Saturday, January 28, 2012

Horror in Peterborogh - Part the Second

Summary - as usual, the animals are the ones who lose

Laid out below, is MY take on the Horror in Peterborough.

What I see from this whole thing is dogs who have been caught between a rock and a hard place. Dogs first and foremost abandoned and neglected by their guardians. Then ignored by the organization that is MANDATED to protect them. Then "rescued" by a group which may very well fall under the auspices of groups which has yet to prove themselves to be on the up and up. Dog which after what appears to be a horrific experience remain without the benefit of a certified vet treating them. Something smells, and smells BIG TIME

FIRST - the "Rescue" shenanigans:

First, according to a flurry of facebook entries on numerous sites, it appears the dogs are now in the care of the so-called Give A Dog a Second Chance, which in reality is now in actuality The Doggies Place Day Care and Boarding with an ostensible rescue element.  Confused yet?  Then, on a number of sites, pleas for a chip in for the dog's vet care appeared and dog lovers, being the kind, generous people they are, ARE chipping in.

Unfortunately, the dogs are NOT actually WITH  a vet right now - although for some odd reason they have been to a groomer's and seen a vet tech?

The same dogs that were emaciated, starving, filthy and had ingested drywall, wood and other non-edible materials?  The same dogs that are in such dire shape? 

After several calls from people to the vet clinic at which these dogs were apparently being vetted, but, OH LOOK, they WEREN'T there - it seems they "will be there - Monday" - Monday??  Monday now after several calls to the clinic.  (several of us had asked for the name of the clinic directly.).

  1. So, as far as i can see, these dogs were rescued from an abandoned house after pleas for their rescue were ignored by the OSPCA affiliated Peterborough humane society.
  2. The dogs - other than seeing a groomer and a vet tech - have NOT been vetted by a certified vet despite their apparent very precarious state - starving, ingested inedible and potentially life-threatening materials and severely neglected.  ONLY after several calls to the clinic in question (which to be clear, is a reputable and decent vet facility) did it suddenly emerge the dogs are NOW due to be brought in Monday.
  3. The Peterborough Humane Society is vacillating on whether or not they know anything about this whole debacle.

SECOND- the OSPCA and Peterborough Humane Society "not my problem" justification

 So, in typical bureaucratic fashion, the Peterborough Humane Society denies any knowledge (per se) of the situation in the home in Peterborough:  that is, in a roundabout way, they assert they can't (due to the law) talk about ongoing investigations.  Here is the conversation:

My most recent reply:

Thank you for your reply although I'm disappointed with the content. As OSPCA inspectors, pretty well have carte blanche under the government's own mandate, I don't entirely understand your assertion that OSPCA inspectors do not have the right to enter a private residence without a warrant - although that is moot - as 6 weeks (if that is the term in question) is more than adequate time to secure one if the situation was in fact, as dire, has I have ascertained from several sources.
The fact that it sounds as if there is an ongoing investigation would be encouraging, if it weren't for the fact that those dogs were left in horrendous conditions - and are now in hardly a better state if the information on the "rescue" involved is in any way accurate (and after many years of awareness about this self-termed rescue I am confident my information is good). I have learned, for instance, that the dogs still have NOT seen a vet - which for dogs which apparently have ingested drywall, wood and other non-edible materials is frighteningly irresponsible.
Disappointing and unfortunately, confirms every intervention with the OSPCA and OSPCA affiliates I have had to date.
yours truly,
sheenagh murphy
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Wendy Ryan wrote:
I want very much to answer your questions. Under the Ontario SPCA Act we are restricted by the privacy act when it comes to discussing any ongoing investigation.
Ontario SPCA Agents and Inspectors can attend and act when facts lead an officer to believe that animals are possibly in distress. We do not have the authority to enter a private dwelling without a warrant.
As to the rescue group I cannot comment on their actions nor do we know the location of the dogs.
I do wish I could provide you with more but I am bound by law and not permitted to do so.
Wendy Ryan
Executive Director

My original email to the Peterborough Humane Society:

Subject: RE: Abandoned dogs from House - 541 Sherbrooke Street
As an animal advocate, I'm trying to ascertain the truth of assertions that the Peterborough Humane Society purportedly ignored repeated requests to rescue dogs from the above-noted house.
Can you confirm or deny that your organization was aware of the plight of these dogs?
That the Peterborough humane society was monitoring the situation? Were you aware if the dogs were being visited, fed, exercised or in any way cared for?
I have grave concerns on a number of levels. First, if the truth was that these dogs were locked in an abandoned house, and your facility HAS the authority under the auspices of the OSPCA to enter and seize neglected or abandoned dogs, why was this not done?
Second, if this is NOT the case - do you believe the dogs were being cared for?


  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. Vanessa, I guess you had second thoughts, but if you want to email me, my email is in my profile above

  3. I would like to bring another point to attention. It is not only the rescue who is attempting to make money off the backs of these poor animals. There is another, just as unsavory very questionable organization who has been called in by this rescue group to put up a ChipIn fund to raise money for the vet fees. I have strongly urged people to donate directly to the vet only. When that wasn't acceptable someone offered to pay the vet in full for their emergency care, who pick up the dogs and take them to their own vet and find foster homes. No expense to the rescue. They were turned down. There are many people attempting to make money from the horrors these dogs "purportedly" have been through. I am not even sure any more if the story has any truth to it. The only public account of it in the newspaper was given by the rescuer. No one else saw the house or the dogs in the house and anyone who could be connected claim they have never heard of the situation. Be careful who you donate to and don't believe everything you read on th
    e internet and on someone's impressive looking website.

  4. Does a vet, include a back yard shed with a idiot pretending to be a doctor? Dishing out meds, without any tests being done, then asking for donations? I guess its hard to give the vets name, unless the shed has a phone number and address. lol