Say it ain't so, Trow ....

Once upon a time there was a man with what many felt was a soft heart. A great BIG cushy heart that loved animals – all animals – loved them to distraction. This man no doubt meant well – but what this man didn’t get is that loving animals extravagantly, loving animals passionately, loving animals to the point where balance, compassion, understanding and awareness are no longer part of the equation really isn’t loving at all – it is obsession.

It is hoarding.

It is narcissism to the highest degree.

For it is sad, but true, that sometimes in loving, we have to let go. True courage and a strong, enduring love give us the strength to recognize our limits. It gives us the courage to know what is best for the animal – not what is easier on our hearts or our own selfish needs.

It describes a man who is a genius at  manipulation.

Whose obsession continues after 20+ years to the extent that rather than allow the THS to blossom as it should ... rather than allow the new, strong THS to grow, his selfish, self-serving, obsessive need to dictate and control are making him take a yet another run for the Board of this beleaguered organization.

Still reeling from the allegations and mismanagement under his reign, the THS is only now beginning to become what it was meant to be.

This man claims to be the voice for the animals.

I wonder who spoke for Diva as she lay dying in her kennel?

I know a volunteer did – begging that a kind word, warm hands and a compassionate needle would release her from her torment. Instead, big hearted Trow who “loved” animals so much refused permission for compassionate euthanasia (for a dog riddled with cancer and dying in pain).

Who spoke for the cats stacked row on row on row, huddled in small dirty cages, sitting in their own feces and urine, desperate to stretch and play and jump as cats should. Yet there they sat, week after interminable week.

Because this man’s “big” heart said he couldn’t say no. This man’s heart said the THS could handle it.

But it couldn’t.

Need volunteers? Caring, compassionate hands to nurture and pet and hold with tenderness and care even for a moment those poor cats? No, according to Mr. Trow, there were “more than enough”. I know because two of my daughters sought to be volunteers twice over the course of a year and were told no volunteer positions were available … there were “more than enough”.

And so the cats sat. Unseen. Uncared for other than the basics of food and sometimes water. No tender hand. No brush along rough fur. No interaction.

While those who loved them, those who cared passionately about them, those that stayed despite all, ran themselves ragged trying to give compassion to far too many.

I remember a long, brutally hot summer when the heat beat down like punishment on the pristine grass which Mr. Trow insisted be laid each Spring. A summer when one of a series of firings of ACWs and staff that I personally experienced left kennels bursting with needy dogs. Dogs with issues. Dogs with no outlet for their boundless energy. No opportunity to spend any but a few stolen moments relieving themselves outside.

A summer when arriving for my early morning shift to walk, instead I spent several hours just filling empty water bowls. Over and over. Because there were no people you see to deal with all these dogs and while the staff that remained had huge hearts and cared desperately, few hands can only accomplish so much.

I remember filling those bowls over and over … finishing the rows upon rows of kennels only to start again as the desperately thirsty animals had already finished what I had poured.

Volunteers and sadly depleted staff would scuttle along the corridors of the THS, frantic to relieve for a moment the awful tedium of a pointless existence for the animals trapped within its confines … heads down, keeping ourselves small and non-offensive.

Because narcissism demands an audience.

Self-obsession and an unshakeable belief in your own inalienable right to make every decision require instant obedience.

Why did we stay?

Because when all was said and done, those few of us that survived those years, did so because we felt the animals were better off with us there rather than not.

We stayed because at its core, without the burden of a super-ego and a man who thought himself God, the core values were right. Which makes it sadder – that his vision in many respects was wonderful – it was just in the doing that his ego took precedence.

The THS has been, was, and will again be the voice of the animals.

It should and will stand as a beacon for the unwanted, the neglected, the lost, the hurt and the needy.

If Tim Trow TRULY loved the animals he wouldn’t now be running for the Board together with his cohorts and minions.

If Tim Trow TRULY cared about the future of the THS he would accept his defeat with dignity and stand down.

If Tim Trow TRULY cared about the animals he purports to “love’ he would accept that the direction the THS is now taking is what is right and best for the animals.

But he doesn’t.

His ego, his sense of self-entitlement, his obsessiveness and need to control supersede the reality of a thriving THS.

Because it is, in the end, all about Tim.. not the animals.

Draconian legislation against dogs proposed by Nova Scotia....

UPDATE: HERE - sounds like a lot of people had a lot to say- and reading this, the issue really does seem to be all about ONE man who sounds like a complete dick.  As I've said before, it is an OWNER issue not a 'breed' issue.

Please read FrogDog's blog here, and PetConnection here to learn about the absolutely UNBELIEBABLE legislation being proposed by the Province of Nova Scotia.  Draconian doesn't begin to cover this small-minded, ill informed, pointless legislation being proposed. WRITE to the people below (have lifted from FrogDog's blog) and let these individuals know what you think of this.  Nova Scotia relies HEAVILY on tourism - so let them know that their livelihood will most definitely be impacted with this type of garbage.

Mayor.Mooney@townofyarmouth.ca; DeputyMayor.Boudreau@townofyarmouth.ca; Councillor.Dares@townofyarmouth.ca; Councillor.Langille@townofyarmouth.ca; Councillor.MacIsaac@townofyarmouth.ca; Councillor.MacKenzie@townofyarmouth.ca;
Councillor.Pink@townofyarmouth.ca



Text of an email sent to the above-noted individuals:


I was absolutely appalled to read the content of this proposed legislation.


I am not sure on what basis such draconian legislation has been drafted - nor what the Province of Nova Scotia thinks to accomplish by this small-minded, ill-fated, badly drafted legislation which is based on innuendo, rumour and a glaring lack of common sense.

If the individuals who propose this legislation had done their homework, even a cursory search on the internet will bring up dozens of incidents where stupid legislation such as banning a certain "breed" has been proven to be ineffective and pointless and done nothing to deal with the issues they are ostensibly supposed to address. Further, condemning a dog based on ONE bite with no recourse is nothing short of pure maliciousness; the reality is that there are cases where the dog has been provoked, attacked, beaten, mistreated or otherwise placed in a situation where its only recourse is to bite. The only balanced response would be to look at each case individually, based on the facts of THAT case, not wholesale destruction of often tolerant, loving pets!

Over the past several years, numerous cities, towns, provinces, states and COUNTRIES have rethought the belief that banning a certain 'breed' of dog somehow mitigates the problem of 'dangerous' dogs. There have been a record number of revocations of such breed bans - as statistics clearly show that banning a specific breed does not in any way decrease the number or severity of dog bites.

The bottom line is that the issue is seldom the DOG and almost ALWAYS the OWNER. Drafting legislation to deal with abusive owners, those who mistreat or actively encourage their animals to fight and develop aggressiveness, owners who neglect and starve or ignore their animals, owners who refuse to exercise responsible guardianship over their dogs - is the answer - NOT targeting the innocent victim - the dog.

The proviso that 'dangerous' dogs can be shot on sight is unbelievable. The reality is that an individual who is frightened of dogs could easily misunderstand even the friendly overtures of a dog that comes up to them. This type of decision-making is subjective to the highest degree and one would think that a town's animal services department with trained staff would be the individuals who SHOULD deal with dogs that are loose or appear to be otherwise "at large". My own dog, a black shepherd named Llyr is a goofball who despite repeated instruction STILL tends to bound towards an individual with a big grin and leaps at them would be 'shot at will' based on this legislation. The biggest issue faced by anyone he actually reached would be being licked to death!

My husband and I have been actively researching towns in Nova Scotia as we had pretty well decided that retirement in your province was our dream. I can promise you, that we would ASSUREDLY rethink that if legislation such as this was in place. As animal lovers, I could not and would not choose to live in a place that treats my beloved pets like some sort of slavering monsters!

Please do your research. There is absolutely NO doubt that if you explore the realities of most of the legislation as drafted, there are myriad examples of places that enacted similar legislation to NO effect. There are a substantial number of places, in truth, that having seen the error of their ways- have rethought this knee jerk reaction espoused by alarmists.

I sincerely hope that this whole issue is rethought and this legislation definitively shelved.

Yours sincerely,

There are MANY Patricks out there ...

By now, anyone interested in animal welfare is aware of poor Patrick, the pit bull that was starved almost to death then dumped like garbage down a chute. This sweet pit somehow found the will to survive and the caring intervention of a lot of people have seen his gradual and remarkable improvement.

My heart, like everyone else's goes out to this brave boy - and hurts when I think of how neglected, unloved and horribly he was treated.

So MANY people want to adopt Patrick!

If even half of those who are not chosen could PLEASE go to your nearest shelter, rescue or pound - look around and see the many, many neglected, unloved and hopless dogs are OUT there - as deserving, as needing and as hopeful of finding a place to call home.

Think of our own new and wonderful Toronto Humane Society

Check out Toronto Animal Services.

There is Bear in St. Catherine's ...

What about Mrs. Potts at the Niargara Humane Society?  And many other beautiful dogs too










There are thousands of loving, deserving dogs (and other animals) out there.  Patrick can only find one home - but one home is all ANY of these dogs need.

Open your heart to a shelter dog and make their lives bloom.

Easter is NOT the time to buy a rabbit!

Easter is coming and pet stores are chockful of sweet, cuddly little bunnies.

Impulse buys, rabbits by the thousands are dumped with weeks of Easter Sunday as the realities of pet care sinks in and the novelty of having an "easter bunny" dissipates. 

I have a memory which haunts me.

Many years ago, when I was first house-hunting I went into one house where an older couple were looking to sell - downsizing. In their spotless basement was a wire cage - wire floor, nothing else - a water bottle, the little white rabbit sat there, alone in the basement, by himself, his feet being punished by the wire cage bottom.  Spotlessly clean... and all I could think was he sat there, hour after hour, day after day, week after week, the only interaction when they changed his water or fed him. no affection, no company, no love, no exercise.  I didn't even have a lot of knoweldge about rabbits then but all these years later, that little rabbit haunts me ..... in hindsight, I wish desperately I had done something - offered to take him, found him a home.  But caught up in my own life with 4 small kids, 3 cats, a needy dog and a fulltme job I didn't.  I suffer for that now, thinking of that sad little rabbit.
A Toronto Star article this morning aptly describes how the thoughtless actions of silly people bring anguish, abandonment and often death to thousands of little rabbits every year.

“Easter sucks to be a rabbit,” says Lush, whose Milton-based charity places bunnies with volunteer foster families until permanent homes are found. There are 50 rabbits in foster families at any given time.

Rabbit Rescue has some excellent advice on rabbits - and details clearly the time, care and work that goes into caring for a rabbit. Rabbits make terrific pets - but you have to be cognizant of what is involved.

Some facts about bunnies:

• lifespans can be 10 years or longer
• require regular exericse - will suffer if left to languish in a cage
• require regular interaction - they are social, affectionate and curious
• "bunny-proofing" is a MUST - rabbits chew and electrical wires and other hazards must be avoided
• spaying or neutering is HIGHLY recommended as they reach maturity
• they do NOT make good pets for small children - small children want to pick them up and cuddle them and this will frighten and make the rabbit kick or nip to get away and OFTEN results in severe injury

The House Rabbit Society has an excellent overview of what pet rabbits require - and are blunt that rabbits require almost as much effort and work as a dog.
So PLEASE think twice and then again before buying a bunny for that one moment on Easter Sunday ... and give your child a stuffed rabbit or a chocolate one instead.

Easter Bunny

by Mary Brandolino

In memory of all the bunnies we couldn't save.

I remember Easter Sunday

It was colorful and fun

The new life that I'd begun

In my new cage.

I was just a little thing

When they brought me from the store

And they put me on the floor

In my cage.

They would take me out to play

Love and pet me all the time

Then at day's end I would climb

In my cage.

But as days and weeks went by

I saw less of them it seemed

Of their loving touch I dreamed

In my cage.

In the night outside their house

I felt sad and so neglected

Often scared and unprotected

In my cage.

In the dry or rainy weather

Sometimes hotter sometimes colder

I just sat there growing older

In my cage.

The cat and dog raced by me

Playing with each other only

While I sat there feeling lonely

In my cage.

Upon the fresh green grass

Children skipped and laughed all day

I could only watch them play

From my cage.

They used to take me out

And let me scamper in the sun

I no longer get to run

In my cage.

Once a cute and cuddly bunny

Like a little ball of cotton

Now I'm grown up and forgotten

In my cage.

I don't know what went wrong

At the home I did inhabit

I just grew to be a rabbit

In my cage.

But they've brought me to the pound

I was once loved and enjoyed

Now I wait to be destroyed

In my cage.

UPDATE: As of yesterday, Venus has found a home!!!!

This beautiful girl has finally been given her chance - THANK you to the people who saw in her what many of us had seen for years - a loving, caring, loyal and passionate spirit.  Be happy, little girl.

BC SPCA dropped the ball - BIG time in sled dog slaughter

Over at the Dogster blog- read this article.

Apparently the man who slaughtered the dogs asked for help, not once but TWICE. The first time he was turned down because according to the "experts" at the SPCA, sled dogs were not "adoptable". The second time (5 months later) .. see below:

Five months after the cull, which sent the man into major post-traumatic stress disorder, he once again contacted the SPCA, looking for homes for some of the pack’s remaining dogs. The Sun obtained a copy of the email he sent. It states:



“I understood…that there were to be some dogs going to you for adoption? Is that indeed happening? Or should I just show up with a truck full so they can get off the chain and get some attention, exercise, stop fighting, etc….I am happy to bring some down to stop cruelty they are going through here.

“This is me as a bystander (I am off due to injury to both arms). I am the only one who has made any effort to move dogs. We still have almost 60 dogs too many, and a new litter of pups to be given away. Can you please give me a call so I know something can be done. It’s breaking my heart.”

Drever wrote back once again that after consulting with behaviorists, she has deemed the animals unadoptable. She said she would conduct an inspection of the Outdoor Adventures facility. She never did.

The reality is that when animals are perceived merely as "profit", bad things happen to them. When their usefulness in terms of serving the company ends, they are seeb as liabilities - and treated not like living, breathing creatures but rather, as disposable (usually in the cheapest  way). There have been issues before with how sled dogs used in businesses are treated; legislation needs to happen that ensures there is a retirement plan in place or at the very least, that the number of dogs are restricted to what is able to be handled both when business is brisk and when it slows down.

While the BC SPCA should not have been left with the responsibility of being dumped with 100+, largely unadoptable dogs because a profitable company decided they were now a liability - they SHOULD have investigated and ensured that when THEY turned them down, there were alternative plans in place. That is ostensibly the RESPONSIBILITY of any humane society!

There are many villians in this sad, tragic story - and each must be made to shoulder their share of the responsiblity.


the losers in all this were the dogs that met such a cruel end.

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.