Puppy Forum and Dog Forums banner

1 - 20 of 60 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...led-dogs-in-post-olympic-cull/article1888742/

At least 100 healthy sled dogs have been destroyed in Whistler – victims of a post-Olympic slowdown in demand for sled dog tours.

Word of the slaughter is contained in WorkSafe B-C documents obtained by CKNW radio.

The documents show a worker with Outdoor Adventures Whistler was granted compensation for post-traumatic stress disorder after being told to shoot the dogs.

The cull occurred last April and the company does not dispute that the dogs were put down – except to say that the worker indicated 70 were shot, when about 100 were killed.


--------

Very sickening!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,307 Posts
So the worker shoots 100 dogs and then gets paid post-traumatic stress compensation. I hope at least he was an efficient dog killer. (less suffering) I wonder if Vick needed any paid PTSC. About every time you think you've heard it all Murphy's law gives you a mind slap.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,728 Posts
Just caught the tail end of this on the news so will have to listen to the noon hour news. Sounds like he worked for them and was ordered to kill the dogs so went ahead and did it, but now is regretting it, probably because of the backlash when it was found out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,765 Posts
I have always assumed this kind of thing was common in the sled dog world. . .it's common enough in hunting kennels (in fact, there was a local news item back when the economy started to go south, where a hunting resort operator said he had to shoot most of his hunting dogs because there was no business and he couldn't afford to feed them. Nobody jumped on that one, although I hoped they would). But I have probably read too much Jack London. I don't see how anything could legally be done (one article said it's "definitely a criminal code offense"); it's either legal to shoot dogs or it's not--they can't say it's legal to shoot one dog but not 100 dogs.

In short, I think it's awful but I doubt anything will come of it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,714 Posts
Someone else just posted another thread on this. Apparently it was because there were no bookings for dog sledding by Whistler's visitors and they couldn't find homes for the dogs.

I can't believe this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,440 Posts
So the worker shoots 100 dogs and then gets paid post-traumatic stress compensation. I hope at least he was an efficient dog killer. (less suffering)
He was not.

“I know I’ve said in the past that I’ve seen horrific things involving animal cruelty, but reading this, this blew my mind,” said [The SPCA’s Marcie] Moriarty.

“It was an absolute massacre. Some of the descriptions were, yeah, just horrifying.”

She said some of the dogs were shot in the head, but others clearly suffered and did not die instantly.
If any boss of mine ordered me to shoot dogs, I'd quit on the spot... or more likely be fired for the choice words I'd have for that idiot. Then I'd go straight to the media. I can't believe that this happened or (especially) that they thought they'd get away with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
205 Posts
Read about this story a few minutes ago and was utterly disgusted. The article I read gave some count of what happened during the shootings and it sounds like he was not an efficient killer at all. I guess it's legal in BC to kill a dog as long as it's done in one shot (which is somewhat of a strange law to begin with). It sounds like that didn't necessarily happen for at least some of the dogs, so I'm sure they'll be able to get charges filed, especially since he admitted to taking more then one shot with some.

I just...I cannot....I cannot believe how anyone would allow themselves to do something like that. I understand that it's your job, but I can't imagine that a job like that is so prized that you would shoot 100 healthy dogs just to keep it. This guy should have said no, should have quit and should have gone straight to the media with the story. At least then, hopefully, the dogs would have been taken from that situation and saved. I don't even understand how it's not a thought in the company's mind to take the dog's to a local shelter or work with local shelters to make sure they get good homes. Sure, that takes a little work...but hell, the time it took this guy to dig that grave, shoot all the dogs and bury them probably would have been better used finding proper homes for the animals. It's not like when you ask for help these days regarding dogs people aren't willing to jump at the chance.

It truly sickens me that these dogs were thought of as nothing more then the simple possession of a company. They weren't employees of the company as they very well should have been, they were viewed as equivalent to a piece of equipment that has no more use. Absolutely disgusting that any human being would view an animal in that manner.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,192 Posts
A musher friend posted this today on Facebook. It's pretty damn horrifying. And not only is it terrible for the dogs, but it's really bad for mushers who actually LOVE their dogs and treat them like family -- not equipment.

A message for all touring companies: dogs are NOT equivalent to an unused snow mobile. You don't just throw them away.

You could argue that these dogs were the company's responsibility, and if they could no longer care for them financially, it's their job to "euthanize" them (I put that in quotes because this was not a merciful killing, this was downright disgusting). They could surrender them, but they'd be flooding shelters with relatively unadoptable dogs -- because, let's face it, I doubt these dogs spent any time as indoor pets. I'm not saying they'd never come around -- with the right people, they could learn and transform into awesome house pets. The husky rescue I volunteer with is currently rehoming a number of Alaskan Huskies from a disgusting mushing situation. But these dogs are difficult cases, and many would certainly just sit in shelters, waiting to die.

That being said -- it's the responsibility of the touring company to KNOW what they can handle, even in times of crisis. Like any business, they should have backup plans that don't require mass killings. I mean, it's not only horrible for the dogs -- but it's not exactly good PR for your company, either. "Hey! We're so-and-so sled dog adventure! If you don't come for a ride, our huskies die!"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,722 Posts
I know some countries have laws that say you're allowed to put an animal to sleep if you are skilled in that sort of thing and it's done humanely, but it doesn't specify HOW you have to be skilled. So basically anyone with a firearm licence could consider themselves skilled, and therefore allowed to put animals to sleep because you know how to operate a firearm.

Pretty tragic, but if they can't feed the dogs and they can't find homes for them (which would be pretty difficult with 100 of them, they would have trouble even finding a shelter that would take that many dogs) then what are you gonna do? But they should have at least made sure it was done humanely.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,728 Posts
Not that it is any excuse but they apparently tried to get a Vet to put them down and he refused to put down healthy dogs. Because they are not considered "pets" I can see where nothing will probably be done to them as they are considered "livestock" like horses, cows, etc. (maybe not the right "category" but looked at differently than pet dogs.) It is all over our news casts and sounds like he did not do it very humanely and was injured as the other dogs paniced when he started shooting them. Since it was done way off in the bush, I guess they figured nobody would ever know about it. It is horrible and it makes it so hard on people who truly love their sled dogs and look after them.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,942 Posts
What did they THINK would happen after the Olympics? that people would STAY?????

Riding camps used to have horses that, at the end of the season, were sent to slaughter simply because they cost too much to feed over the winter. These days most summer camps who have horses lease them for the summer instead.

Like I said.. what were they thinking? Make a lot of money for a few weeks and then what???????? in this economy?????
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,765 Posts
That's one of the worst parts of this, I think--that nobody would have heard about this if the executioner didn't suddenly feel guilty (as well he should!), start having nightmares, and apply for Worker's Comp. Just one of those dirty little secrets. . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,913 Posts
I've been sick over this story all day. It just disgusts me. There are simply NO WORDS. I think Jess summed it up perfectly well, these dogs are living beings, not equipment to be discarded. :(

And yes, it makes ALL mushers look bad and that's how the media is playing up the story. Not good PR for anyone involved with sled dogs. :(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,761 Posts
Riding camps used to have horses that, at the end of the season, were sent to slaughter simply because they cost too much to feed over the winter. These days most summer camps who have horses lease them for the summer instead.
So who actually owns the horses they lease? And do they feed them over the winter?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,307 Posts
I've been sick over this story all day. It just disgusts me. There are simply NO WORDS. I think Jess summed it up perfectly well, these dogs are living beings, not equipment to be discarded. :(

And yes, it makes ALL mushers look bad and that's how the media is playing up the story. Not good PR for anyone involved with sled dogs. :(
I wonder if this will also add to Iditarod problems as people like to jump on things when they can.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,942 Posts
So who actually owns the horses they lease? And do they feed them over the winter?
Oh yes they do. It is a business where the camp leases the horses for their season and maintains them but they do not have to maintain them for the winter. The lease fees pay for the horses to be fed and cared for thru the off season. Ultimately the camp pays less and the horse string owner makes something.

If a horse has a problem (lameness etc.) the horse is returned and replaced by another. The leasing owner then cares for the horse/treatment.
 
1 - 20 of 60 Posts
Top