away. Luckily I found you! Lucky for you, not so lucky for my wallet. When we first met, I didn't think you were much to look at.
Your fur was thin, dirty and had a weird oily texture, even after the bath I gave you.
You were so skinny your face looked like the kitty version of skeletor and I could see the weird little joints in your tail, and all your ribs but the prescriptions kitten food from the vets fixed that.
Ear infections in both ears, and a upper respiratory infection, but the vet had some nice pills and ear drops for that, they were oh so easy to give to you as well!
The ear mites you had were gross but at least you didn't give them to my other cat. You did however have more fleas than I have ever seen before in my life, and in the winter. You were kind enough to share them with everyone! And, I learned though you, that excessive fleas give way to tapeworms. Oh joys! Luckily, the humans didn't get that one, just you and my other cat. That was pricey AND gross.
You aren't gross, parasitic and skinny anymore. In fact, now that malnutrition is never an issue, your coat is a glossy black, soft, thick and you have no bones showing! In fact, I have had guests see you walk into a room, and they gasp "oh my what a gorgeous cat!"
And than they discover your "personality"
You are batshit crazy. The vet says it is likely brain damage from severe malnutrition when you were developing. I like to call it, crackhead cat syndrome. You tear around my house like a meth addict being chased by miniature leprechaun cops. I have had to put all my vases, pictures frames, knick knacks and decorations in storage. You eat everything, food and non-food items so that I have to put away all loose items, dimes, paper, the necklace my grandmother gave me, the little plastic do-dads that come with bread ect.
The librarian officially hates me, and I have spent a fortune on replacement fees because for some reason you hate literature and shred any books come near, and if I do put it up, you just climb up and knock it down to destroy it. You run into walls at top speed for no apparent reason. I have had to rearrange my furniture because you enjoy jumping from my bookcase onto my stomach while I lie on my couch, I guess that "OOF" sound is just too tempting.
Despite all affection and treats I offer you, you prefer to be mauled by my small child relentlessly and without mercy. When I finally convince my child to let you alone, you follow after him begging for more.
All that being said, I love you. I am so glad you are in our family you stupid, weird, insane cat.
Happy Birthday Garbage Kitty!
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
OSPCA investigation finally to start -
FINALLY, the investigation into the outrageous actions of the OSPCA to kill all 350 animals in its care because of what is essentially a TREATABLE condition (ringworm) is being investigated.
There remains, of course, some concern on my part anyways that the OSPCA is spearheading the investigation into ITSELF.
Does anyone else find it questionable that an organization whose outrageous, inhumane and arrogant actions resulted in the wrongful death of MANY animals (and I believe many more of which we were not informed) gets to pick who spearheads the investigation which is supposed to come up with a balanced report on those same actions?
This merely highlights what many were unaware of before this atrocity began way back in May - there is something seriously wrong when an organization that has authority above and beyond those of other organizations such as the police, has no power or authority which can provide balance if there are questionable or outright actions taken. Nowhere in fact for individuals to go for recourse when targeted by the obnoxious and bloated ego-driven upper echelon of the ospca with their self-professed expertise and outrageous arrogance.
On a positive note, outspoken critics of the powermongering OSPCA applaud the appointments of the individuals in question:
Thus, regardless of the investigation which will determine whether in fact there was an "unusually virulent" strain of ringworm (the poor excuse used when it was decided to massacre their animals), critics must continue to push for a government body to be appointed to oversee this OSPCA.
Frank Klees (Newmarket-Aurora) who tabled a legislative motion seeking to separate its shelter and enforcement functions between two entities and to increase government authority over it must continue to push for this motion to become law.
There remains, of course, some concern on my part anyways that the OSPCA is spearheading the investigation into ITSELF.
The Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has hired former Ontario Veterinary College dean Alan Meek and former Ontario Superior Court chief justice Patrick LeSage to lead a long-awaited review of its controversial handling of a May ringworm outbreak at its shelter in Newmarket.
Does anyone else find it questionable that an organization whose outrageous, inhumane and arrogant actions resulted in the wrongful death of MANY animals (and I believe many more of which we were not informed) gets to pick who spearheads the investigation which is supposed to come up with a balanced report on those same actions?
This merely highlights what many were unaware of before this atrocity began way back in May - there is something seriously wrong when an organization that has authority above and beyond those of other organizations such as the police, has no power or authority which can provide balance if there are questionable or outright actions taken. Nowhere in fact for individuals to go for recourse when targeted by the obnoxious and bloated ego-driven upper echelon of the ospca with their self-professed expertise and outrageous arrogance.
On a positive note, outspoken critics of the powermongering OSPCA applaud the appointments of the individuals in question:
The appointment of Meek and LeSage was applauded by OSPCA critics. Upon hearing the news, Lynn Perrier cancelled a protest she had organized for Tuesday afternoon. Douglas Brown, who runs the website OSPCATruth.com, said he wished the review would have been launched sooner but that he was “pleased with the individuals who have been appointed, because they both have outstanding credentials.”While I await (admittedly with some pessimism) the results of the investigation which has no stated deadline for completion, it is HIGHLY disappointing that the issue of the OSPCA's autonomy is not being addressed or included as part of the process:
LeSage, who said he and Meek would not comment on the review until it is completed, “will advise on non-veterinary issues,” such as communications. To the disappointment of Progressive Conservative MPP Frank Klees, however, Godfrey said the terms of reference for the review will not allow LeSage to address questions related to government oversight of the OSPCA.
Thus, regardless of the investigation which will determine whether in fact there was an "unusually virulent" strain of ringworm (the poor excuse used when it was decided to massacre their animals), critics must continue to push for a government body to be appointed to oversee this OSPCA.
Frank Klees (Newmarket-Aurora) who tabled a legislative motion seeking to separate its shelter and enforcement functions between two entities and to increase government authority over it must continue to push for this motion to become law.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Icy Redux Redux
Icy and Diablos' former owner was kind enough to reply to an email I sent.
As I suspected (based on my feeling that anyone who kept such lovely dogs so hearty, hale and healthy had valid reasons for surrendering), he had no choice (for reasons he asked remain private). However, he has given permission to share a few of his words.
These are a direct quote:
But in any case, he confirms that other than a benign lump (which many old dogs develop - I know my old Lass had quite a few), Icy was healthy and happy.
I am sorry that Steve's belief in the Toronto Humane Society was so horribly misplaced ... and I know that he and all of us want an answer why.
As I suspected (based on my feeling that anyone who kept such lovely dogs so hearty, hale and healthy had valid reasons for surrendering), he had no choice (for reasons he asked remain private). However, he has given permission to share a few of his words.
These are a direct quote:
Icy was in good health and had no health issues what so ever She had 1 benign lump on her right front leg which was not bothering her at all and was in fact decreasing in size over the past 2 year. The largest it got was almost the size of a tennis ball, at the time I surrendered her to THS it was the size of a golf ball and shrinking. I am DEEPLY upset with the fact she was put to sleep. As you can read below I have received a few e-mails fomr some of you who want to help and others who decided to rub it in. Before you send me ANY e-mails please consider the following:
1. I FIRST found my BELOVED dogs a home with family
2. My family reengaged and I had to find a home for the dogs again
3. I had a 2 week grace period in which to find a home for them and that is when you guys came in, thank you.
4. Unfortunately there were no spaces open ANYWHERE and I DID call ALL the shelters and rescues that were suggested to me
5. With no time left before I LEFT THE COUNTRY I went to THS based on YOUR recommendation
I am NOT happy Icy was put to sleep, it pains me deeply as she was my baby. It was painful enough knowing that I will never see her or Diablo again.I am not sure to whom the "you" refers to - obviously somene gave him some guidance about bringing the dogs to the THS. At one point it would have been good advice - and there are many of us, before this situation that might have gambled it was STILL the safest place - sadly, this is not the case.
But in any case, he confirms that other than a benign lump (which many old dogs develop - I know my old Lass had quite a few), Icy was healthy and happy.
I am sorry that Steve's belief in the Toronto Humane Society was so horribly misplaced ... and I know that he and all of us want an answer why.
Icy Redux.
Still no word on why Icy was euthanized within 24 hours of being surrendered from either the new THS Board or anyone speaking on behalf of the THS.
No doubt, there are those that believe I'm belabouring the point. The reality is that since June 28 when the shelter opened, the oft-stated status of the "new" THS has been woefully quiet. While I am cognizant that new policies take time to discuss and implement and the Board has had only a limited time period in which to acquaint itself with the current policies and procedures at the shelter, what I find troubling is the complete and utter lack of communication occurring between the public and the THS.
Perhaps I am seeing this too simplistically - and if so, I would be grateful if people would point out the error of my concerns.
But it seems to me there was a fairly clearcut sequence of events.
So what is the mystery?
If there was a sound reason why this had to be done, why hide it? While I am obviously not privy to the dog's medical history, it states in the original ad that they were both healthy. I think it a fair assumption to say the dogs were also socialized - Icy was a pet for 11 years!
Incidentally, I DO NOT believe people should point the finger at their former owner - it seems to me that just based on the dogs themselves, he was a conscientious ad caring owner. They were older, they were healthy and they were well loved - that is obvious - and we are not privy to his reasons for giving them up. I know that, for instance, Britain's 6 month quarantine and the associated costs are simply too prohibitive for some. Or if he was moving to a tropical country, that is a legitimate reason - I know, because we brought our samoyed to live in Grand Bahamas many years ago and it screwed up his system for the rest of his life (northern dogs are not designed to deal with such hot countries).
Houndward Bound brings up the issue in a discussion on the Stop the Slaughter at the Newmarket OSPCA facebook page.
I know that I have been open about my concern about a different philosophy between the "no-kill" advocates on the Board versus the "low-kill" - and make no secret that I support the former. In the correct context, not only is "no-kill" plausible, but when followed correctly has proven to be successful beyond the wildest dreams. It does NOT mean "NEVER kill" - one of the issues with the "old" THS and is far too intricate to summarize here but google Winograd and you will comprehend how truly successful an example he provides.
It appears a number of people have emailed various board members and THS executive director Garth Jerome directly- if anyone receives any information about the circumstances surrounding this, I would love to hear about it.
I know that part of my concern and the reason I am worrying about this is that during the chaos and horror of the OSPCA occupation (apart from the sheer number of animals who were murdered), at two of the meetings which occurred toward the end it was clearly up in the air as to the ultimate goals of the "new" THS. I give Garth Jerome full marks for being honest and aboveboard about what he perceived was the policy - which is "low kill" ...and to my mind, a euphanism for getting rid of animals that aren't readily and quickly adoptable. While I disagree with him, I appreciate his candour.
An 11 year old Huskey may very fit the criteria of not "readily" adoptable by some.
Of course, they didn't volunteer there for several years and see how many caring people are out there that are ready, willing and able to adopt dogs that most places would deem "unadoptable". I have seen homes found for dogs that in a thousand years I would swear would never find them - old dogs, sick dogs, dogs with medical issues- dogs with behaviour issues ... as much as it breaks your heart to see how many HORRIBLE people are out there - people who abuse their pets - people who dump them when they get old - people who treat them as a "flavour of the month" and then quickly lose interest and move onto the next thing --- for as many of THOSE people there are a commensurate number of WONDERFUL people - who open their hearts and wallets and take the dispossessed, the neglected, the abandoned and the old into their hearts and homes.
So why did Icy have to die??
No doubt, there are those that believe I'm belabouring the point. The reality is that since June 28 when the shelter opened, the oft-stated status of the "new" THS has been woefully quiet. While I am cognizant that new policies take time to discuss and implement and the Board has had only a limited time period in which to acquaint itself with the current policies and procedures at the shelter, what I find troubling is the complete and utter lack of communication occurring between the public and the THS.
Perhaps I am seeing this too simplistically - and if so, I would be grateful if people would point out the error of my concerns.
But it seems to me there was a fairly clearcut sequence of events.
- The dogs were surrendered (and I don`t dispute that somewhere in the tedious and to my mind, far too complicated process of surrendering there is a clause that states the dog could be euthanized if deemed by the staff of the THS).
- within 24 hours SOMEONE made a decision to kill the dog for SOME reason.
- SOMEONE then euthanized the dog.
So what is the mystery?
If there was a sound reason why this had to be done, why hide it? While I am obviously not privy to the dog's medical history, it states in the original ad that they were both healthy. I think it a fair assumption to say the dogs were also socialized - Icy was a pet for 11 years!
Incidentally, I DO NOT believe people should point the finger at their former owner - it seems to me that just based on the dogs themselves, he was a conscientious ad caring owner. They were older, they were healthy and they were well loved - that is obvious - and we are not privy to his reasons for giving them up. I know that, for instance, Britain's 6 month quarantine and the associated costs are simply too prohibitive for some. Or if he was moving to a tropical country, that is a legitimate reason - I know, because we brought our samoyed to live in Grand Bahamas many years ago and it screwed up his system for the rest of his life (northern dogs are not designed to deal with such hot countries).
Houndward Bound brings up the issue in a discussion on the Stop the Slaughter at the Newmarket OSPCA facebook page.
I know that I have been open about my concern about a different philosophy between the "no-kill" advocates on the Board versus the "low-kill" - and make no secret that I support the former. In the correct context, not only is "no-kill" plausible, but when followed correctly has proven to be successful beyond the wildest dreams. It does NOT mean "NEVER kill" - one of the issues with the "old" THS and is far too intricate to summarize here but google Winograd and you will comprehend how truly successful an example he provides.
It appears a number of people have emailed various board members and THS executive director Garth Jerome directly- if anyone receives any information about the circumstances surrounding this, I would love to hear about it.
I know that part of my concern and the reason I am worrying about this is that during the chaos and horror of the OSPCA occupation (apart from the sheer number of animals who were murdered), at two of the meetings which occurred toward the end it was clearly up in the air as to the ultimate goals of the "new" THS. I give Garth Jerome full marks for being honest and aboveboard about what he perceived was the policy - which is "low kill" ...and to my mind, a euphanism for getting rid of animals that aren't readily and quickly adoptable. While I disagree with him, I appreciate his candour.
An 11 year old Huskey may very fit the criteria of not "readily" adoptable by some.
Of course, they didn't volunteer there for several years and see how many caring people are out there that are ready, willing and able to adopt dogs that most places would deem "unadoptable". I have seen homes found for dogs that in a thousand years I would swear would never find them - old dogs, sick dogs, dogs with medical issues- dogs with behaviour issues ... as much as it breaks your heart to see how many HORRIBLE people are out there - people who abuse their pets - people who dump them when they get old - people who treat them as a "flavour of the month" and then quickly lose interest and move onto the next thing --- for as many of THOSE people there are a commensurate number of WONDERFUL people - who open their hearts and wallets and take the dispossessed, the neglected, the abandoned and the old into their hearts and homes.
So why did Icy have to die??
Sunday, August 1, 2010
UPDATE: University of Guelph says policy change possible
Pressure has been brought to bear on the University of Guelph Veternairy College to change its policy of euthanizing healthy animals after foreign students who need to qualify in Canada have "practiced" spaying or neutering. Only one supervisor oversees 10 students, and current policy dictates that the otherwise healthy dogs (raised in situ for this purpose alone) were then euthanized.
Bravo to veternary student Dr. Anya Yushchenko (not sure of spelling) who on being told she had to kill the little beagle she had just spayed, refused - and on being pressured and told she may not qualify for a Canadian practice - fought back. Contacting Lawyers for Animal Welfare, the administration was persuaded to make an exception in the case of the little dog, now named Rainbow. Paul Ward saw the online posting and adopted her where he points out he would NEVER have known she was raised in a lab as she was sweet, affectionate and social.
CBC covers the story here.
"What we're committed to now is to having enough supervisors present so that these trainees will be able to do the spays successfully and the animal will be healthy when it`s recovered" states Dr. Elizabeth Stone, Dean of the College. If a successful outcome to what is arguably a common practice (spaying/neutering) is not necessarily possible, then the College obviously must revisit its teaching methods! One supervisor per 10 students, from a laymen's perspective, seems woefully inadequate - which opinion is borne out if the outcome of these attempts mean the animal must be killed.
Having graduated more than 160 foreign vets to date, that means the same number of animals has been killed. This seems morally reprehensible; I know that as an animal lover with my own menageries, I would far rather bring my animals to a vet like Dr. Anya than one who has no compunction about euthanizing a healthy animal - which they have just used ONLY as a training "tool".
Kudos to the Animal Alliance of Canada for bringing this practice to the attention of the public and were happy to announce in their latest blog that an outpouring of support for these little beageles has resulted in more than enough adoptive homes for the 10 beagles currently being offered for adoption.
It is an unfortunate reality that past practices are often hidebound and subject to retrenchment by the individuals who have lived their realities. The sometimes rarified world of acadamia is perhaps one of the most difficult to change. It is commendable on the part of the University of Guelph and Dean Stone that they are willing to reassess old practices.
Bravo to veternary student Dr. Anya Yushchenko (not sure of spelling) who on being told she had to kill the little beagle she had just spayed, refused - and on being pressured and told she may not qualify for a Canadian practice - fought back. Contacting Lawyers for Animal Welfare, the administration was persuaded to make an exception in the case of the little dog, now named Rainbow. Paul Ward saw the online posting and adopted her where he points out he would NEVER have known she was raised in a lab as she was sweet, affectionate and social.
CBC covers the story here.
"What we're committed to now is to having enough supervisors present so that these trainees will be able to do the spays successfully and the animal will be healthy when it`s recovered" states Dr. Elizabeth Stone, Dean of the College. If a successful outcome to what is arguably a common practice (spaying/neutering) is not necessarily possible, then the College obviously must revisit its teaching methods! One supervisor per 10 students, from a laymen's perspective, seems woefully inadequate - which opinion is borne out if the outcome of these attempts mean the animal must be killed.
Having graduated more than 160 foreign vets to date, that means the same number of animals has been killed. This seems morally reprehensible; I know that as an animal lover with my own menageries, I would far rather bring my animals to a vet like Dr. Anya than one who has no compunction about euthanizing a healthy animal - which they have just used ONLY as a training "tool".
Kudos to the Animal Alliance of Canada for bringing this practice to the attention of the public and were happy to announce in their latest blog that an outpouring of support for these little beageles has resulted in more than enough adoptive homes for the 10 beagles currently being offered for adoption.
It is an unfortunate reality that past practices are often hidebound and subject to retrenchment by the individuals who have lived their realities. The sometimes rarified world of acadamia is perhaps one of the most difficult to change. It is commendable on the part of the University of Guelph and Dean Stone that they are willing to reassess old practices.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Who killed Icy and Why?
Diablo & Icy: Icy and Diablo (dibo) These 2 striking huskies find themselves in need of a loving, committed home together. Their owner is moving out of the country and due to the hot climate and long distance, he cannot take them. Icy is a beautiful spayed female siberian husky, black and white. she was born aug 30, 1998...so she is 11 years young. she has one blue eye and one half blue, half brown eye - very cool! She is very energetic, a little bit timid but loves hugs.Diablo (or Dibo) is a striking male siberian husky, white and beige. he was born on july 12, 2002...so he will be celebrating his 8th birthday this month. diablo has 2 blue eyes. he's very energetic and goofy... a very lovey dovey dog. icy and diablo are bonded and need a loving home together. they will come with all their own supplies....beds, leashes, bowls etc. Contact Steve Namen 416-200-0478 stevenamen@rogers.com
That was the ad posted on Toronto Adopt-a-Pet on July 11. Via M. Michelle Nadon at C4P Animal Rescue, and the Toronto Examiner, a further plea went out for homes for these beautiful dogs (July 17, 2010). Owner Steve Namen had been desperately searching for a good home for his dogs for some time. While I don't pretend to agree with most of the people I see "re-homing" their animals, there ARE legitimate reasons and his seemed so. Finally, time ran out, and trusting in the promises of the "new" THS he reluctantly surrendered his dogs, confident that the place that had once epitomized compassion and caring and had believed every animal deserved a chance would do well by his dogs. This surrender took place (subject to confirmation) on or around Friday, July 16.
YET, according to reliable sources, within HOURS of their arrival, Icy was euthanized. Yeah, this healthy, beloved, beautiful dog was euthanized. While the reason why this atrocity was allowed remains unanswered - there is no question it DID happen. Icy, beloved pet, bonded strongly to partner Diablo was killed. By Toronto Humane Society staff.
While we are thankful that Diablo dodged the bullet and was subsequently adopted, the fact remains that a healthy 11 year old dog was killed.
The new Board of the THS pronounced themselves "shocked" and promised a speedy and thorough investigation into the circumstances surrounding this decision. That investigation was purportedly to have come to some form of resolution today.
So, what is the outcome? What were the circumstances surrounding the decision to euthanize? Who made the decision - an individual? A group? Was it Garth Jerome or head vet Karen Ward? If it is asserted there was a judicious decision made based on sound reasons, then the Board should have no compunction in allowing the public to know those reasons. The current Board has promised unequivocally that transparency and communication are two major tenets of their platform. The twisted private machinations of former directors and staff were to be a thing of the past.
The THS opened on June 28, 2010. Now, a month later the direction the THS intends to take remains murky and unclear. It continues to only take owner-surrenders - which surrenders are cumbersome and far too involved and by any standard, could and probably do discourage many individuals from surrendering animals. Strays, abused, abandoned and neglected animals are no longer their concern (at least right now) - those animals in short that used to find in the THS their ONLY place of refuge.
The direction the THS intends to take continues to elude understanding as communication continues to remain sketchy and unclear. At this point, it is not entirely evident whether the facility ever intends to at least attempt to pursue a "no-kill" policy as so many supporters, members and volunteers sought. Certainly, euthanizing a dog within hours of its arrival, with no clear explanation as to why does not bode well for the future.
It's no secret that I have no use for THS Executive Director Garth Jerome ; however- he has at least been clear that euthanasia is something he deems inevitable and in many cases probable; let's not forget that he has reiterated more than once that the THS is "not a sanctuary". However, perhaps I was naive in hoping that the definitive vote for a brand new Board, many of whom have espoused their support and often passionate commitment to pursuing a "no-kill" option (keeping in mind this does not mean NOT KILL EVER - please google Wingrad for a better grasp of what is meant by no-kill) would mean the dawning of a new era for the THS.
At this point, 7:37 on Wednesday, July 28 I STILL have not been able to find any indication from the Board that they have reached some understanding of the reasons behind euthanizing an old but healthy dog.
It really isn't rocket science.
Who made the decision to kill Icy?
Based on what criteria?
Okayed then by whom?
And IS this then what we can expect from the THS for the future?
These questions are not difficult nor are are they unequivocal - SOMEONE made that decision.
Toronto animal lovers deserve to know.
Monday, July 26, 2010
10 beagles desperately seeking caring homes - refugees from U of Guelph Vstep
The Animal Alliance of Canada recently announced the desperate need for individual homes for 10 beagles and 4 cats from the University of Guelph V-step program.
The Vstep program trains vets from other countries who wish to qualify here in Canada. The vets "practice" spay/neuter on beagles raised in laboratories at the University. These sweet, gentle dogs have never been (in most instances) outside, on a leash, have lived their short lives in cages, are "practiced" on - often by inexperienced practioners and then are summarily euthanized. The Animal Alliance has been fighting with the University of Guelph for 10 years to have the dogs released to rescue groups on being spayed or neutered. To this point they have been unsuccessful. Apparently only 1 supervisor oversees 10 students (for scenarios which for the safety of the animal should be one on one).
The University has JUST agreed to release 4 cats and 10 beagles but ONLY to individuals not to rescue or humane groups (even those willing to take them on). These lovely sweet-tempered beagles will most definitely provide a challenge (but would be well worth the effort) - they have not been socialized, will have to be housetrained, introduced gently to the outside world, will need LOTS of one on one to learn how to trust human beings and how to actually BE a dog.
They DESERVE a chance.
Pressure must be brought on the University of Guelph to stop this horrific practice. Many other veterinary collegs use cadavers - and there are also groups willing to form a partnership where experienced vets could provide (for an example) shelter dogs that need spaying or neutering with ONE on ONE supervision. I also find it a sad comment on the University's mandate to teach aspiring vets compassion for the aniamls they treat. Animals, like people, need caretakers and individuals with a holistic approach - one based on compassion and caring as well as science.
Please contact Liz of Animal Alliance for further details:
416-462-9541 ext: 23
liz@animalalliance.ca
The Vstep program trains vets from other countries who wish to qualify here in Canada. The vets "practice" spay/neuter on beagles raised in laboratories at the University. These sweet, gentle dogs have never been (in most instances) outside, on a leash, have lived their short lives in cages, are "practiced" on - often by inexperienced practioners and then are summarily euthanized. The Animal Alliance has been fighting with the University of Guelph for 10 years to have the dogs released to rescue groups on being spayed or neutered. To this point they have been unsuccessful. Apparently only 1 supervisor oversees 10 students (for scenarios which for the safety of the animal should be one on one).
The University has JUST agreed to release 4 cats and 10 beagles but ONLY to individuals not to rescue or humane groups (even those willing to take them on). These lovely sweet-tempered beagles will most definitely provide a challenge (but would be well worth the effort) - they have not been socialized, will have to be housetrained, introduced gently to the outside world, will need LOTS of one on one to learn how to trust human beings and how to actually BE a dog.
They DESERVE a chance.
Pressure must be brought on the University of Guelph to stop this horrific practice. Many other veterinary collegs use cadavers - and there are also groups willing to form a partnership where experienced vets could provide (for an example) shelter dogs that need spaying or neutering with ONE on ONE supervision. I also find it a sad comment on the University's mandate to teach aspiring vets compassion for the aniamls they treat. Animals, like people, need caretakers and individuals with a holistic approach - one based on compassion and caring as well as science.
Please contact Liz of Animal Alliance for further details:
416-462-9541 ext: 23
liz@animalalliance.ca
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Lost dog alert! (cross posted from craigslist)
Missing Australian Shepherd - new info (Rouge Valley)
Date: 2010-07-21, 1:58PM EDT
Reply to: comm-cvkt7-1855287684@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
Sadly, what appeared to be a very good lead in the Sandford area turned out to be a different dog. They did manage to catch that dog, but he was a sheepdog with Oshawa tags.
We are back to the fact that the last confirmed sighting was in the Rouge Valley. The sighting near Whittamore Berry Farm is believed to be 100% reliable, and really there is no reason why Sunny should move from that area. Given that there have been no confirmed sightings of him since then, it is reasonable to think that he is hiding out, taking care of himself Aussie-style.
f anyone is walking in the area and thinks they see him, please do not try to coax or approach him, as this will cause him to run. The best thing to do is just to make the call, as soon as possible.
The main contact number for any sightings is Leigh 416-566-0611 (cell). If you are likely to be walking in the area, maybe you could put that number in your cellphone phone book - who knows, you may see him and be able to make the call whilst you have him in sight. In view of the number of mistaken identity calls which have been received, a photo snapped with your cell phone would also be most helpful in confirming the sighting.
Thank you to all the many people who have been searching for Sunny, and praying for his safe return.
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Saving animals of afghanistan and iraq- support caring marines
see more Lolcats and funny pictures
Kittehs Kiki and Keykey have found a home in the midst of war. And it’s all thanks to three US Marines, Brian Chambers, Chris Berry and Aaron Shaw. They started a mission to help find homes for stray cats that they found while serving in Afghanistan. After finding Keykey injured by a c-wire, Berry took care of his wounds and nursed him back to health and the two of them have been best friends every since.
And now Keykey is living with Berry’s parents in Michigan while Kiki is living with Chambers’ parents in Texas and both are enjoying their new loving homes! Those Marines are definitely heroes in our book as is also the group of Royal Marines that started the organization called Nowzad in 2007. This organization rescues stray and abandoned animals in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Wednesday, June 9, 2010
UPDATE: on Quebec baby mauled by dogs - mother charged - WTF??
So apparently they are charging this young mother with manslaughter!
WTF??
All over the country, people get away - lilterally - with MURDER. Drivers get in cars drunk- often on a regular basis- run over people and get off with slaps on the wrist and suspended sentences. Bloody BRYANT runs OVER a cyclist and his case is DISMISSED!! A taxi driver in Brampton hit and killed a man, leaving him dying in the street as the cowardly bastard ran off and got a suspended SENTENCE - and they are charging this young girl with MANSLAUGHTER??
What happened is a tragedy - a terrible, horrific tragedy. It is doubly sad becuase so many factors are seen over and over again in these kind of cases. In this most recent article, it mentions "puppies in a cage" - which means the parent dogs are going to be extra-vigilent and fragile in terms of behaviour - that the male in fact is most likely NOT neutered which is yet another factor (a common denominator in serious dog bites are UNNEUTERED males).
The poor wee baby was strapped SAFELY in a car seat - the mother thought. By all reports, even at her young age (she is KID herself for god's sake!), she was a conscientious and caring young mother.
She made a mistake in JUDGMENT - one based on youth, lack of experience and very common misconceptions about how dogs act around young babies. People far older than she, with more experience with children and dogs make that SAME mistake again and again.
My heart breaks for that young mother. It aches for the dogs which will now likely be euthanized. It is a horrific, terrible thing but that child - the mother - should NOT be targetted as someone who with forethought and intent allowed her baby to be killed. That is outrageous. It smacks of sexism (because so often men seem to get away with so much more) - of a vigilante mentality that the Courts should NOT support nor encourage.
Let her alone to mourn her tragedy. God knows, she has to live with it the rest of her life. She went out for a SMOKE, leaving her baby, she thought, safe and clean in a little chair. She did not abandon the baby, plan her demise nor put her in a position she KNEW would result in death or injury.
Get a GRIP - and leave this child alone!
WTF??
All over the country, people get away - lilterally - with MURDER. Drivers get in cars drunk- often on a regular basis- run over people and get off with slaps on the wrist and suspended sentences. Bloody BRYANT runs OVER a cyclist and his case is DISMISSED!! A taxi driver in Brampton hit and killed a man, leaving him dying in the street as the cowardly bastard ran off and got a suspended SENTENCE - and they are charging this young girl with MANSLAUGHTER??
The upgraded charge of manslaughter against the mother indicates that the Crown intends to prove that there was a criminal act committed that brought on the death of the baby, rather than sheer negligence, said criminal lawyer Conrad Lord.They are trying to prove she had INTENT?
What happened is a tragedy - a terrible, horrific tragedy. It is doubly sad becuase so many factors are seen over and over again in these kind of cases. In this most recent article, it mentions "puppies in a cage" - which means the parent dogs are going to be extra-vigilent and fragile in terms of behaviour - that the male in fact is most likely NOT neutered which is yet another factor (a common denominator in serious dog bites are UNNEUTERED males).
The poor wee baby was strapped SAFELY in a car seat - the mother thought. By all reports, even at her young age (she is KID herself for god's sake!), she was a conscientious and caring young mother.
She made a mistake in JUDGMENT - one based on youth, lack of experience and very common misconceptions about how dogs act around young babies. People far older than she, with more experience with children and dogs make that SAME mistake again and again.
My heart breaks for that young mother. It aches for the dogs which will now likely be euthanized. It is a horrific, terrible thing but that child - the mother - should NOT be targetted as someone who with forethought and intent allowed her baby to be killed. That is outrageous. It smacks of sexism (because so often men seem to get away with so much more) - of a vigilante mentality that the Courts should NOT support nor encourage.
Let her alone to mourn her tragedy. God knows, she has to live with it the rest of her life. She went out for a SMOKE, leaving her baby, she thought, safe and clean in a little chair. She did not abandon the baby, plan her demise nor put her in a position she KNEW would result in death or injury.
Get a GRIP - and leave this child alone!
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Tragic - Dogs MUST be monitored around babies and small children
The reality is that dogs and children CAN and DO get along very well - given that proper introductions and proper precautions are taken. It is an unfortunate fact of life these days, that more and more people in "humanizing" their dogs, put these animals in situations where simply by "being dogs" they are doomed - and the tragic consequences are innocent victims.
For small children, this is compounded by parents who neglect teaching their children how to approach, interact with and deal with dogs appropriately.
A 3 week old newborn was mauled to death by one, perhaps two visting huskey mixes in Ste-Barnabe, Quebec.
There are just so many things wrong with how this tragedy occurred.
Babies can be disconcerting to any dog - the crying, flailing limbs and smells do not necessarily translate into "person" for the dog, but can trigger prey instincts.
Then again, who in the WORLD leaves a small infant ALONE, unsupervised, in a position where the baby is put in danger? Leaving a baby vulnerable to dogs who are themselves left to roam unsupervised is at best, careless, at worst, criminal. Certainly, the police feel there is reason to charge the two women involved (the 17 year old mother and 37 year old grandmother).
I would be very interested to know as well if either or both of the dogs are neutered or spayed. A common factor in dog bites are unneutered males - and the story notes that the husky mixes were a male and female. While the comments on the story range from informed to demented (indicative of almost any comments on any story respecting dogs and dogs that bite or maim), the reality is that ANY dog can be a potential threat to infants and small children and should be treated as such. Not because they are 'aggressive', 'mean' or 'by nature viscious" - that is just crap - but becuase they are DOGS and have certain genetic predispositions which make it imperative that the dogs are supervised, introduced and acclimitized to children.
Even so, based on the unpredicability of toddlers - it should be a rule that until they children are old enough and responsible enough to follow through with proper etiquette vis-a-vis how to treat dogs - they should NEVER be left alone.
This of course is compounded a hundred times over when the dogs are visitors!!
I feel desperately sorry for both the mother and grandmother while at the same time feeling frustrated and angry that their carelessness lead to the death of a small child - and most likely to the death of two dogs. All because no one (mother, grandmother and visitors (owners of dogs)) used common sense.
For small children, this is compounded by parents who neglect teaching their children how to approach, interact with and deal with dogs appropriately.
A 3 week old newborn was mauled to death by one, perhaps two visting huskey mixes in Ste-Barnabe, Quebec.
There are just so many things wrong with how this tragedy occurred.
Babies can be disconcerting to any dog - the crying, flailing limbs and smells do not necessarily translate into "person" for the dog, but can trigger prey instincts.
"They are not aggressive dogs," said Claude Dionne of the St-Hyacinthe SPCA. "They are just territorial dogs."
Then again, who in the WORLD leaves a small infant ALONE, unsupervised, in a position where the baby is put in danger? Leaving a baby vulnerable to dogs who are themselves left to roam unsupervised is at best, careless, at worst, criminal. Certainly, the police feel there is reason to charge the two women involved (the 17 year old mother and 37 year old grandmother).
I would be very interested to know as well if either or both of the dogs are neutered or spayed. A common factor in dog bites are unneutered males - and the story notes that the husky mixes were a male and female. While the comments on the story range from informed to demented (indicative of almost any comments on any story respecting dogs and dogs that bite or maim), the reality is that ANY dog can be a potential threat to infants and small children and should be treated as such. Not because they are 'aggressive', 'mean' or 'by nature viscious" - that is just crap - but becuase they are DOGS and have certain genetic predispositions which make it imperative that the dogs are supervised, introduced and acclimitized to children.
Even so, based on the unpredicability of toddlers - it should be a rule that until they children are old enough and responsible enough to follow through with proper etiquette vis-a-vis how to treat dogs - they should NEVER be left alone.
This of course is compounded a hundred times over when the dogs are visitors!!
I feel desperately sorry for both the mother and grandmother while at the same time feeling frustrated and angry that their carelessness lead to the death of a small child - and most likely to the death of two dogs. All because no one (mother, grandmother and visitors (owners of dogs)) used common sense.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
A new day dawns ... Congratulations to Faces of Change - and MOST OF ALL to the Members who believe in them
By now, many are aware that the entire slate of Faces of Change were voted to the Board of the Toronto Humane Society. A very BIG congratulations to a group of people who have stepped forward with passion, intent and hands-on knowledge to guide the THS on a new path.
But most of all, congratulations to ALL the members who voted for them.
In the often unsavoury and distasteful bad politiquing leading up to this election, it was easy to forget that there were thousands of people out there, honest people, caring people, people with commitment and ideology and vision of a haven for animals, that are, at the HEART of it the REAL THS.
People, many of whom have contributed time, effort, years and passion to a vision of a THS which included compassion, caring and a chance for every animal. Who believe in a refuge for all animals.
People who were betrayed and ignored by former management. People whose honest, caring support was twisted and used for personal vendettas, whose vision was shattered in the harsh light of reality; who no doubt were horrified, grief-stricken and incredulous that their hard-earned dollars, their BELIEF was so sorely betrayed.
It is THOSE people who have now spoken.
Despite the myriad attempts of those who would twist and distort facts, the many caring Members of the Toronto Humane Society have chosen to believe that the 15 people on Faces of Change mean what they say when they talk passionately, with conviction and knowledge, of the path now to be taken.
I have no doubt that among the members are those who were, are and have been volunteers, who have cleaned cages, walked dogs, given sad, abandoned cats a kind word, a soft caress. But whether intimatley acquainted with the corridors, the byways and rooms of the THS, Members are in the end, individuals who truly care about animals - not metaphorically or from a distance, but are willing to stand behind their beliefs with financial support, with passion and with dedication.
Thank You to all the Members who stood up this day and are the REAL heroes for leading the THS in the direction it was meant to go - Members, YOU ROCK.
But most of all, congratulations to ALL the members who voted for them.
In the often unsavoury and distasteful bad politiquing leading up to this election, it was easy to forget that there were thousands of people out there, honest people, caring people, people with commitment and ideology and vision of a haven for animals, that are, at the HEART of it the REAL THS.
People, many of whom have contributed time, effort, years and passion to a vision of a THS which included compassion, caring and a chance for every animal. Who believe in a refuge for all animals.
People who were betrayed and ignored by former management. People whose honest, caring support was twisted and used for personal vendettas, whose vision was shattered in the harsh light of reality; who no doubt were horrified, grief-stricken and incredulous that their hard-earned dollars, their BELIEF was so sorely betrayed.
It is THOSE people who have now spoken.
Despite the myriad attempts of those who would twist and distort facts, the many caring Members of the Toronto Humane Society have chosen to believe that the 15 people on Faces of Change mean what they say when they talk passionately, with conviction and knowledge, of the path now to be taken.
I have no doubt that among the members are those who were, are and have been volunteers, who have cleaned cages, walked dogs, given sad, abandoned cats a kind word, a soft caress. But whether intimatley acquainted with the corridors, the byways and rooms of the THS, Members are in the end, individuals who truly care about animals - not metaphorically or from a distance, but are willing to stand behind their beliefs with financial support, with passion and with dedication.
Thank You to all the Members who stood up this day and are the REAL heroes for leading the THS in the direction it was meant to go - Members, YOU ROCK.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Death of Justice
I'm a biker, cyclist, call it what you will - I can and do ride my bike to work, not every day- but once weather permits, a couple times a week. I start out in the cool of night, the sky washed dark with stars singing the night, swirling in a heavens still stained with sound and smell and the sweet, intoxicating drifting perfume of lilacs in the Spring night.
My bike is festooned with a ridiculous array of flashing lights; red ones that flash spasmodically on fender and along the back of my seat, halogan which shines bright on the road which flows before me, red reflectors flashing on the sturdy tires and more flashing red light at the back - and front of my helmet. For I know that each morning I pull out of my driveway and onto the common roadway, I am courting potential harm.
The reality is that Toronto continues to be a car city, one dedicated to the worship of 4 wheels, and heavy exhaust and impatient courtiers who swerve and curse and see as their divine right complete and utter dominion over the concrete byways of a city that in truth belongs to everyone.
Cyclists are cursed, maligned, despised, reviled and seen as upstarts claiming what is not theirs. Lip service on the part of city government promise and never deliver on safe egress for cyclists along roads they too are paying for those roads through the same taxes levied on the driver.
Just last night, my youngset daughter came in, shaken and disturbed, having spent 45 minutes at the corner of Brimley and Danforth talking to police. A little boy, riding his bike, training wheels attached, following his older brothers on the green light crossing Danforth was struck (thankfully not fatally) by a car driven by an impatient motorist who felt it was his divine right to turn right on a red ....
In the 5 years since I took up biking, I have been struck 4 times- 2 of those hits resulting in me being knocked off my bike and damage to my bike - both times with drivers who sped away without even stopping to see if I was ok. I have had bruised legs as impatient cars pushed me into curbs and light standards, have been sworn at, cursed, had cigarettes thrown at me, been spit at and cut off. I have dodged doors opening suddenly into the badly constructed bike lanes, wiped out on gravel as someone accelerated out of laneways and once, when a car ran a red light, been struck and airborne, ended up in the seat of a convertible waiting to turn right.
Darcy Shepperd was by all accounts, an angry man. A man with serious alcohol and maybe drug issues. A violent man.
Michael Bryant on the other hand, with his spin machine, Navigator influencing, prodding, moulding and creating his public persona, is displayed as an upright citizen, simply coming home from a night out with his lovely wife, vilely attacked by a maddened courier...
A maddened courier whose bike was indisputably HIT by Bryant.
An already angry man who RIGHTFULLY reacted when Bryant in his fancy car, impatient by all accounts with lane restrictions tried to get by.
It is inarguable that Bryant HIT Sheppard's bike.
Having been hit, I know exactly how he felt.
PISSED.
We know how vulnerable we are.
Cars are big suckers. Cars are heavy. Cars are STEEL. Cyclists on the other hand are flesh and blood, fragile, tender flesh easily hurt by 2 tons of weapon driven by idiots and fools who see as their divine right exclusive access to the roads.
So Sheppard went after Bryant. and WHAT?
That exonerates him from scraping Sheppard off against a fire hydrant like a piece of dirt?
Somehow, in all the justifications, the spin doctoring about "saintly" Bryant, about the gossip mongering pruient recitation over and over of Sheppard's troubled past, somehow, in all that cesspool of justification, the reality that a man was KILLED because he got ANGRY that another man threatened him with a 2 ton machine has been been lost.
Bryant was the man responsible for bringing in Breed-specific legislation.
I guess he saw in Sheppard just another cur to be put down - for the "potential" harm he MIGHT have done. Did anyone notice in all the allegations of violence against his person, NO ONE has reported that Bryant was in any way bruised or cut?
I guess congratulations are due to Navitagor for successfully spining another fairy tale.
Darcy,- your ghost will not rest - for justice is absent.
My bike is festooned with a ridiculous array of flashing lights; red ones that flash spasmodically on fender and along the back of my seat, halogan which shines bright on the road which flows before me, red reflectors flashing on the sturdy tires and more flashing red light at the back - and front of my helmet. For I know that each morning I pull out of my driveway and onto the common roadway, I am courting potential harm.
The reality is that Toronto continues to be a car city, one dedicated to the worship of 4 wheels, and heavy exhaust and impatient courtiers who swerve and curse and see as their divine right complete and utter dominion over the concrete byways of a city that in truth belongs to everyone.
Cyclists are cursed, maligned, despised, reviled and seen as upstarts claiming what is not theirs. Lip service on the part of city government promise and never deliver on safe egress for cyclists along roads they too are paying for those roads through the same taxes levied on the driver.
Just last night, my youngset daughter came in, shaken and disturbed, having spent 45 minutes at the corner of Brimley and Danforth talking to police. A little boy, riding his bike, training wheels attached, following his older brothers on the green light crossing Danforth was struck (thankfully not fatally) by a car driven by an impatient motorist who felt it was his divine right to turn right on a red ....
In the 5 years since I took up biking, I have been struck 4 times- 2 of those hits resulting in me being knocked off my bike and damage to my bike - both times with drivers who sped away without even stopping to see if I was ok. I have had bruised legs as impatient cars pushed me into curbs and light standards, have been sworn at, cursed, had cigarettes thrown at me, been spit at and cut off. I have dodged doors opening suddenly into the badly constructed bike lanes, wiped out on gravel as someone accelerated out of laneways and once, when a car ran a red light, been struck and airborne, ended up in the seat of a convertible waiting to turn right.
Darcy Shepperd was by all accounts, an angry man. A man with serious alcohol and maybe drug issues. A violent man.
Michael Bryant on the other hand, with his spin machine, Navigator influencing, prodding, moulding and creating his public persona, is displayed as an upright citizen, simply coming home from a night out with his lovely wife, vilely attacked by a maddened courier...
A maddened courier whose bike was indisputably HIT by Bryant.
An already angry man who RIGHTFULLY reacted when Bryant in his fancy car, impatient by all accounts with lane restrictions tried to get by.
It is inarguable that Bryant HIT Sheppard's bike.
Having been hit, I know exactly how he felt.
PISSED.
We know how vulnerable we are.
Cars are big suckers. Cars are heavy. Cars are STEEL. Cyclists on the other hand are flesh and blood, fragile, tender flesh easily hurt by 2 tons of weapon driven by idiots and fools who see as their divine right exclusive access to the roads.
So Sheppard went after Bryant. and WHAT?
That exonerates him from scraping Sheppard off against a fire hydrant like a piece of dirt?
Somehow, in all the justifications, the spin doctoring about "saintly" Bryant, about the gossip mongering pruient recitation over and over of Sheppard's troubled past, somehow, in all that cesspool of justification, the reality that a man was KILLED because he got ANGRY that another man threatened him with a 2 ton machine has been been lost.
Bryant was the man responsible for bringing in Breed-specific legislation.
I guess he saw in Sheppard just another cur to be put down - for the "potential" harm he MIGHT have done. Did anyone notice in all the allegations of violence against his person, NO ONE has reported that Bryant was in any way bruised or cut?
I guess congratulations are due to Navitagor for successfully spining another fairy tale.
Darcy,- your ghost will not rest - for justice is absent.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
A murderer is a murderer by any other name ...bloody government gives Bryant get out of jail free card
So apparently if you are the former Attorney General, you are above the law - sort of like the OSPCA.
The fact that you were the guy who is ALSO responsible for the horrific deaths of THOUSANDS of innocent animals - it was bloody Bryant who brought in the Anti-Pitbull laws and instituted Breed-specific legislation - isn't even a consideration - after all, one can apparently kill a cyclist with impunity and no repercussions!
Yeah - RIGHT Mr. Bryant, sure you did - big mistake!! And bloody media - STOP DWELLING ON SHEPPERD'S PAST ACTIONS - HE IS THE VICTIM HERE. The reality of his past actions is simply not relevant in this case. The reality is that two people got into an altercation - one had a 1000 lb steel machine, the other a 50 lb BICYCLE. And somehow, it's OK that the individual in the CAR ran OVER the cyclist by acting recklessly and with intent seemingly is not at issue according to the courts.
Disgusting.
Miscarriage of justice doesn't even begin to cover it.
The fact that you were the guy who is ALSO responsible for the horrific deaths of THOUSANDS of innocent animals - it was bloody Bryant who brought in the Anti-Pitbull laws and instituted Breed-specific legislation - isn't even a consideration - after all, one can apparently kill a cyclist with impunity and no repercussions!
When Bryant hit his brakes, the vehicle stalled. Peck said Bryant was trying to get away and attempted to get his car started when it stalled again, causing it to lurch forward. That was when “Mr. Bryant’s vehicle came close to or in contact with the rear wheel of Mr. Sheppard’s bike,” Peck said.
Yeah - RIGHT Mr. Bryant, sure you did - big mistake!! And bloody media - STOP DWELLING ON SHEPPERD'S PAST ACTIONS - HE IS THE VICTIM HERE. The reality of his past actions is simply not relevant in this case. The reality is that two people got into an altercation - one had a 1000 lb steel machine, the other a 50 lb BICYCLE. And somehow, it's OK that the individual in the CAR ran OVER the cyclist by acting recklessly and with intent seemingly is not at issue according to the courts.
Disgusting.
Miscarriage of justice doesn't even begin to cover it.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
wow - SHAME on you, Brampton Animal Servies - poor Rambo had two-three broken RIBS!!
You probably remember poor Brittany and Rambo- wrongly seized as "pit bulls" (although registered for several years as boxer mixes with the actual Animal Services that SEIZED them) and left to languish without access to the owners who adored them as the City refused every expert that CONFIRMED they were not pit bulls.
In a final petty reaction, as the owners refused to back down and fought with publicity, litigation and keeping the spotlight on them, Animal Services said they could ONLY release them if they had signs they were "viscious dogs" (when NEITHER animal had EVER had any complaint and in actual fact, numerous people came forward to talk about their sweet natures) and kept them muzzled - this despite the fact that an outside expert CONFIRMED they were not pit bulls.
Well, I wonder if the FACT that Rambo had broken ribs was ONE reason the City was desperate to hold onto him?
Doesn't look very good for Brampton Animal Services when an animal seized illegally, retained despite all evidence that they had no cause, was seriously injured - and effectively, NOT treated.
An article in the Brampton Guardian today reveals that when Rambo's owners picked him up, they noticed almost immediatley "something sticking out under the skin": But within hours of being released April 19, his owners say they saw something jutting out underneath his fur.
What do you think?
Perhaps report them to the OSPCA and get them to investigate - of course then, poor Rambo and Brittany may end up dead.
But SOMEONE's head should roll for this!
In a final petty reaction, as the owners refused to back down and fought with publicity, litigation and keeping the spotlight on them, Animal Services said they could ONLY release them if they had signs they were "viscious dogs" (when NEITHER animal had EVER had any complaint and in actual fact, numerous people came forward to talk about their sweet natures) and kept them muzzled - this despite the fact that an outside expert CONFIRMED they were not pit bulls.
Well, I wonder if the FACT that Rambo had broken ribs was ONE reason the City was desperate to hold onto him?
Doesn't look very good for Brampton Animal Services when an animal seized illegally, retained despite all evidence that they had no cause, was seriously injured - and effectively, NOT treated.
An article in the Brampton Guardian today reveals that when Rambo's owners picked him up, they noticed almost immediatley "something sticking out under the skin": But within hours of being released April 19, his owners say they saw something jutting out underneath his fur.
It was sticking out,” Gaspar said.The City of course and Animal Servies has refused to answer any questions.
The injury was so obvious, they immediately suspected a broken rib, they said.
Two days later, on April 21, X-rays were taken that confirmed two of the floating ribs near the end of Rambo’s rib cage were broken, one of them with a 2-3 mm gap.
The Gaspars had the X-rays sent to a certified radiologist in Toronto— an X-ray expert— who reported the bones were already healing and the injury was, at a minimum, two to four weeks old.
What do you think?
Perhaps report them to the OSPCA and get them to investigate - of course then, poor Rambo and Brittany may end up dead.
But SOMEONE's head should roll for this!
THS rethinks shutting Kitten Nursery
UPDATE: confirmed - Letters to THS volunteers from Bob Hambley says that it is MAY not be cancelled after all:
As I mentioned earlier, James at THS has a superlative program in place just for this as it is a project close to his heart. Even more telling, keep in mind ALL the volunteers who are ready, willing and able to do their 4 hour shifts - over the course of kitten season, that is HUNDREDS of hours and a LOT of people. It would be criminal to ignore the kind of commitment that is exemplified by this program and perfectly illustrates the partnership that can be forged between ordinary toronto animal-lovers and the THS.
FROM craigslist - is this true?
THANK YOU! (11 River St)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2010-05-20, 11:53AM EDT
Reply to: comm-zmshq-1750501187@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you everyone who sent an email or faxed the Toronto Humane Society about the closing of the kitten nursery. The THS has now sent out an email to the volunteers stating that they have decided to review the closure and will leave the decision up to the new board of directors who will be elected on May 30th.
The volunteers at the THS really appreciate your taking the time to help the kittens at the THS. THANK YOU!
http://toronto.en.craigslist.ca/tor/pet/1749507116.html
Location: 11 River St
it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
No final decisions have been made regarding the in-house kitten nursery, staff have made no such recommendation to the Board.So, at the moment, there is hope - take note THS - Toronto WANTS the kitten nursery at THS - more than anything it exemplifies what the THS purports to care about - caring, compassion and shelter for the most vulnverable of little creatures. A craiglist blitz yesterday begged people to email, fax, call the THS to have the program reinstated and the public outcry has obviously had impact.
As I mentioned earlier, James at THS has a superlative program in place just for this as it is a project close to his heart. Even more telling, keep in mind ALL the volunteers who are ready, willing and able to do their 4 hour shifts - over the course of kitten season, that is HUNDREDS of hours and a LOT of people. It would be criminal to ignore the kind of commitment that is exemplified by this program and perfectly illustrates the partnership that can be forged between ordinary toronto animal-lovers and the THS.
FROM craigslist - is this true?
THANK YOU! (11 River St)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2010-05-20, 11:53AM EDT
Reply to: comm-zmshq-1750501187@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thank you everyone who sent an email or faxed the Toronto Humane Society about the closing of the kitten nursery. The THS has now sent out an email to the volunteers stating that they have decided to review the closure and will leave the decision up to the new board of directors who will be elected on May 30th.
The volunteers at the THS really appreciate your taking the time to help the kittens at the THS. THANK YOU!
http://toronto.en.craigslist.ca/tor/pet/1749507116.html
Location: 11 River St
it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Toronto Humane Society Elections -
Fred says it all and eloquently - at One Bark at a Time - highly recommend you read it.
Monday, May 17, 2010
VOTE Faces of Change for compassion and honesty ...
For a look at a dynamic new slate of compassionate, caring individuals with hand's on experience and a passion to inspire, visit the Faces of Change website.
_____________________________________
No matter how many times it happens, I continue to harbour a pointless belief that people will "play fair" and the naive core of me keeps thinking that those who purport to care for animal welfare, somehow are "different" and will avoid the narcissistic, self-congratulatory, defamatory and malicious gossip mongering that is an inevitable reality in the political arena.
Silly me.
As I watch the gathering storm surrounding the upcoming election of a new Board at the Toronto Humane Society, I am increasingly disgusted by the posturing, shrillness of the Old Guard as they scramble to maintain their vice-like grip and influence on positions to which they brought disgrace and disgust.
The reality is that the current Board of Directors – which includes Bob Hambley – allowed many of the actions which the OSPCA alleged took place over the last several years to continue. No one challenged the adversarial and dictatorial Trow nor questioned his decisions and lack of transparency over many YEARS and through numerous allegations, complaints, change in staff and accusations; allowing his management to continue unquestioned – thus destroying what began as a great vision (because truth be told, much of Trow’s visions had merit, the vision unfortunately remained amphorous and the actions were different), and leading to the situation which allowed the OSPCA to take over.
More problematic is that as someone who was intimately involved with the desperate (and often futile race) to save many of the animals that were at the THS when the highly offensive, dictatorial animal-killing OSPCA took over – not ONCE did I see any Board member (Hambley included) in there fighting the good fight. It was staff – primarily support staff and volunteers who scrambled, fought, cried and moved mountains to save those innocent lives that were able to be saved – and in the doing, rescued some that seemed doomed (and to our continued grieving, some we couldn’t save).
From last week’s outrageous and improper use of privileged information :
Tell me that a “slap on the wrist” is adequate for this! Outrageous!
To the shrill bleating of an individual called Margaret Ann Johnson (who is possibly is related to Alan Johnson, a current and long-time THS board member (since 1979, through several scandals) – (from Social Mange AND according to another source, from a family who have had a member on the THS Board of Directors for many years) there have been slurs, slander, outright lies and the appropriation of actions and efforts by OTHERS as these narcissistic, self-congratulatory individuals seek to maintain if not positions, influence on the direction which the THS will now take.
The reality is that much of what transpired at the THS during the Occupation was abetted and aided by individuals who – cowed no doubt by the heavy-handed tactics of the Nazi Guard (aka OSPCA)– signed off on actions that were directly in violation of everything the THS stood for. From the appointment of Garth Jerome (who most decidedly does NOT have the “no kill”, humane vision which the Society exemplified) to acceding to numerous unnecessary, inhumane and political euthanizations of many of the animals (and in truth, decimating the cat population to the sorrow of many volunteers and staff), Hambley et al. have NOT stepped out to be heard.
Now, to compound their lack of action during the actual crisis, in a letter he sent to THS supporters, Hambley now claims credit for many actions that in truth had NOTHING to do with him.
Among other things, he claims to have “removed the OSPCA from the shelter and found homes for all the animals...”- um, NOT. My recollection, which is crystal clear certainly does not include any efforts on the part of Hambley in this regard!
Further, he asserts he “helped expose and led [sic] the movement that stopped the OSPCA plan to euthanize 350 cats and dogs for ringworm ...” well yeah, we heard the media quote him but that was AFTER there was a groundswell of public opinion, hundreds of emails to the premier, the OSPCA, massive and unrelenting reactions to the stories by the general public, veterinarians, rescues, humane societies and others – NOT the THS Board! They certainly were NOT involved in the numerous protests, organized campaigns, and efforts made by the Toronto people to proclaim their outrage and I certainly did not see them walking the protest line with myself and others up in Newmarket.
He also asserts that certain actions were undertaken by the newly minted Faces of Change slate – i.e. legal recourse to the court to have the OSPCA remain, complaints etc – which most certainly are NOT true. The Faces of Change has, among its members, a few (very few) members of ART – which may and indeed, was, responsible for some of what he claims – but has NOTHING to do with any of the actions currently planned by Faces of Change.
The reality is that Faces of Change contains a balanced, passionate, experienced group of individuals with diverse viewpoints that balance and strengthen a central vision - the Toronto Humane Society as a refuge, a rehabilitation centre, a voice for education and reform of animal welfare laws, whose most important and crucial job is to care for all animals – not just the easy ones.
Unlike the current “new” slate of candidates championed by Hambley and handpicked by the VERY Michelle Wasylyshen named above, many of whom have more than likely never set foot in the THS or any other animal rescue facility- the FOC slate actually have direct experience in animal welfare, rescues and in many cases, are intimately familiar with the THS itself, having actually volunteered there. The FOC slate includes veterinarians, publicity experts, a forensic accountant, a lawyer and individuals from other animal rescues, an eclectic, passionate group who through EXPERIENCE and their actual actions have showed themselves to be champions of a Shelter that believes every animal deserves a chance.
May 30th is coming up quick – EDUCATE yourself and decide for yourself whether the ineffective, bumbling of the Old Guard with their underhanded tactics is preferable to a transparent, clean slate of individuals whose combined experience in animal welfare can only create what most of us here in Toronto want to see – a revitalized, transparent, honest and HUMANE Toronto Humane Society where compassion rules and every life counts.
_____________________________________
No matter how many times it happens, I continue to harbour a pointless belief that people will "play fair" and the naive core of me keeps thinking that those who purport to care for animal welfare, somehow are "different" and will avoid the narcissistic, self-congratulatory, defamatory and malicious gossip mongering that is an inevitable reality in the political arena.
Silly me.
As I watch the gathering storm surrounding the upcoming election of a new Board at the Toronto Humane Society, I am increasingly disgusted by the posturing, shrillness of the Old Guard as they scramble to maintain their vice-like grip and influence on positions to which they brought disgrace and disgust.
The reality is that the current Board of Directors – which includes Bob Hambley – allowed many of the actions which the OSPCA alleged took place over the last several years to continue. No one challenged the adversarial and dictatorial Trow nor questioned his decisions and lack of transparency over many YEARS and through numerous allegations, complaints, change in staff and accusations; allowing his management to continue unquestioned – thus destroying what began as a great vision (because truth be told, much of Trow’s visions had merit, the vision unfortunately remained amphorous and the actions were different), and leading to the situation which allowed the OSPCA to take over.
More problematic is that as someone who was intimately involved with the desperate (and often futile race) to save many of the animals that were at the THS when the highly offensive, dictatorial animal-killing OSPCA took over – not ONCE did I see any Board member (Hambley included) in there fighting the good fight. It was staff – primarily support staff and volunteers who scrambled, fought, cried and moved mountains to save those innocent lives that were able to be saved – and in the doing, rescued some that seemed doomed (and to our continued grieving, some we couldn’t save).
From last week’s outrageous and improper use of privileged information :
The supervisor of the Toronto Humane Society board election has rebuked one of the two competing slates for sending a campaign message to THS members using email addresses obtained from the public relations firm which employs the slate’s organizer.
The “Save the THS” slate was assembled by Michelle Wasylyshen, an employee of the Sussex Strategy Group, which worked for the THS in 2009.
According to the election supervisor, former judge Sydney Robins, Sussex gave the slate THS members’ emails without the society’s knowledge.
“The list clearly ought not to have been transferred to the Save the THS slate and its use thereof was improper,” Robins wrote to candidates.
Wasylyshen has apologized.
Daniel Dale
Tell me that a “slap on the wrist” is adequate for this! Outrageous!
To the shrill bleating of an individual called Margaret Ann Johnson (who is possibly is related to Alan Johnson, a current and long-time THS board member (since 1979, through several scandals) – (from Social Mange AND according to another source, from a family who have had a member on the THS Board of Directors for many years) there have been slurs, slander, outright lies and the appropriation of actions and efforts by OTHERS as these narcissistic, self-congratulatory individuals seek to maintain if not positions, influence on the direction which the THS will now take.
The reality is that much of what transpired at the THS during the Occupation was abetted and aided by individuals who – cowed no doubt by the heavy-handed tactics of the Nazi Guard (aka OSPCA)– signed off on actions that were directly in violation of everything the THS stood for. From the appointment of Garth Jerome (who most decidedly does NOT have the “no kill”, humane vision which the Society exemplified) to acceding to numerous unnecessary, inhumane and political euthanizations of many of the animals (and in truth, decimating the cat population to the sorrow of many volunteers and staff), Hambley et al. have NOT stepped out to be heard.
Now, to compound their lack of action during the actual crisis, in a letter he sent to THS supporters, Hambley now claims credit for many actions that in truth had NOTHING to do with him.
Among other things, he claims to have “removed the OSPCA from the shelter and found homes for all the animals...”- um, NOT. My recollection, which is crystal clear certainly does not include any efforts on the part of Hambley in this regard!
Further, he asserts he “helped expose and led [sic] the movement that stopped the OSPCA plan to euthanize 350 cats and dogs for ringworm ...” well yeah, we heard the media quote him but that was AFTER there was a groundswell of public opinion, hundreds of emails to the premier, the OSPCA, massive and unrelenting reactions to the stories by the general public, veterinarians, rescues, humane societies and others – NOT the THS Board! They certainly were NOT involved in the numerous protests, organized campaigns, and efforts made by the Toronto people to proclaim their outrage and I certainly did not see them walking the protest line with myself and others up in Newmarket.
He also asserts that certain actions were undertaken by the newly minted Faces of Change slate – i.e. legal recourse to the court to have the OSPCA remain, complaints etc – which most certainly are NOT true. The Faces of Change has, among its members, a few (very few) members of ART – which may and indeed, was, responsible for some of what he claims – but has NOTHING to do with any of the actions currently planned by Faces of Change.
The reality is that Faces of Change contains a balanced, passionate, experienced group of individuals with diverse viewpoints that balance and strengthen a central vision - the Toronto Humane Society as a refuge, a rehabilitation centre, a voice for education and reform of animal welfare laws, whose most important and crucial job is to care for all animals – not just the easy ones.
Unlike the current “new” slate of candidates championed by Hambley and handpicked by the VERY Michelle Wasylyshen named above, many of whom have more than likely never set foot in the THS or any other animal rescue facility- the FOC slate actually have direct experience in animal welfare, rescues and in many cases, are intimately familiar with the THS itself, having actually volunteered there. The FOC slate includes veterinarians, publicity experts, a forensic accountant, a lawyer and individuals from other animal rescues, an eclectic, passionate group who through EXPERIENCE and their actual actions have showed themselves to be champions of a Shelter that believes every animal deserves a chance.
May 30th is coming up quick – EDUCATE yourself and decide for yourself whether the ineffective, bumbling of the Old Guard with their underhanded tactics is preferable to a transparent, clean slate of individuals whose combined experience in animal welfare can only create what most of us here in Toronto want to see – a revitalized, transparent, honest and HUMANE Toronto Humane Society where compassion rules and every life counts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)