# Dog euthanized by OSPCA without owner knowing



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

Dog euthanized by OSPCA without owner knowing - thestar.com

Seriously?
It's amazing that this organization will actually drive 150km there and back to snatch a dog out of its back yard but not bother to contact the owner or the dog's vet.


----------



## MarleyGSD (Sep 29, 2010)

i agree completely that before the dog is put down the owner should absolutely be notified! But im curious to see how that case pans out because if the dog really was neglected of treatment, i wish he could have been found sooner and gotten proper care


----------



## Rerun (Feb 27, 2006)

She "laid" him in the backyard with a bed and left for the day? Hadn't given him his medication in weeks because he hadn't needed it? Sorry, I don't believe that! Arthritis doesn't just get better like that in a 16 yr old large breed dog. If she had to "lay" him in the backyard with a bed before she left for teh day, it was time for that poor dog to be put out of his misery.

I agree with the SPCA.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

Canine controversy dogs OSPCA | Toronto & GTA | News | Toronto Sun


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

It sounds like it was time, but they should not have lied to her. If I was animal control and saw a dog that was complained about in a yard, with no shelter and having trouble in the heat of the day, I would have taken the dog. It was seen by vets, good. 

I think that if I cared about my sixteen year old pet it would be me going and getting it on day one, and not my kid calling on day two. 

But, I don't know, I think that they should let the owner know prior to euthanizing unless the dog's pain was such that it could not wait.


----------



## BGSD (Mar 24, 2011)

I'm sorry, but you can't just walk into someone's house and take their dog or anything else. Isn't that illegal? I know the police notified the SPCA, but doesn't the police need some sort of warrant in order to do this?


----------



## fuzzybunny (Apr 29, 2011)

Rerun said:


> She "laid" him in the backyard with a bed and left for the day? Hadn't given him his medication in weeks because he hadn't needed it? Sorry, I don't believe that! Arthritis doesn't just get better like that in a 16 yr old large breed dog. If she had to "lay" him in the backyard with a bed before she left for teh day, it was time for that poor dog to be put out of his misery.
> 
> I agree with the SPCA.


I agree as well. I realize it is probably heartbreaking for the owner but I doubt the SPCA would lie about his condition. They stated the dog was in agony.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

fuzzybunny said:


> I agree as well. I realize it is probably heartbreaking for the owner but I doubt the SPCA would lie about his condition. They stated the dog was in agony.


Let's not forget that this is also the same organization that wanted to kill 360 dogs in their care because of a ringworm outbreak, it was later lowered to 99 (the number which actually *HAD* ringorm at least) due to public outrage?


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

If it is hot and a dog has no shelter and the dog seems to be in trouble, no, animal control should be able to take the dog and leave a notice, who has the dog. 

If the dog has shelter and water. Then animal control should leave the dog there and if they want to contact the owners, they should do so. 

I do not know what the laws are in Canada. Not sure what the law is here. We have no government run shelter and the dog warden might house an animal at the private shelter.


----------



## fuzzybunny (Apr 29, 2011)

Jax's Mom said:


> Let's not forget that this is also the same organization that wanted to kill 360 dogs in their care because of a ringworm outbreak, it was later lowered to 99 (the number which actually *HAD* ringorm at least) due to public outrage?


That's not really the same situation though. Were not talking about an outbreak here. I certainly didn't agree with that situation but I can also understand the predicament they were in and what led to making that decision. This is one dog that was old, had a health problem, was left in my opinion without proper shelter or care. The SPCA was called by a neighbour so obviously others were concerned for his well-being. I think the owner was neglectful and I don't believe the SPCA would honestly put one dog down considering the circumstances if there wasn't a good reason. There are extremely difficult decisions that need to be made daily and I'm glad I don't have to make them.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

At any given time you can find protests outside of this organization's headquarters. They rake in millions of dollars a year from people who hear the pretty name Society for the _Prevention_ of *Cruelty* to _*Animals*_ and watch their sad kitten commercials and open their wallets like zombies, if that wasn't enough, they actually go into people's homes to take their animals while they're at work (this isn't the only case) and then offer to sell them back to them for thousands of dollars.
If these owners were so cruel, why would they spend *years* offering to sell their pets back to them?


----------



## TriadGSD (Feb 19, 2011)

BGSD said:


> I'm sorry, but you can't just walk into someone's house and take their dog or anything else. Isn't that illegal? I know the police notified the SPCA, but doesn't the police need some sort of warrant in order to do this?


i think they can take the dog if they find physical abuse (tick infestation , embedded chain in the neck etc.) but, if the dog looked like that in the picture she looked like she was well taken care of. they had no reason to take it


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

fuzzybunny said:


> I think the owner was neglectful and I don't believe the SPCA would honestly put one dog down considering the circumstances if there wasn't a good reason. There are extremely difficult decisions that need to be made daily and I'm glad I don't have to make them.


I don't mean to start a fight here but I'm just livid that people don't want to see what's going on. Everyone should drive to their shelter and have some conversations with the people outside protesting. Neglectful, uncaring, guilty owners don't camp outside an animal shelter. (Most of the time)


----------



## fuzzybunny (Apr 29, 2011)

You could be absolutely right and they could have put the dog down without a good enough reason, but what if the dog really was in agony? We just don't know so I don't want to be too quick to judge the decision.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

The fact that the dog's vetretarian is offering her name to the news leads me to believe the dog was not in that badly neglected. 

This happens more than rarely.


----------



## ozzymama (Jan 17, 2005)

This is kinda the way this organization tends to work. I saw this a couple weeks ago, one of my friends keeps track of all OSPCA BS (she sent me the links) ever since she went through something similar with a foster dog - well not similar, but OSPCA BS nonetheless. Talk about a corrupt organization.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

I don't know what outrages me more about them, that any innocent pet owner could fall victim or that they can take in so much money under the guise of animal protection when that money could be put to such better use.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

OSPCA's killer streak a sign of too much power | Columnists | Opinion | Toronto Sun



> The report on the slaughter of animals at the OSPCA, supposedly for ringworm, makes the raid on the Toronto Humane Society a couple of years ago seem more questionable than it was.
> 
> The investigation by former Ontario Superior Court Chief Justice Patrick LeSage and University of Guelph veterinarian Alan Meek into the OSPCA’s Newmarket shelter killing 99 animals to halt an outbreak of virulent ringworm, makes the OSPCA look incompetent or heartless — or both.
> 
> ...


----------



## Stevenzachsmom (Mar 3, 2008)

You need to be very careful who you donate money to. I only support the independent shelters close to home. Those I can investigate myself, get a feel for and look at their policies. I do NOT donate to National organizations that aren't going to do a darned thing for the animals in my own area. I do not donate to organization who are not transparent with their policies and I feel I cannot trust. A big name with a so-called good reputation mean nothing to me.


----------



## ILGHAUS (Nov 25, 2002)

> I only support the independent shelters close to home.


A good way to handle donations. I only have one large national organization that I would ever consider giving to and that is only because I know of their work on local levels.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

I only donate food and bleach, never money. 

But still, donated food and bleach means less money can be spent. 

But our shelter is a volunteer run shelter with no government funds. 

I would not use the case of a 16 year old dog, left without shelter, and showing neurological signs to be your alamo though. The vet MAY have seen that dog 2 days ago and it could have been just fine then. But sometimes things change fast. 

Our shepherd mix ate her food in the morning and my dad talked to her and all was fine, at 10 AM the police stopped because she was foaming at the mouth. They saw she was having a siezure. We took her immediately to the vet, and they determined that there were neurological signs and it was time. We did have the opportunity to say good bye. She was almost 15. Things turned from fine to awful in 2 hours -- and she did have shelter.

It bothers me that the dog had no shelter out there. We cannot completely hamstring animal control.

If my old dog was picked up for some reason and seemed to be in serious pain, I think I would hope they would euthanize the dog so she would not suffer needlessly. In many places here (what makes the news) they spend bundles keeping every migrant goose with an arrow through it neck alive. If a dog has heartworm, and needs a leg amputated, and is burned over a percentage of its body, they will try to save it. If a dog is in perfect shape, they will give it three days and then euthanize. I pretty much think that is scandalous too.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

I think the argument here is that these people are famous for snatching people's pets when theyre unattended and then selling them back to the owners for thousands of dollars.

Normally when someone's pet is stolen, they're expecting to be raked over the coals to get the dog back, in this case, they told the owner's son _as the dog was being euthanized_ that they're working on it and will get back to them.

I can understand if the dog needed to be euthanized, but why lie about it, if it was truely necessary? 

I could just be paranoid but my guess is because if an owner has evidence that they were just at the vet, and they get their pet back alive to prove the organization made another mistake, they're looking at another law suit, so it's best to destroy the evidence.


----------



## innocents_lost (Jul 1, 2011)

*get the facts straight*

I think you need to realize the facts here. The OSPCA can not take a dog with out it being in immediate distress or from inside a dwelling. This animal was in plan sight and in immediate distress and not inside a dwelling. The OSPCA can also not make the decision to Euthanize a dog that is not their property this dog was the property of the owner there for the only one who could make the decision to euthanize was the vet they took the dog to. If the dog was in immediate distress to justify the removal from the lard and then deemed to be suffering to the point the the vet it was taken to said the only option was to end its suffering. The owner herself said she had to "lay" the dog out in the yard and a bed is not by any means adiquet shelter if he was that old and she cared about him so much and also considering the breed of dog he was he would have been much better inside. I personally would never dream of leaving my 15 year old dog out side for more then 15 min in this heat let alone while i'm at work!!!!


----------



## Stevenzachsmom (Mar 3, 2008)

I'm not speaking specifically to this story, but in general, I do not trust some of these big organizations. I have seen animals "determined" in immediate need by an organization so they could be taken. Then - the vet is working with that organization. There needs to be checks and balances and sometimes I think there are none.

Like Sue, I check the shelter "wish list" and donate those items.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Leaving dogs out unattended in that neighborhood sounds pretty risky. 

I think a general warning here for people in that area makes sense, but the majority of your campaign should be to your local clubs, training clubs, dog oriented businesses, veterinary practices, and if possible, your news media. 

Getting the word out here only gets you a few affected people, most of whom would not leave an elderly dog in a yard with no shelter.


----------



## innocents_lost (Jul 1, 2011)

They are not the ones who make the desision to euthanize and as for why the son was not able to find out well first i'd like to know why the owner wasn't calling herself and second shelter staff probably had no idea about this dog as shelter staff and cruelty agents are two separate entities all they might have know was the dog had been taken to a vet


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

innocents_lost said:


> I think you need to realize the facts here. The OSPCA can not take a dog with out it being in immediate distress or from inside a dwelling.


I realize the facts.

They may enter your home and take your animal whether you're there or not. 



> *The Ontario SPCA Act provides Ontario SPCA Inspectors with the power to obtain search warrants, remove (seize) animals, issue Orders and enter private property.* The Act also provides Inspectors with police powers to investigate Criminal Code offences related to animal cruelty.
> 
> Police Powers
> Section 11(1) of the Act states:
> ...


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

I agree with the spca too, but it's not my ****ing right to go and take someone's dog and do with it what I like and it isn't their's either. I wish people would spend more time worrying about their own house rather than everyone else's. If someone would come to me telling me how to make the toughest decision I'd have to make about my dog, I'd want to punch them in the teeth. Seriously, if you're going to have the balls to make those decisions for people, then have the balls to man up and be up front about it. Cowards.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

crackem said:


> it's not my ****ing right to go and take someone's dog and do with it what I like and it isn't their's either. I wish people would spend more time worrying about their own house rather than everyone else's. If someone would come to me telling me how to make the toughest decision I'd have to make about my dog, I'd want to punch them in the teeth. Seriously, if you're going to have the balls to make those decisions for people, then have the balls to man up and be up front about it. Cowards.


It's their right to send an investigator accompanied by a police officer, and ask the officer to shoot your animal (and miss its brain a few times) without giving you the opportunity to call your own vet for a second opinion.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

This has got to be the most ironic topic of them all.


----------



## innocents_lost (Jul 1, 2011)

*read what you have written!!*

"Attending at homes, farms, apartment buildings, and commercial operations at all hours of the day or night to conduct investigations, and respond to emergencies."

This means they have the right to attend a home,farm apartment etc, no were in here does it say they my enter a home without an owners consent

"Entry onto *property* without the consent of the owner through court order, or other statutory authority"

Yet again this states they may enter your property Every humane being has the right to enter another PROPERTY its called the wright of inquiry hence how you get door to door sales men and people selling cookies

You are not reading the laws correctly get your facts straight before you pass judgment 

and I will point out again that at no time did the OSPCA make the decision to euthanize this dog, the decision was made by the nearest vet to the scene Who has more qualifications then the owner to deside if the dog is suffering and no an OSPCA agent under no circumstance can tell a police officer to shoot a dog that is 1 not their property and 2. not an immediate threat to the public if the dog is attacking yes the cop has the wright to shoot it just the same as they would have the right to shoot a person in the same circumstance


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

innocents_lost said:


> "Attending at homes, farms, apartment buildings, and commercial operations at all hours of the day or night to conduct investigations, and respond to emergencies."
> 
> This means they have the right to attend a home,farm apartment etc, no were in here does it say they my enter a home without an owners consent
> 
> ...


I'm not having an argument with a 10 year old about their legal interpretation of a law they can't even read, let alone understand.


----------



## Jax's Mom (Apr 2, 2010)

Mrs.K said:


> This has got to be the most ironic topic of them all.


I thought it was quite strange also that two days ago, there was a 45 page thread of people morally opposed to euthanizing a 15 year old stray dog whose owners didn't want it, and wasn't eating, but they're all on board with snatching a dog from its family, who claimed the dog was improving, and euthanizing it behind their back. 

I have a feeling "innocents_lost" is just a username created for this thread by someone who doesn't want to be called out on being a hypocrite, and disguising their writing style with all sorts of spelling errors. No one can be *that* illiterate lol 
I wonder whose IP they match up with?


----------

