In what many have described as a staff and volunteer blackout, several animals, including Pit Bulls which had already found placement in out of province shelters but were awaiting transport, have been euthanized at the Toronto Humane Society. I'll post up more details once I can get a sense of what's rumour and what's truth - if that's even possible at this point.
From the THS website:
Responsible Animal Care Decisions
Our responsibility to provide medical care to the animals sometimes means difficult choices need to be made.
In recent days, The Toronto Humane Society has euthanized 6 dogs and 19 cats that were chronically ill, displayed aggressive behaviour, or whose quality of life due to illness or injury was severely diminished and who had been at the shelter for an extended period of time.
Our new euthanasia policy is clear that we will not house these animals in the shelter indefinitely as their medical and behavioural condition deteriorates and the possibility of them being adopted diminishes. Our policy dictates that we will continue to provide all necessary veterinary care to all the animals in the shelter. However, there is a time when euthanizing an animal is the appropriate medical and humane choice.
These decisions were made by the THS staff veterinarians as well as OSPCA contract veterinarians in consultation with THS Executive Director Garth Jerome.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
I would point out that placement had been found for ALL the illegal and legal putbulls and we had TWO people (with impeccable refrences) come forward to adopt both Peti (legal pit bull) and Smokey (legal pit bull).
I'm bitter and so upset I can't stop crying. I'll have more on this when I'm able to form a coherent thought.
With the exception of poor Janey, there was not ONE dog that had any major issues tha woudl require this type of murder.
and there was no question of "awaiting transport" - volunteers had offered it numerous times - in shifts in order to avoid stopping in the province (which was apparently an issue). We also offered to bankroll it and had already submitted more than $300 worth of cheques to EACH rescue that was willing to take our dogs.
Wait...what? So did the THS euthanize them or the OSPCA? I would assume the THS since they posted it, but then was it a joint decision? Why all at once? I'm utterly confused.
"Our new euthanasia policy..."
Does this sound and smell like the current board trying to keep their places?
Something smells.
I recognize that animals shouldn't be housed indefinitely. But these euthanasias have completely missed the boat: If what I understand is true, namely that the dogs, at least, were all simply awaiting transport to confirmed placements, HOW IN THE HELL DOES KILLING THEM CONFORM TO THIS "NEW EUTHANASIA POLICY"?
Is there any reasonable expectation that that question, will be legitimately addressed? Or can we expect it to go into the cone of silence?
Is this part of the new soft target or hard target? Somewhere on the THS site, under FAQs, didn't they say that they never euthanize just to make space (or will that disappear from the website in line with the New Policy?) Anyway, they are down to 300 animals now, aren't they?
So these dogs weren't sick. They weren't dangerous. They had places that would take them in.
Yep, something smells, and I hope the media chews on this one for a long time.
Post a Comment