Horror in Whistler

As details emerge about the horrific slaughter of up to 100 healthy sled dogs in British Columbia, reaction has been swift and decided.  A press release (link brings you to a pdf of the review decision) details the slaughter, and it is enough to turn your stomach.  It also leaves some huge questions.

Outdoor Adventures Whistler ("OAW"") is owned by Joey Houssian, son of the founder of Intrawest Corp., Joe Houssian.   Tourism Whistler has wisely suspended reservations for dog sledding via OAW and in my opinion, should suspend ALL business dealings with that company.

The Globe details some graphic descriptions of the slaughter, which took place in full view of the other dogs, consisted of varous forms of "execution-style" killing and included the use of guns, knives and in some cases, resulted in severe pain and suffering by some of the dogs (by all of them emotionally and mentally) but also physically.

Some salient points:

• a veternarian was initially contacted and refused (rightfully so) to kill healthy dogs; my question: why were OTHER vets not contacted?  There is no doubt that there are many vets out there that would have undertaken to euthanize becuase they had no moral qualms about killing healthy animals - it happens all the time
• why was the timeline so limited?  He talks about the slaughter going on all day - why could he not have killed them (if that was his intention no matter what) - in small increments - in a humane manner and apart from where the other dogs had to witness the horrific deaths and have pain and suffering in mind and heart on top of everything else;
• why was this done entirely by him? There were, by all accounts, at the least 300 dogs in total (before the slaughter) - that entails a LOT of care - which means he would have had to have a fair number of workers who helped him feed/water/care for the dogs - so where were these people? 

There are as many questions remaining as there have been answered. Bottom line is that both the company AND the employee should be prosecuted for cruelty. While the law is laughably remiss in respect of really "punishing" individuals/companies that have been proven to be guilty, at least the process should be followed.  I would find it difficult to understand that they could NOT find the individual who actually conducted this horror guilty - as according to the Review, his OWN WORDS condemn it. 

And, as his employer, OAW should and MUST be held accountable for viewing profit as the bottom line - even when talking about living, breathing creatures.