By now most people in Canada, and quite possibly beyond, have heard that 100 sled dogs were culled — some of them allegedly inhumanely — by a Whistler company following the finish of the 2010 Olympic games. The news created shock and outrage from dog lovers everywhere, who couldn’t imagine how a company suddenly decided to euthanize that many dogs at once without finding alternative homes for them.
Less than a week after the news, Premier Gordon Campbell made an unusual decision that should equally shock and outrage British Columbians. He announced a public inquiry into the “inhumane” treatment of the animals, appointing Kamloops-North Thompson MLA Terry Lake to lead it. The task force will include representation from the British Columbia Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (BCSPCA) and the Union of B.C. Municipalities, to review the circumstances related to the dog killings and make recommendations to prevent it from happening again.
Why should that outrage anybody? Well, to begin with, let’s look at the use of the word “humane” in conjunction with the euthanizing of dogs. The reason we don’t use the word murder, massacre or atrocity when talking about animals is that they aren’t humans, who are worthy and deserving of a higher level of compassion and sympathy. Or so one would think.
This speedy inquiry announcement happened so quickly that it can only leave those who have been trying to get the government to call inquiries into more important issue for decades shaking their heads. Perhaps the most egregious example was the time it took to call an inquiry into women reported missing from Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside from 1997 to 2002.
As of Dec.11, 2002 there were 62 women listed as missing from Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside district, all believed to be murder victims. More shameful still, the stain of B.C.’s “Highway of Tears” remains ignored to this day, as the 800-kilometre section of road between Prince George and Prince Rupert is believed to have been the last known location for 32 women since 1969.
But inquiries into murdered women, many of whom were prostitutes and drug addicts, isn’t a populist vehicle the government of the day can ride to higher approval ratings. And if social media reception is any indication, missing furry friends, not missing women, is clearly the inquiry that people want.
It took three years after the conviction of serial killer Robert Pickton for the government to call an inquiry into the botched police investigation that could have got him behind bars sooner, saving as many as 14 lives.
British Columbians are used to waiting for years, and sometimes decades, before the government decides to open inquiries on important issues. Frank Paul, a 47-year-old Mi’kmaq, died of hypothermia after his limp body was dragged from a Vancouver police jail and left in a back alley on Dec. 5, 1998. It took 12 years to launch a public inquiry into the decision not to charge the police for the act.
And it took 14 months and an unprecedented scandal in the BC RCMP before the taser death of Robert Dziekanski went before Justice Thomas Braidwood in a public inquiry into the incident at Vancouver International Airport in 2007.
It isn’t just murder inquiries that refuse to be addressed either. The stench of the seven-year BC Rail case and the house arrest that was given to Dave Basi and Bob Virk has still not gone away. The two pleaded guilty in October to breach of trust and accepting benefits in exchange for leaking confidential information about the BC Rail bidding process in 2003. For taking the fall, Basi-Virk had their six-year legal ordeal covered by the taxpayers to the order of $6 million.
Thanks to the anthropomorphizing effect of dogs in our culture, we can seemingly cull runaway populations of rabbits, but not dogs. No, dogs are a Canadian sacred cow, above things like corruption, murder and human injustice.
Another great posting, Adrian.
Priorities of modern people sure are upsidedown.
exactly…and thank you for having the courage to write this post!!
A fine post, and excellent point. I was thinking about Picton too.
Thanks, I appreciate that! I figured I was going to get hate mail from dog lovers.
So we should not be upset by this horror story because other issues are not resolved to YOUR satisfaction ? Here’s an idea —
You get upset by what you to get upset about and the VAST majority of us will get upset at what we want.
Don’t like that your causes don’t get any attention — convince people that they should. But clearly you can’t so convince others, so the next best thing is to attempt to de-legitimize what does strike a chord with them. In a fit of pique it would appear.
What exactly do you think could have been done to prevent the vile and deranged Pickton from doing what he did ? Answer —absolutely nothing at all. So an inquiry can only apportion blame after the fact and never really affect future events. This ‘dog’ inquiry might prevent this type of horror from happening again. Which despite your chattel attitude towards other non-human lives would be a good thing.
And your unpleasant view that other sentient creatures are merely amusements and tools for we superior folks is both archaic and unacceptable. Even if it does reflect the current state of Canadian law. Would you feel the same were superior otherworldly beings suddenly to drop in a visit and decide to amuse themselves with us ? I has me doubts. But the principle is EXACTLY the same.
I believe I was quite clear that it was the speed of the inquiry call that got my attention. And I would hope those other issues I mentioned aren’t just “my causes”. You know, murder and police negligence…
Well I’m a huge dog lover, and this issue has made me sick. If an inquiry can prevent future culls like this I am all for it.
That being said, Adrian is correct that we seem to value dogs, polar bears and seals more than we do murdered women. Think about all those poor cows, pigs and chickens that are killed everyday. It’s enough to make you a vegan….okay, not quite, but let’s call an inquiry into how they are killed too then.
Our priority must be people who are suffering. We have to act faster to help people who are in trouble. Plus we can help animals in distress as well, it doesn’t have to be one or the other.
Great piece Adrian!
And your unpleasant view that other sentient creatures are merely amusements and tools for we superior folks is both archaic and unacceptable.
Spoken like a true PETA supporter.
Great article. I too, have gotten rather tired and annoyed with the “outrage” over this. Yes, they are cute innocent dogs, and being a dog lover myself, its a pretty awful thing. However, I would like to add that list the thousands of unborn helpless babies “aborted” every year. Why is it that no one seems to be “shocked” by that? By the fact that late term abortions are legal in Canada? That, to me, is far more disgusting, repulsive, and morally reprehensible than the killing of 100 dogs.
And not to mention the shocking death rate of children under government care in the Province…this government has it’s priorities bass ackwards.
This winter, following the drought last summer, I’ve had to cull my herd from 300 to 200. Some of the ones that I culled were the old and lame, some were just fine. Am I going to get the frigging SPCA leaping to conclusions about how I killed them and that criminal charges should be laid because I reduced the amount of livestock that I was feeding?
The SPCA seems to be run by the frigging inmates!!
Very well written Adrian. Simple fact of life, Humans are higher order beings…we do not deserve more than any other creature and are no better, but we have the free will and ability to impose cruelty very rarely seen in the animal kingdom where violence is dispassionately doled out as a means of survival or acquiring food, as opposed to satisfying some sick urge or desire.
It’s pretty impressive to hear someone claim nothing could have been done to avert the Pickton debacle. Any type of human inflicted cruelty and violence can be stopped/averted, think half-full not half empty sir!
Acquiescing to the the fact that we cannot work to identify early, and as a community protect ourselves against those that are inherently cruel to any victim (2 legged or 4) is a slap in the face to history and the concept of self- and collective improvement. By your reasoning we wouldn’t even casually mention the Holocaust these days because, “wtf, what could we have done to stop it?! But what about all those poor horses killed in WWI drowning in the mud between the trenches, someone should have brought that up at Versailles!” How inspiring.
Suffering everywhere should be a prominent issue in all communities. We should constantly be working together and communicating and not wasting time with double talk and holding down the caps key. Cruelty to animals is important no doubt, as is abortion (no offense Karsten, but that’s a whole different Pandora’s box so let’s leave it aside for now), but as the original piece stated, there is an order of magnitude, that you could probably trace back to, oh I don’t know, Darwin maybe…that calls into question the amount of resources attributed to certain causes, and the speed with which they are mobilized. It’s an accurate observation and not designed to question what grinds your gears in whatever it is you do on your every day.
This dog incident while highlighting animal cruelty, is exactly what ‘Pat’ said, animal control. Not exactly a foreign concept even in nature, think conservation and fishing and hunting quotas set out each year by the government. And then think how many hunters probably take more than one shot to finish a deer, or fisherman who club those beautiful coho on the banks of the Fraser River each fall as they flap around drowning in air…sad in each case, but no one calls the press.
I do feel for this guy’s suffering, but no one held a gun to HIS head telling him to step on and slit the throats of dogs he had named. It was the execution of the act (pardon the pun) that deserves discourse IF we must talk more on it. Free will questions whether he really had to keep reloading his firearm, versus stepping back and questioning what exactly it was he was doing…if anything further needs to be written on this story, it’d be a piece in the lifestyle section under “are you being efficient in your workplace.”
The lesson learned from this whole incident is quite simple: if hookers could pull dog-sleds, they would deserve more public sympathy. Game, set and match.
*
“dougf screeches… other sentient creatures are merely amusements and tools”
dear dog, er… doug… where exactly does adrian say anthing of the kind?
oh right… that was you.
enough said.
*
Actually, Doug, the case can be made that the man who did this was as deranged in his own way as Picton was; nothing could have been done to stop him, etc., etc. So if you think the Picton inquiry is a waste of time, I can think this one might equally be so.
The Picton inquiry is an effort to pinpoint where police went wrong in their early investigations; given there is evidence they almost had him but didn’t follow up and fourteen more women were killed, I can make a case that the analysis provided by such an investigation – if properly followed – will be a lifesaver when other crazies come on the scene.
Since the whole horrific dog killing went on over a couple of days, I am surprised noone thought to investigate the howling, shots, etc. It’s hard to believe this ranch or whatever it was was that isolated. Others must have known and chose not to intervene.
To be fair, people would be a lot LESS sympathetic if sled dogs were out trolling for johns to support their smack addiction…
Hi Pat,
From what I understand it wasn’t the process of “culling” but the issue of culling “inhumanely”. Many of the dogs did not die outright, but were wounded and suffered slow agonizing deaths. The SPCA agrees that “putting down” animals by a single shot to the head, where death is instantaneous, is still legal. (well, for now, anyway).
Again, for the most part, sled dogs are not considered pets. They do not domesticate well so it is difficult to find homes for them. What would be appropriate is to find other businesses willing to accept them, but then the problem might be would existing packs then accept them? If there is no clear plan for their future, licenses should not be given. I agree this part should be regulated.
Why wasn’t the meat used to feed the hungry?
Adrian:
A nicely balanced post.
As a young RCMP officer, I was called upon to euthanize dogs from time to time in the small town in which I was stationed.
With no small animal vet in reasonable distance, the town’s “solution” was to provide us with a plywood box, connected to a hose that would be affixed to the the exhaust pipe of a vehicle.
I refused to use that, on the basis that I believed that it was cruel and barbaric.
My alternative was to take the poor animal to a quiet place, give it a piece of steak that I had purchased for that purpose, allow them to enjoy the meal, and then shoot them as humanely I possibly could.
I hated it each time I had to do that…it sickened me.
The thing that bothers me most about the Whistler incident is that this jerk shot those animals in full view of the remaining dogs. Dogs being social animals and intelligent, had to recognize the fate that was awaiting them. That is not only barbaric…it is obscene.