Do you like this story?
Head of B.C. task force: Sled dogs ‘aren’t pets,’ can be killed
By Christie Keith
February 18, 2011
If you thought the fate of the 100 sled dogs who were slaughtered in British Columbia would mean a better day ahead for dogs, think again.
Instead of learning from the tragedy, instead of understanding that yes, sled dogs can be and frequently are adopted into pet homes, instead of acknowledging that death — whether it’s from a bullet to the head, a knife to the throat, or a syringe full of Fatal-plus – is not an acceptable canine retirement plan, the task force assigned to investigate the killings is turning its back on Canada’s working sled dogs.
Task force head Terry Lake, a veterinarian and past vice-president of the World Small Animal Veterinary Association as well as currently an elected official representing Kamloops-North Thompson in the B.C. legislature, had this to say to The Canadian Press:
Lake speculated the task force could end up recommending tighter rules and regulations to govern B.C.’s sled dog industry.
He said the task force will also review the gruesome ways in which the dogs died and likely recommend guidelines for more humane methods of destroying working animals.
“In over 20 years of practise, I probably have euthanized hundreds of animals, and, of course, in an acceptable and humane way,” Lake said. “These are not pet dogs we are dealing with, and so the method of euthanasia in a veterinary office is not the only humane method of euthanasia. I think that’s an important thing to say.”
You know what, Mr. Lake? It’s a stupid thing to say. It’s a false thing to say. It’s a steaming pile of crap. You should be removed from this task force for having given up on these dogs before your investigation even began. You make me sick. Your fellow veterinarians should turn their backs on you when you walk in the door.
I shouldn’t really be all that surprised; the president of the British Columbia SPCA is on the task force, too — you know, the organization that said these dogs weren’t adoptable, without having ever seen or evaluated a single one of them? Who said if they’d been brought into the case earlier, they’d have killed them, too?
But, you know… humanely.
I could understand, barely, that the sled dog tour company took the attitude that the dogs were just livestock and could be disposed of when their usefulness was at an end. I didn’t like it, I didn’t agree with them, but it at least had some kind of rational framework I could grasp.
But this? Veterinarians and animal welfare officials talking about how these dogs aren’t pets and as long as they’re killed less horrifically than the way Robert Fawcett did it, that’s okay? But don’t worry, it doesn’t even have to be in a veterinarian’s office to be humane.
And it’s the mushers and sled dog tour operators you think need regulation? It sounds to me like this task force needs regulation. What do you think?
Photo: Some “unadoptable” sled dogs enjoying their retirement with Jo Jacques of Salem, Mass. But remember… these aren’t pets.
Share & Enjoy
|
Facebook
|
Twitter
|
Google Buzz
|
Digg
|
|
Technorati
|
StumbleUpon
|
Delicious
|
Email
|
Home
Right now, I’ve heard more about saving sled dogs’ lives from the people at the freaking dog tour company that owned the killed dogs than the head of the local SPCA or the vet heading the task force. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?
Comment by Christie Keith — February 18, 2011 @ 10:05 pm
I think you, MR Lane, Should go thru the same process when you are not able to care for yourself, IN fact NOW!! For your LAME BRAIN theory………HOW can u, NOT even having a DR status come to this conclusion………LIFE “IS” a Bitch…………and LANE are making me become one!! YOU, MR lane do not deserve to Live either as far as I am concerned!!
Comment by Rosa De Los Santos — February 18, 2011 @ 11:02 pm
This vet’s argument is both ridiculous and unfounded. Racing greyhounds aren’t pets either and they make wonderful companion animals after retiring from sport. Feral dogs are rescued all the time and many of them adapt readily to life with humans. If we can take a dog that has lived on the street its whole life and turn it into a pet, then I don’t see why human-handled huskies are a hopeless case. I wonder if anyone even tried contacting a rescue group before destroying these dogs. I think this “task force” needs another task force to investigate it!
Comment by Nancy Hajeski — February 18, 2011 @ 11:06 pm
Bob Fawcett, the sled dogs’ executioner, was on the board of Mush with PRIDE until he got thrown under the bus. I leave it as an exercise to the reader to figure out whether that organization gave a damn about dogs, or were just working PR cover for widespread industry practice.
Comment by Rob McMillin — February 18, 2011 @ 11:07 pm
My hair is on fire I am so angry and disgusted. So much for those who said, let’s be patient and wait until the verdict is in when they (assumes this task force is the “they”) release their findings on March 25th… What a brutal culture you have there, when not even a professional animal caregiver, a doctor, has the moral core to be outraged at the magnitude of this slaughter. Shame, shame, shame Dr. Lane.
Comment by Linda Tegarden — February 18, 2011 @ 11:12 pm
This is absolutely stunning. All the people one would think who, based on their occupations, would be rushing to the dogs’ defense, don’t give a rat’s ass about them. Total disconnect.
There seem to be deeply embedded, unexamined and unproven (actually easily disproven) assumptions about what “everyone knows” to be true about sled dogs operating here.
I think human ego and defensiveness have kicked in now, too. The wagons have been circled and they will fight to defend killing sled dogs rather than admit that, gasp, they may have been m-m-m-mistaken.
Mr. Lane needs to be tethered. He’s clearly not socialized, possibly not housebroken. And obviously cannot be trusted around other animals.
Comment by Susan Fox — February 18, 2011 @ 11:13 pm
Susan, from what I have read online, the BC SPCA isn’t exactly the most beloved organization in that area among people who actually care about animals. I’m not quite sure why they exist, really … the comments on the Feb. 2 article here had a number of good links regarding that organization.
Comment by Rob McMillin — February 18, 2011 @ 11:17 pm
Geesh - are you telling me this guy not only graduated from college with a 4 year degree but went back for a veterinary degree also?
Critical thinking is definitely not his forte. Let’s see - if I follow his kind of reasoning - sled dogs are not /can not be pets; therefore, using that same reasoning: musher’s are not human or civilized.
These sweeping statements of his are from the dark ages - this man is a dog bigot - the same kind that draws up breed specific legislation or sides with greyhound murderers because racing dogs don’t make good pets.
Comment by cheryl — February 18, 2011 @ 11:25 pm
I wonder what Ceasar Millan would say if he’d heard something so lame and stupid. Ceasar is an advocate to rehabilitating ALL breeds of dogs including “working” dogs whether it be sled, greyhounds, herding or any other type of dog. All of them make great companions when treated with love. Terry Lane, you don’t deserve to be a vet or on the task force for that matter. Your thoughts on this matter are ridiculous, unfounded and downright barbaric
Comment by Hannah Latreille — February 19, 2011 @ 2:23 am
The thousand puppy mill dogs were also killed basically because of the rationalisation that “they were not pets”. This in spite of the fact that the puppies would have been pets if they’d survived just a few weeks longer.
If the local SPCA had been asked to step in there they’d have had no trouble at all rehoming any surviving pups but almost certainly a lot of problems rehoming surviving adults.
The sled dogs would have at least been sane and not terrified of everything.
I think to an extent arguing about whether or not particular breeds, or dogs with particular backgrounds are or aren’t harder than normal to rehome is letting the owners off the hook. All of these cases involve dogs humans have chosen to use for recreation. There’s no excuse for not making the relatively small changes (such as teaching breeding bitches to walk outdoors on a leash) which would make them readily adoptable once their commercial usefulness is over.
Comment by Rosemary — February 19, 2011 @ 3:08 am
More stupidity:
http://www.sctimes.com/article.....s-to-light
1. The California-based Animal League Defense Fund….urged people to write Iditarod race sponsors asking them to back out, said Lisa Franzetta, ADLF’s director of communications.;
2. …”Debra Probert, executive director of the Vancouver Humane Society, which has called for a provincial ban on tour businesses.”;
3. “Mushers routinely abandon, shoot, bludgeon, or drown dogs when they become ill, don’t run fast enough, or are simply unwanted,” Michelle Sherrow of Lexington, Ky., wrote on behalf of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
Comment by CathyA — February 19, 2011 @ 6:32 am
Great- now Peta is joining the circus!
This whole thing is just unbelievable. Vets, heads of “humane” organizations and all they can say is KILL!
Angry beyond words here . . .
Comment by db — February 19, 2011 @ 6:56 am
Just like Iditarod veterinarians, Terry Lane supports the abuse of sled dogs. Check out: http://www.helpsleddogs.org/re.....etcare.htm
Comment by Margery Glickman — February 19, 2011 @ 7:35 am
One of the things I find most mind-boggling is, if I’m reading Lake’s quote correctly, he’s saying that, for working dogs, there is a different (and one assumes, from the context, lower) standard of what is humane euthanasia. That what is humane differs for dogs strictly based on their job description. What?
And, yes, I too love the “not pets” thing and the implications for adoption that has. Sheesh.
Comment by Glenye Oakford — February 19, 2011 @ 7:55 am
This is outrageous. Protest people! Im in ontario and although far away geographically I’m very disturbed by this overly clinical outlook. This statement is absurd and deserves the public spotlight. For shame on the members of the taskforce
Comment by Paige — February 19, 2011 @ 8:04 am
I took the comments to indicate that sled dogs are not only unadoptable, but also that, if we are wanting to off 100 of them, we need to keep in mind that we’re not going to be doing it via sedative/lethal injection.
Scary.
Comment by YesBiscuit! — February 19, 2011 @ 8:20 am
What a load of bull hockey.
Comment by Mary — February 19, 2011 @ 8:22 am
Glenye, this is what I’ve been struggling with, tried to come at in my post on this topic.
Setting aside for a moment the standards for what constitutes “humane” when killing livestock, it seems that this vet is classing these dogs with the cows and chickens, in terms of our obligations towards them.
Just as puppymill breeder dogs, who produce expensive pets to live in people’s homes and be loved, are themselves considered “livestock.” (Well, machines is more like it, which gets back to how it happens that we now consider a pig a pork machine rather than an animal. Technological thinking has eliminated an entire ethical category — one is either a mechanism or a person, possibly in a fur suit.)
I don’t think there’s any gray area about where a tour operator’s sled dog — or any non-human animal who is a trained working partner, much less one whose appeal and personality are meant to please the tourists — lies in our ethical responsibilities.
What kind of being demands love and devotion and intelligence and willing service and then, like this vet, refuses any reciprocal consideration?
If the sled dog is a disposable machine, then who else?
Comment by H. Houlahan — February 19, 2011 @ 8:30 am
completely disgusted….. all about money is what it comes down too. im truley starting to hate this world and the pathetic people in it. if we have a vet & spca leader willing to do nothing about this, where are we at in the future? most people choose their carrers bec they love what they do. this entire organization of sled dogs carrying fat ass people around for profit needs to be put to an end. this is beyond words…… i honestly cant even write what is in my heart, it would be too offensive.
Comment by nichole — February 19, 2011 @ 8:44 am
Admin note: We allow intelligent, informed and engaged discussion here. Hateful or violent speech will not be tolerated.
Unlock your cap key and take it elsewhere.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — February 19, 2011 @ 9:58 am
Deja Vu. Christie, the understandably outraged pit bull owners on our facebook page want to know where to send letters in support of the humane disposition of sled dogs. Ideas?
Comment by Donna — February 19, 2011 @ 9:58 am
The Terry Lane point of view would have all those loyal dogs serving in law enforcement shot in the head after their last shift sniffing for bombs or chasing down drug dealers.
What an ignorant and asinine perspective.
Comment by Christina G — February 19, 2011 @ 10:04 am
Donna, I’m trying to find out somewhere I can channel this fury… will post when I do!
Christie
Comment by Christie Keith — February 19, 2011 @ 10:13 am
Yes, he really did say that, didn’t he? That because these dogs aren’t ‘pets,’ there is and ought to be different and lesser standards for humane euthanasia. It seems to me that what he’s doing is staking out a territory to defend: that while the killing of these dogs was indeed inhumane, the industry should be permitted to kill dogs en masse when their numbers become inconvenient, and do so in cheaply in the field - so long as it’s ‘humane,’ by these lesser standards. Presumably, by shots to the head, and presumably even if there are alternatives available, places which would accept the dogs.
I wonder if one of the things he’s not-saying is that there are not any plans to recommend or commit resources to re-homing sled dogs? My guess, based on this, is that the findings of the panel will be very narrow, and essentially change nothing.
Comment by Eucritta — February 19, 2011 @ 10:20 am
OMG @Dr. Lane. Are you kidding me? Wow, so let’s review shall we? Just so I’m clear. We have taken domesticated dogs, and forced them into an exploitive situation, thereby now rendering them “working” animals. Based on this new status, resulting from forced slavery, which is what it is, you’re now saying they have lost their status of “pet”, and are not deserving of kinder considerations. Have I understood what you’ve said so far? And you are not only a veterinarian and past vice-president of the World Small Animal Veterinary Association, but as well a currently elected official representing Kamloops-North Thompson in the B.C. legislature? I would have to say that I am shocked beyond belief. Who the hell put the fox in the hen house? Do you truly believe what you stated? If so, I think we not only need to repeal some of the laws in Canada, emphatically, but we need to clean house. You are a danger to animal welfare sir, and because of your position, you are even more dangerous than the man that killed these animals.
Comment by Domino — February 19, 2011 @ 10:30 am
Here’s what I am appalled by: in over 20 comments so far, not one veterinarian (unless I missed something) has spoken up until now.
Christie said, “Your fellow veterinarians should turn their backs on you when you walk in the door.”
I say DARN STRAIGHT!
Leaving aside the non-pet paradigms that we veterinarians must resign ourselves to understand if we are to do our jobs effectively, we do take an oath, and I believe that this veterinarian’s philosophy is counter to “the relief of animal suffering” AND NOT “in keeping with the principles of veterinary medical ethics.” Maybe some of my colleagues think it’s okay to play the good ol’ boy game of circling the wagons. But I’m not old (though I AM old enough to know whereof I speak when it comes to my profession) and I’m not a boy: Terry Lane’s comments are not representative of the veterinary medical community, and I sincerely hope he is no longer in clinical practice. It is bad enough he’s allowed to speak for us.
Laura L. Neal, DVM
Washington, USA
Comment by Laura L. Neal, DVM — February 19, 2011 @ 10:32 am
How about we petition the good doctor? For those wanting to express outrage, here is one way to do it:
http://www.change.org/petition.....-sled-dogs
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 19, 2011 @ 10:51 am
I just wanted to say thanks for the blog. It seems the more useful an animal is, the more we treat it as a commodity and not a living being. There is, obviously, no fundamental difference between a husky sled dog and a husky that sits around the house. I’d even argue that an animals that’s earned his master money for years is deserving of an even better retirement than our household pets. Animals deserve respect. However, I will point out that this includes livestock, which you mention in passing in your article. Why is it that we can treat cattle like “cattle” either?
Comment by Gemma — February 19, 2011 @ 10:54 am
I tell you: This is the ONE and only ONE good thing that came out of the Michael Vick situation (and Sick Vick gets NO CREDIT for it):
We now know that ALL dogs deserve to be considered as individuals, and that NO dog is “automatically” ineligible for rehoming because of breed, history or occupation.
Any “humane society” or “SPCA” that says otherwise should turn over their leadership to people who know better … and any veterinarian who thinks mass “killing” is “euthanasia” that needs to be defended and encouraged needs to be in another line of work.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — February 19, 2011 @ 10:58 am
Exactly, Gina.
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 19, 2011 @ 11:01 am
Why is it that we can treat cattle like “cattle” either?
Comment by Gemma — February 19, 2011
Gemma, an increasing number of us don’t accept that, either. Many people are ethical vegans, and others of us (like me) do not support industrial agriculture, and buy meat from regional, sustainable farms (often small and owned by a family) that practice humane husbandry.
Personally, I don’t eat much meat, but I do share my life with carnivores, and they do. So I make my purchases accordingly.
How big a movement this is can be seen pretty clearly in the recent changes at Whole Foods and how much money they’re spending to tell you about them. While most people don’t shop at Whole Foods and humane, sustainable animal husbandry is still but a small part of the overall, it’s clearly a movement that is gaining ground. (And by the way: Many animal rights folks HATE these changes because pure AR ideology dictates that no animals be “exploited” — not even as “pets.” They believe that such “happy meat” gives people an excuse to keep eating it without feeling guilty and undermines efforts to turn us all vegan. I consider it unethical and unhealthy for my dogs and cats to not eat as they are supposed to, so I will continue to source their food — and mine — from sustainable, humane and small regional sources.)
Comment by Gina Spadafori — February 19, 2011 @ 11:20 am
I just wanted to take a moment to thank Pet Connection and in particular Christie for keeping this in the public eye.
As a Canadian and a dog lover I am horrified that this occurred at all, and doubly horrified that it occurred in my country - and is now being defended by the very people put in charge of preventing it in the future.
Several protests have been scheduled (April will be a BIG month) and I encourage ALL Canadians to take the time to find a demonstration near you and to attend. We need to let the powers that be know in no uncertain terms that we will NOT stand idly by while our government participates in the acceptance of animal abuse and neglect.
We are a very progressive country - and we are PROUD of it. It’s time that our animal laws reflected this, not only in reference to sled dogs, but in reference to ALL animals.
The only way these changes will come about is public pressure. I urge you to contact your local, provincial and federal representatives and let them know that you care about these issues - and that your future votes will reflect these values.
Comment by Kim — February 19, 2011 @ 12:00 pm
The Terry Lane point of view would have all those loyal dogs serving in law enforcement shot in the head after their last shift sniffing for bombs or chasing down drug dealers.
Christina, that is exactly the “retirement” that was offered by the US military for all military working dogs, from the Korean War era until an act of Congress during the Clinton administration.
Because they were, you know, too vicious to, at the age of ten or twelve, retire to the sofa. Because military working dogs were “unadoptable.”
Except, now, they are. (And WWII era military working dogs were also decommissioned back to civilian life.)
But that can’t possibly be relevant to anything else, right?
Comment by H. Houlahan — February 19, 2011 @ 12:15 pm
Like I said before, there won’t be any justice from the official investigation. Predict the conclusion will be it was OK for him to shoot the dogs but he should have aimed better. Not joking here.
Getting mad is fine (I’m pissed as hell) but mad doesn’t change a thing. Still need a way to do something that matters about this. These guys don’t care about dogs, doing right, or any of that stuff. We need to hit them where it hurts—loss of money, bad PR that sticks like crap on their shoes and doesn’t go away, whatever.
Any ideas?
Comment by JonRob — February 19, 2011 @ 12:16 pm
This kind of attitude toward dogs is just assinine. Have we as a society not learned anything form past mass killings? Look at the Michael Vick dogs—and I mean REALLY look into that story. Those dogs were immediately deemed vicious and unplaceable, because of their breed and previos living conditions. But if more people would bother to follow those stories to the end, they’d know that ALL but 2 of Vick’s dogs were saved. Alot of them are still in sanctuaries because of the court rulings, But the majority of all the dogs are now living healthy, happy lives with new families and several have become therapy and/or service dogs. All the dogs at Dogtown have passed Canine Good Citizen (required there) and are doing fabulous. If more people would seriosly take a look at Cesar Milan’s way of “teaching”, maybe more dogs could be saved and live out their lives in the comfort of a warm and loving family. I, personally, use his methods and I have 2 very well behaved pits and an Akita. I don’t care if a dog is a working dog or not—they are still entitled to live out their complete lives safely, humanely and happy. Start looking into the dogs, their behavior, temperment, etc and try wortking wioth the ones that may be a bit difficult before tossing them aside like uesterday trash. If you don’t want the responsibility for the entire life of the dog, DON’T OWN ONE—for any reason!!
Comment by Sheila Osborne — February 19, 2011 @ 12:47 pm
Thanks for the petition, Laura. Signed it and posted it at NKN.
Comment by Karen — February 19, 2011 @ 1:08 pm
It will be sad if all this horror puts an end to Dog Sledding facilities. I am not supporting any behaviors of the owners of these dogs, but I’ve seen working dogs; whether it be sledding dogs, herding dogs, scent dogs etc….they love the work they do, they get excited about it, they feed on the praise when they do well…if owners of sledding dogs (and all working dogs) were in it for this interaction and the rewarding relationship with the animals instead of the money this sort of thing wouldn’t happen so often!!
Comment by Cheryl — February 19, 2011 @ 1:36 pm
Thanks, Karen. I’ve worked to refine it a bit more this afternoon. Let’s let Dr. Lake know that this stance is not acceptable.
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 19, 2011 @ 2:11 pm
Another admin note:
Comments that blame the Canadian government or all Canadians will also NOT be tolerated.
I assure you Canadians are as outraged as others are.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — February 19, 2011 @ 2:36 pm
I’m simply outraged a VET would say such things! No animal is different from the rest - all animals deserve humane treatment. This bozo needs to be removed from the task force as his thinking is tainted!
Comment by Pat — February 19, 2011 @ 3:06 pm
As one who usually admires things Canadian I’m upset and embarrassed at the cavalier way that people, whose titles would indicate that they care about animal lives,would so dismiss these poor dogs as not worthy of humane treatment. My daughter, who is a veterinary student in Canada, will be sickened to know how arrogant and stupid some Canadian officials can be. Dr. Lane should resign from anything having to do with animals.
Comment by Alan Alford — February 19, 2011 @ 3:36 pm
I had a conversation today with a friend of mine who with her husband, raced sled dogs for years. Her daughter has now taken over the dogs, but the mother still maintains a business catering to making boots and other racing equipment. Her daughter is now on the boards of several national sled dog organizations. Never once did Fawcett or his company make an effort to network with any of those organizations. Mushers, like all dog people, are a tight community, and they would have risen to the occasion to provide homes and jobs for these dogs. They were never approached, not even Sled Dog Central (http://www.sleddogcentral.com/about.htm) by Fawcett or anyone else.
Comment by Deb — February 19, 2011 @ 4:49 pm
Fawcett was on the board of directors of Mush with P.R.I.D.E. (http://www.mushwithpride.org/) and I’m sure he had plenty of connections within the mushing community. For whatever reason, he chose not to use them.
I have been in touch myself with several people in the sledding community who have told me in no uncertain terms that these dogs are not only adoptable but quite adaptable as pets. It’s simply unconscionable to me that this myth that sled dogs are unsuitable pet material and therefore must be killed is being perpetrated by the head of this task force— and that he is a veterinarian. Boggles the mind.
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 19, 2011 @ 4:59 pm
Laura it boggles the mind and breaks one’s heart! The sled dog community knew about this travesty before the rest of us did, but still too late to save the dogs! Alas, they may not have been aware of dog related Internet communities on the scale that they now are. It only publicly came to light when Fawcett filed a claim for PTSD compensation. Now that the Interwebs have taken hold of it, I do hope the reverbs are heard and felt throughout both Cda and the USA and that a lesson is beaten home again about how powerful the Web is, and that despicable acts of cruelty can’t be hidden anymore.
Comment by Deb — February 19, 2011 @ 6:31 pm
I’m with Dr Neal, where are all the vets who normally post here ? This is outragous & people need to speak up ! Especially others involved in the business. If everyone keeps quiet so as not to offend colleagues nothing will change.
Comment by original Leslie K — February 19, 2011 @ 6:51 pm
I should say that, to their credit, Mush With PRIDE immediately voted to remove Fawcett from the BoD and stated unequivocally that “euthanasia” was not a legitimate method of population control.
But what would those guys know about sled dogs?
Comment by H. Houlahan — February 19, 2011 @ 7:18 pm
Then by Mr. Lane’s definition of what pet is. Then a musher isn’t a person. Just how many of them did they kill over this? Mr. Lane, dogs,whether service,working, or stay at home are someones pet. Somebody feeds them, gives them water and a place to stay. Using your idea, means there’s a lot of people like you we don’t need. Should you be treated like those 100 poor souls?
Comment by Joe Konery — February 19, 2011 @ 7:25 pm
Just a reminder that the petition to send a message to Dr. Lake is here:
http://www.change.org/petition.....-sled-dogs
I’m happy to see that it’s picking up steam and thankful that people care enough to make their voices heard.
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 19, 2011 @ 7:54 pm
I’m with Rosemary. Puppy mill dogs are not pets too I assume. Huh. My “PET” was a puppy mill breeding dog and she turned out just fine. Who’s to say that these dogs wouldn’t have done so as well? One vet who just happens to be less of a vet than most I know.
What a charade. Disgusting and sad. Maybe Dr. Lake should choose a new career where emotions and feelings are not required… like Wall Street maybe? Good lord!
Comment by Mel — February 19, 2011 @ 7:57 pm
its just not fair what is able to be done to animals and only a select few give a crap. i just hate that they cant fight back.
Comment by kerwin — February 19, 2011 @ 8:22 pm
Mr.Lane is a heartless bastard who should never be let near an animal. Whys hould these dogs deserve anything less than euthenasia? Because they slaved working their whole lives instead of playing in someoneone’s yard?
We cannot let them get away with this and let this issue die.
This is an outrage and each and every one of those dogs deserved the chance at being adopted or at the VERY least a humane death.
Comment by SS — February 19, 2011 @ 8:33 pm
The correct name for the appointed head of the BC task force is Dr. Terry LAKE (not Lane). The man sounds positively thrilled of having put down “hundreds of animals” in an “acceptable and humane way” and is of the professional opinion that bullets, knives (choose your weapon) are much more fitting ways to dispatch dogs who have been used as beasts of burden in service of the vanity of mankind.
There is a Dr. David LANE who apparently serves the Whistler sled dog tour businesses, who appears to have been as blind to sled dog cruelty and neglect as has the disgusting BC SPCA. Dr. Lane was quoted in a 2009 Whistler Question article after a California tourist who was shocked about the condition and demeanour of the dogs who pulled her on a dog sled ride.
Stemming from this lady’s complaint, the BC SPCA identified two companies as being under suspicion with regard to dog neglect, Bob Fawcett’s company was one of them.
http://animaladvocateswatchdog...../read/2208
The Whistler Question took a lot of flak from the rabid sled dog lobbyists - Editorial: Newspaper has a responsibility to seek the truth’
http://animaladvocateswatchdog...../read/2165
Letter to Whistler Question ‘On the dogs’ behalf, thanks’ (April 8, 2009)
http://www.whistlerquestion.co.....alf-thanks
Comment by Terry Cumming — February 19, 2011 @ 10:19 pm
I cannot believe this is the attitude of professionals brought in to examine what happened. This is a vet?! How can it be ok to dispose of a life, a life of an innocent animal. Can you imagine this being the case in our lives…no more layoffs, kill them, no need for money for old age care homes, kill them, you call in sick or have a bad day at work, kill them. Unbelievable!!! This is not ok Mr Lake and will not be accepted by the people of BC or Canada.
Comment by LA — February 20, 2011 @ 1:00 am
Lake, the vet’s name is Terry Lake.
Somebody wanna fix his Wikipedia entry? ;-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Lake
Comment by CathyA — February 20, 2011 @ 7:21 am
This is disgusting. Public pressure can make a difference, especially world wide public pressure. BC depends on tourism as a major revenue source. Make your voice heard, no matter where you live.
There is a group on facebook who is taking a stand against Animal Cruelty, and this case specifically.
http://www.facebook.com/#!/AAOAW
Please dont let the name fool you - it was the original group that started when the public found out about the executions. Facebook will not allow name changes, so we are stuck with that. We are not associated with any merchandise or fundraising initiatives, our focus is making a difference with empowerment, communication and action.
There is much information there, about what you specifically can do to express your outrage, and to demand change, regardless where you live.
See you on the board.
Julia
Comment by Julia Trops — February 20, 2011 @ 9:04 am
Yes, it is Lake, and here is his official website (which is where I got his e-mail address for the petition).
http://www.terrylake.ca/about/
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 20, 2011 @ 9:24 am
Unfortunately, the veterinary community (let’s hope it’s largely the old guard) regularly produces such “steaming piles of crap.” Consider, for example, the “report” published last last year by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, in which the authors misread, misinterpret, and/or misrepresent nearly every bit of research they reference (some of which isn’t valid research to begin with)—all in an effort to rationalize lethal methods for controlling feral cats (“Proper euthanasia involves a gunshot to the head, chemical injection, or carbon dioxide asphyxiation.”)
Among the responses in a Veterinary Information Network post (http://news.vin.com/VINNews.aspx?articleId=17319):
“A very good article overall, though I do agree with the criticism of traps/gassing/shooting,” wrote Dr. Brian Novak of Trappe, Pa., in the VIN discussion. “However, if we are viewing feral cats as ‘pests’ (a term used repeatedly in the article), shooting and trapping are used and accepted for every other pest — rats, starlings, deer, nutria, monk parakeets, etc.”
Please don’t get me wrong—I’m not suggesting that all, or even the majority of veterinary professionals hold such attitudes. But we can’t simply assume they are automatically “on our side” when it comes to a whole range of animals welfare/rights issues.
Comment by Peter J. Wolf — February 20, 2011 @ 10:40 am
A google search reveals Terry Lake is prone to a recall. Hmm? from news item:
“Instead, he has chosen to represent the interests of the British Columbia Liberal Party and their supporters in big business over those of his voters in Kamloops-North Thompson.
Let’s not get mushers confused with Intrawest. I am a victim of the EXPERT dog catcher and breed designation that Lake promotes. Long story, no proof. I was told I would never see my Sibes again, and I didn’t. I made arrangements to have them returned to the original breeders/mushers who went out of their way to RESCUE my dogs. The experts, like Lake, make the rules as they wish.
I signed the petition and I expect it to meet Lakes’ delete button. Hit em where it hurts.
Trying to get the FB link. It will have to come after this afternoons sled run. It’s called “runners high” for a reason. Just watch the dogs as I pull the sled out.
Thanks for the links and keeping this in public. Business should not be business as usual.
PS intrawest needs cash.
Comment by Larry — February 20, 2011 @ 12:22 pm
Thanks to everyone who caught my typo on his name! I had it both right AND wrong in the same post, a sign of how distraught I was when I wrote this!
Comment by Christie Keith — February 20, 2011 @ 1:27 pm
Don’t feel too bad about that Christie - honest mistake but a powerful article, very much appreciated.
Comment by Terry Cumming — February 20, 2011 @ 3:23 pm
I’m sorry, but this man needs a reality check. If a convicted murderer is allowed a second chance after he’s served his sentence, why not give these dogs a chance? Sled dogs are non aggressive, unlike fighting dogs, which in some cases go on to be great companions for people and can be taught to be kind to other dogs if they are found and saved early enough. If I can go adopt a former fighting dog and it can get along with my dogs well, these sled dogs DID NOT HAVE TO DIE! I know many people who would have taken them! However, this is British Columbia we’re talking about. Some of their views are dated and down right ignorant. I think Mr. Lake should be barred from deciding what to do with his parents once they’ve “reached the end of their usefulness”. He may have them offed too.
Comment by Amanda Kiser — February 20, 2011 @ 6:27 pm
My comment is this it is just like retired racing grayhounds or sled dogs or pit bulls these are our friends and loving animals and should not be treated as property. I seriously cannot believe this what if one of those dogs had champion blood lines then what a liniage is lost.
Comment by Teresa McKean — February 20, 2011 @ 7:18 pm
Christie, it’s easy to make mistakes when you’re distraught, and anyone who wouldn’t be distraught reading (or writing) about this situation isn’t someone I even want to know.
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 20, 2011 @ 7:27 pm
Over 600 signatures on the petition so far. Keep those cards and letters coming! http://www.change.org/petition.....-sled-dogs
Larry, if he has to hit delete 600 times, that’s 600 times he gets reminded how much BS he’s full of. Okay by me :)
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 20, 2011 @ 7:29 pm
This is appalling. I am shocked that a veterinarian would take this type of stance. “Sled dogs aren’t pet”, what a crock. Even the Vick dogs were given a chance and proved to the world that, given the right atmosphere, the right people and the right kind of love, almost any dog can live a quality life after working or abuse.
Comment by Rick — February 21, 2011 @ 7:07 am
Hello all,
Dr. Lake has responded to the petition by leaving a comment at the Pet Health Action Network blog:
http://pethealthaction.blogspo.....lings.html
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 21, 2011 @ 11:15 am
Well, that’s good… thank you, Laura!
Comment by Christie Keith — February 21, 2011 @ 12:01 pm
You’re welcome. Now that we’ve got his attention, I’m asking him to make a commitment to us that he will work to dispel this myth of the unadoptable sled dog. Until we get that commitment, I think the petition should stay open.
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 21, 2011 @ 2:50 pm
I read his comment. It is not satisfactory and does not address the specific issue of writing off an entire breed or type of dog sight unseen and condoning the killing of same.
He mentions “terrified” dogs, which can’t be brought to a vet’s office to be killed, so it’s ok to kill them in the back of a pick-up truck, which completely misses the point about the “necessity” of killing healthy, adoptable sled dogs in the first place.
“Taken out context” is the usual defense when someone realizes they’ve put their foot in it big time and is trying to weasel out.
Comment by Susan Fox — February 21, 2011 @ 2:56 pm
Laura-Absolutely the petition should stay open. I don’t think he gets it at all judging from his statement on your site.
Comment by Susan Fox — February 21, 2011 @ 2:58 pm
I can not believe this jerk is the head of the task force appointed to investigate these poor dogs. How dare him say these beautful sled dogs are not adoptable all dogs & breeds are adoptable. Just might take some longer then others to warm up to you. I would think that the sled dog would blend in to family life much faster then the ones resued from puppy mills as they have more conact with humans. All I cab say is Mr Terry lake you are totaly wrong. ALL DOGS ARE ADOPTABLE!!!!
Comment by Janice Zicari — February 21, 2011 @ 3:14 pm
He said that some dogs, not all, most, or just sled dogs, are terrified by vet clinics, and if they are being euthanized, there’s no reason to subject them to that terror rather than euthanizing them in what is for them a less stressed environment.
He also said that sled dogs, if socialized, can be adopted to many homes though they aren’t great candidates for apartments or tiny yards.
What he actually didn’t say is anything about being okay with the mass killing of healthy dogs.
It would be great to get more, and more detailed, discussion of this from him. It will be important to watch and see what he really does. But anybody who doesn’t believe the comments can get trimmed and edited to the point where it completely changes their meaning, has not been paying close attention to media coverage of subjects they know or events they were involved in.
Comment by Lis — February 21, 2011 @ 3:50 pm
Like Lis, I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt in this kind of situation, for the reasons she suggests. Our outrage at him is predicated on comments attributed to him which appeared in a single article, and I would be willing to bet that many of us have seen our words misused and misconstrued, either willfully or otherwise.
However, I don’t feel satisfaction without getting to the heart of the matter, which is, as Susan points out, the condoning of a whole group of dogs, sight unseen. I want the petition to stay open until we have a firm commitment from him that shows that he gets it. He’s in a position to influence the tone of future discussion of this kind of situation to a great degree. Hopefully he now understands that lots of us care about this particular issue, want to see it addressed, and will not shut up until that happens.
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 21, 2011 @ 4:01 pm
Er, I meant condemning, not condoning. Must proofread more :)
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 21, 2011 @ 4:02 pm
I don’t believe he gets it either. I’ve left a comment as well.
Comment by jo — February 21, 2011 @ 4:55 pm
Lis, my comment was directed to what he himself actually posted, neither trimmed or edited, on Laura’s comment thread, not to how he was quoted or misquoted or non-quoted in any of the media stories.
Also, given an opportunity to say exactly what he meant at whatever length he chose to say it, he noticeably DID NOT say one word (I just double-checked his comment) about NOT being “okay with the mass killing of healthy dogs.” He could have, but he didn’t. Instead, he cherry-picked one specific example, the relevance of which is questionable, to talk about the most humane way to kill dogs that are “terrified”, with a little at the end about the specific home circumstances he felt were appropriate for sled dogs.
IMHO, he talked around the all the important, relevant issues in this whole sorry mess.
Comment by Susan Fox — February 21, 2011 @ 5:44 pm
No further comments today from Dr. Lake. I suspect he’s blocking the e-mails from the petition now, and probably will never see the additional questions that have been posted for him to address.
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 22, 2011 @ 7:57 am
Unfortunately it is apparent that my comments have been taken out of context and I hope readers will allow me to explain.
Firstly I have been an advocate of animals for my whole life and have been responsible for banning the use of exotic animals in circuses, for promoting the adoption of the convention for the protection of companion animals and am currently working on a sterilization project for the feral dogs of Sri Lanka.
When asked about the adoptability of these dogs I said they were not typical house pets and that they would need to go to environments that would allow them to mimic their species and breed specific behaviour, i.e. running. They are not suited for apartment living or to be left in the back yard all day. They need dedicated owners and of course there are many out there. It is not acceptable for sled dog operators to fail to plan for retirement for these dogs and our task force will ensure that this is addressed.
In terms of euthanasia, many veterinarians will tell you that dogs that are unfamiliar with living indoors with minimal direct human contact are absolutely terrified to enter a veterinary hospital. Many times we find it necessary to perform euthanasia in the back of a car or truck to spare the poor dog the fear of entering the clinic. Performing euthanasia in the dog’s normal environment is much less stressful. Of course, euthanasia is a last resort (I have refused to perform this on healthy animals)and should be reserved for dogs that have a quality of life that is no longer acceptable.
I hope reades will follow the work of the task force as I am confident our work will lead to better standards and better lives for sled dogs.
Terry Lake, DVM
Comment by Terry Lake — February 24, 2011 @ 7:04 pm
The story keeps changing but the song remains the same.
Terry Lake, your comments were not “taken out of context” on the comment thread that referred I to, in which you were certainly allowed to say whatever you wished to say and at whatever length. And it was unsatisfactory, to say the least.
But I can guarantee you that your task force will be watched closely. Very closely, indeed.
Comment by Susan Fox — February 24, 2011 @ 8:28 pm
Susan, perhaps you could dictate for us the statement you want Dr. Lake to make.
Comment by Lis — February 24, 2011 @ 11:32 pm
Sometimes when someone isn’t happy with the reception of what he has said, he will keep revising in different venues until it “works.”
This is more likely to be effective when the audiences don’t overlap, or don’t speak to one another.
I don’t regard it as compelling evidence that the later utterances are the truth and the former utterances are “out of context” or “misunderstood.”
Comment by H. Houlahan — February 25, 2011 @ 7:41 am
Was I suffering delusion of the suitability of 2 of my dogs re: living in my home 14 1/2 and 13 years because I had them euthanised in my van?
Comment by CathyA — February 25, 2011 @ 8:08 am
Heaven knows I hate being the voice of moderation, but …
Has anyone trashing Dr. Lake considered that this might be a “teachable moment”?
Think about it: Up to just a few years ago most if not the overwhelming majority of us also accepted the premise that “to rescue” meant to remove from harm and kill. Most people still DO think that, including the majority of the shelter industry and probably most veterinarians. They just don’t see another way.
Instead of bashing Dr. Lake for trying to do what’s right within the context of his education and experiences — and thereby forcing him into defensive posturing where no change is possible — consider that ours is the minority opinion still, even if it is gaining ground steadily and will in the years to come be the norm.
So … Discuss the issue, not attack the person. That’s true here every day, for regulars and guests alike.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — February 25, 2011 @ 8:10 am
I agree, Gina. I hope that Dr. Lake will take to heart the concerns being voiced. We have over 1200 signatures on the petition this morning and I think it’s safe to say that there are many people concerned about the work of this task force. As I’ve said on my own blog comments, in an ideal situation we would all be working together to make sure nothing like this happens again.
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 25, 2011 @ 8:54 am
Christie Keith wrote:
“But there’s something else that troubles me about this story and its aftermath. That’s the way that Fawcett’s local animal shelter, the British Columbia SPCA, has been talking about sled dogs — not just the dogs who were killed by Fawcett, but all sled dogs.
“B.C. SPCA head of animal cruelty Marcie Moriarty told the Vancouver Sun that, even if Fawcett had told her he was going to kill the dogs and asked for the organization’s help in finding another solution, the dogs would probably still have been put to death by the SPCA.
“If that attitude seems hard to understand given that the organization is a “society for the prevention of cruelty to animals,” try wrapping your brain around their reason turning their backs on these dogs.”
Judy Stone:
That attitude isn’t hard to understand if in BC you are an animal-lover, particularly an animal rescuer; we all have to save animals from the SPCA as well as save animals that the SPCA turns its back on, as it did again with the sled dogs; only this time it was caught; and as usual, when caught it lies and shoots itself in the foot over and over. Animal Advocates Society of BC (www.animaladvocates.com) for fifteen years investigated the BC SPCA, from sixty years back to the present, proving absolutely that it is an animal disposal organization, getting millions a year in local dog-catcher/impounder/disposer contacts, at the same time getting more millions from animal-lovers who don’t know that and believe that the SPCA protects animals when it is protecting itself. The animal-loving, donating public doesn’t know that the SPCA secretely kills animals it “heroically” seizes. It is a secret society, empowered by statute to seize animals under the BC Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, with no government oversight, and greater powers than the police. Many lawyers are shocked by the abuse of this power by the SPCA. This is a society that has been highly corrupted from its mandate for a long time, that has been protected by all BC governments for decades. Government denies that the SPCA is a government agency, even though the SPCA enforces a government statute. It denies it so that it doesn’t get SPCA dirt on its hands. It denies it so that it doesn’t have to pay for enforcement of the PCA Act. (The SPCA uses donations for its enforcement costs; and that is how it should remain in my opinion. More money does not equal more morality; but it can mean more compensation for SPCA employees who already get 48% of its $28 million revenues.) The sled dog slaughter has shone a light on the real SPCA again, but it will survive because the BC government will only rip a strip off it in private, as it has done before. The SPCA is churning up the misinformed to help it get millions in government funding for enforcement. That may make the SPCA’s enforcement arm unequivocally a government agency, its records available to the public through Freedom of Information (FOI), but whose to say what the records are, and if FOI in California is as encircled with barriers and prohibitive costs as it is in BC, then FOI will protect the SPCA, not expose it. I urge all your readers to read some of AAS’s evidence of how the SPCA hid even its own field agent’s alarmed report on Howling Dogs in 2000 and some subsequent reports AAS received which surely must only be a few of hundreds, at http://www.animaladvocates.com. We have more information that if there are no charges laid and no trial where Bob Fawcett might reveal his long history with the SPCA, could explain why.
Judy Stone
Animal Advocates Society of BC
Comment by Judy Stone — February 25, 2011 @ 9:03 am
Dr. Lake,
Thank you for continuing to follow-up with this group of concerned animal advocates. The fact that you bother to do this at all is a positive thing, in my opinion. You say:
“When asked about the adoptability of these dogs I said they were not typical house pets and that they would need to go to environments that would allow them to mimic their species and breed specific behaviour, i.e. running. They are not suited for apartment living or to be left in the back yard all day. They need dedicated owners and of course there are many out there. It is not acceptable for sled dog operators to fail to plan for retirement for these dogs and our task force will ensure that this is addressed.”
This statement seems to be in line with what many in rescue experience with puppy mill dogs and other animals who have not been well socialized. And it is true that some breeds are more active than others.
Part of what bothers me, and perhaps some others here, is that there are many breed-specific stereotypes that create an aura of irrepairable damage around certain kinds of dogs. I think it’s important to look at overall context. Are these dogs more difficult to rehome than, say, a mill dog that’s been neglected and never exposed to human attention? I’d guess not. They’ve spent a lot of time in working relationships with people and with other dogs, which I’d suspect would make them easier to rescue than the majority of mill dogs, and yet rescues take in many mill dogs every day and work with them to overcome obstacles and find them suitable homes.
I do agree with you that a failure to plan for the retirement of these dogs is a unacceptable situation. I hope that your task force will work to develop regulations that will make these plans both mandatory and workable.
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 25, 2011 @ 9:09 am
When is a dog not a pet? According to veterinarian Terry Lake, that is when someone finds it convenient to mistreat, torture, and needlessly kill the dog. Then you label it “not a pet”. What is wrong with the picture??!
Working dogs, when retired, become wonderful pets! Ask anyone who owns a greyhound, a border collie, a german shepherd. Huskies and other-breed sled dogs are no different. They don’t magically cross some invisible boundary into pethood… they ARE pets from the beginning. And deserve to be treated with dignity and respect, and a chance to live a good life after retirement.
Comment by CT — February 26, 2011 @ 4:11 pm
Firstly, an Alaskan husky does not have the disposition of a greyhound. Anyone that has the time and energy for a working Border Collie may have the energy and time to adopt a working Alaskan husky (not Malemute or Siberian husky).
Secondly, if any of you have owned enough animals to understand how frightening it is for any of them to be taken to the vet to be “put down”, will understand the emotional stress it puts them under. They always ‘know’ what is going on. It is far better to have a house visit for such a time. Tell me, what vet will do that? Also, a drug death is not always “clean”…just google it. It can be painful and prolonged too. And although I could never shoot my dog or horse if need be, I understand that it is the better choice for some. They are skilled with firearms and those I know and respect that do this make sure their dog’s tail is wagging at the last moment.
Thirdly, a working sled dog does fall in between ‘pet’ and ‘livestock’, whether you like it or not. These dogs do not live in the house. They are on health regimens befitting livestock, but also get the attention of pets. I have seen ‘pet’ dogs kept poorly and so overweight and badly exercised so as to ensure a bad quality of life.
Lastly, get your facts straight and maybe talk to a musher or two first and surely get the Task Force vet’s name right. Dr. Lake, not Lane.
Comment by LJ — February 26, 2011 @ 9:08 pm
LJ: I spelled his name two different ways in this piece, and corrected the typo the minute it was brought to my attention. And if you’d followed the links in the blog post, or any of our other coverage of this issue, you’d see I spoke to many people, and cite a number of mushers, owners of retired sled dogs and pets from sled dog lines, and sled dog rescuers.
I have no idea where the tirade against not putting dogs down at the veterinarian’s office but in the car comes from, but again, if you were doing more than just a drive-by, you’d know this issue has been dealt with here many times. I’ve only once in my whole life had a dog put to sleep at the vet’s office; every other time was at my home — because contrary to what you say here, many vets perform that service — or in my car.
That has nothing to do with the point at hand, which is whether or not working sled dogs are “adoptable.” Of course they are. It’s idiotic for anyone to say they aren’t, since such dogs are adopted all the time. And to use that as a justification for killing them by any standard that is less than a pet dog is wrong. And that statement that they’re “not pets,” made in the context of the comments by the BC SPCA that they talked to some unnamed “expert” who said these dogs are “not adoptable,” simply feeds that particular lie. And that lie kills dogs.
Now, Dr. Lake has some here and said he was quoted out of context and clarified his opinion in his own words. You’re just muddying the whole thing up again. I honestly can’t even tell from this what you’re saying — you say they’re BETTER treated than pets, that they’re adoptable but they’re not, what?
Comment by Christie Keith — February 26, 2011 @ 9:19 pm
Christie, none of my comments were directed at you, per se, but at some of the comments listed above. What is needed now is information sharing, not hyperbole. My attempt may have been perhaps too direct, but it was meant to inform. I do however, wish that you Christie, would take a moment to reflect before you respond, you may see less enemies around you. I think I am fairly well informed about this issue as I am a BC musher, I know the individuals involved, from inception to fall-out, and I am involved in organizing a solution.
My comments are relevant to the story, the whole story. The issue at hand are ‘exit plans’ for sled dogs. This includes not only adoption, but euthanasia.
And as an aside, I would like to confiscate and re-home all the FAT, UNFIT couch-potato dogs that I see living in the cities. That is irresponsible pet care inasmuch as an underfed sled dog is.
Many of us who keep sled dogs do not live within a winter days driving distance to a vet. I happen to live in a remote area in Canada, so this is not an option for me. Perhaps living in San Fransisco, USA, having veterinary house calls is an option, but for many still living a bush life, or a remote rural life, it is not.
I was incensed at the BCSPCA comments also, and at their lack of action. I phoned in to our public broadcaster to discuss it. I was asked to interview a second day. What hurt more was that it was very close to home, as Mr. Fawcett was on the race circuit with many of us, and I suspect the truth about how much the SPCA knew will remain to be seen. The truth is also that Fawcett had ads up on Sleddogcentral last winter and he did circulate e-mail to the mushing community here. That does not excuse what he did. But the complexity of how events transpired will probably never be made public.
This comment is directed at those who criticize the task force. Besides a vet/politician and others, there are respected and well known Canadian mushers (who race the big races AND operate tours with Alaskan huskies) on the task force. These individuals re-home dogs and keep a geriatric ‘ward’. I have confidence that all will act in the best interest of dogs.
Also, the stories you cite about adoptable sled dogs from racing kennels are stories about Siberian Huskies. Karen Ramstead and the Snowy Owl tours both run Siberians. Siberians are easier to adopt out because they fit the ‘ideal’ appearance of a ‘sled dog’. Some of what we have been trying to work on in Canada is a network for Alaskan husky adoption. Siberian people are already much better established for adoption networks.
I would much rather see all this angry energy going into offers to network or foster or adopt a retired sled dog. I know of many as I write, so if you are willing, there is a way. And if you are willing Christie, we can start right now.
Comment by LJ — February 26, 2011 @ 11:47 pm
I have a dog from a musher that gave KR some good stock. I have dogs from a musher that is derived from KR stock.
Look at the contract. The bill of sale. How many items of property were to be transferred from HD to OA? Joey?
Lake and Lane should both be given shovels, to get hands on, EVIDENCE. Let’s see if they can count to 100.
Comment by Larry — February 27, 2011 @ 4:29 pm
LJ, I think some of us are just trying to get more clarification. I was quite upset at the way Dr. Lakes comments were portrayed in the press, and I made a fuss. He’s commented now, twice, and asked us to watch and see what the Task Force does. I have closed my petition and intend to do just that.
However, I still want to know why these dogs are less adoptable than dogs which have spent their lives in cages without human contact. We rehabilitate dogs like that all the time, and place them in good homes. I hope some thought will be given to this.
Comment by Laura Sterner — February 27, 2011 @ 6:55 pm
LJ: yes some of the stories about successful adoptions have been about Siberians… although, I can’t understand why you think this “ideal appearance” makes them more adoptable — they’re just as nuts (if not more) as any Alaskan I’ve met (I’ve met Alaskans that were a LOT calmer than some of my guys, actually). It seems, too, that you have either skipped over or missed the stories of those who rehome or adopted Alaskan Huskies (check back in the various stories for links, but here’s one: http://carolkleckner.net/successes/ ).
Dr. Lake:
The point that many people seem to be making is that these dogs are extremely undersocialized due to living in a dog yard rather than in a home, and will be difficult, if not impossible, to send to non-working homes.
I feel this is a classic straw man argument, especially when it comes to dogs who have been working as tour dogs or those who run in organized races.
Tour and Racing dogs are constantly handled by all sorts of people — during the races, there are extra handlers, vets, etc as well as spectators who will come over to visit with the dogs. The dogs are used to traveling, and will readily jump into dog boxes on the trucks.
Tour dogs are even more socialized — they are in contact with “regular” people, not dog handlers or vets, including children of all ages. Before OAW took them down, there were multiple pictures of their dogs being hugged and played with by both kids and adults.
As well, just like any other dog, there may be one or two dogs they don’t get along with, but generally, sled dogs tend to be better at getting along with dogs than many pet dogs I see for training. They NEED to, as they work together in teams, closely… as in right next to each other, inches away.
We can’t truthfully make any sort of argument for not rehoming these dogs based on how they have been living, because in many ways, they aren’t so different as many of the dogs that are adopted out of shelters every single day…
Comment by jo — February 28, 2011 @ 12:12 pm
@LJ
“My comments are relevant to the story, the whole story. The issue at hand are ‘exit plans’ for sled dogs. This includes not only adoption, but euthanasia.”
Yes, and I can bet that part of the Task Force’s response to retirement plans will include acceptable euthanasia for dogs who are not able to be socialized - or who are past x number of years.
That to me is completely unacceptable.
Are there going to be strict rules and requirements about the socialization prep, ie who is going to socialize the dogs to ensure they are adoptable? We all know from Cesar Milan’s example that ALL dogs can be socialized.
I expect that the term “not able to be socialized” will be a catch all for any dogs the company doesn’t want to spend the time or the money on finding homes etc. I think that is going to be the cop-out.
Euthanasia should not be part of the picture PERIOD!!!
Is there going to be an age requirement for adopting out? ie are the dogs who are past age … 8 going to be euthanized, because of age, or infirmity or ….?
If that is going to be in the plan, then I want to see corresponding action plan in the provincial seniors health care - any senior past the age of 70 need to euthanized, because they sure cost us taxpayers a lot of money and we are a bigger “company” than the mushers.
These dogs are sentient beings who feel happy and sad, and they communicate, they “understand” you, for goodness sake. Stop treating them like disposable property! They do stuff for you, it makes them happy, fulfilled - are these qualities that “property” would feel?
From your comments above, I don’t expect much from you on the Task Force, I expect very little change. I am already prepared to be disappointed and disgusted.
I’d like you to prove me wrong.
Comment by Julia Trops — March 15, 2011 @ 7:23 am
@LJ
One more comment:
You say in post 88
“Secondly, if any of you have owned enough animals to understand how frightening it is for any of them to be taken to the vet to be “put down”, will understand the emotional stress it puts them under. They always ‘know’ what is going on”
The key here is that “they always know what is going on”!
These are dogs are not property! And just because they are defined as property currently does not mean that can CHANGE!
Or are you who use dogs as property afraid of that change, or don’t want that change, because it will complicate YOUR life or YOUR business.
Yes, the animals “know” and they aren’t “stupid”. I don’t know how you people can look them in their eyes every day and pretend to care when you know damn well you are going to kill them when you have used them up.
Times need to change LJ. If you have input on the TF, make sure your contribution helps that change.
Comment by Julia Trops — March 15, 2011 @ 7:46 am