URGENT: CALL FOR A MORATORIUM ON ALL EUTHANIZATIONS

I received the following news today:

A cat belonging to a Dartmouth family was seized and put down at the Burnside Emergency Animal Clinic within less than two hours after neighbors reported it as a stray, claiming it was “dragging its hind legs.”

Ducky, a 17-year old Angora cat belonging to Paul and Jean Hanlon of Fernhill Drive, went missing on the evening of August 16. Her frantic owners searched in vain with the help of a neighbor. Finally at around 10 pm they called HRM Animal Control, who informed them one of their officers had taken it into custody a few hours earlier. The officer, acting on a call from an elderly couple in the neighborhood about a cat seen on a lawn, mistakenly concluded Ducky was in bad shape.

On learning the news, Jean Hanlon immediately drove to the Burnside clinic and, as she says “went berserk”: “I banged on the door and said, ‘You killed my cat! Let me in!’” A vet came out and explained to Hanlon she had euthanized Ducky after receiving an order from Animal Control. This happened probably sometime between 8 and 9 pm, before the owners were able to track it down. Explanations vary as to why the procedure was done so quickly, nor is it clear why Ducky was taken to the clinic rather than to the SPCA. Ducky was being treated with antibiotics for an ear infection, but was otherwise in good health, according to the family vet. The family is devastated by the sudden loss of a well-cared for, longtime companion. The vet told Hanlon she felt misled by animal control, who in turn claimed they did not know.

Animal Services has claimed it is not allowed to inform pet owners of the names of callers who report their animals. So its officer, who did not actually see the cat dragging its hindlegs, did not attempt to contact the owners. Nor did he search for someone to corroborate the information filled out on an “Animal Relinquishment Form” by Hanlon’s next-door neighbor. To date Jean Hanlon has not been sent a copy of this form, which includes a 72-hour waiver of the time required to hold an animal before euthanization. On it, the officer told her, the neighbor indicated that the cat was a stray, which Hanlon finds odd, as he had clearly known what her cat looks like. Also, since in the past, he had delivered strays to her door, she does not understand why he chose to call police this time.

My friend Jon Stone, who made me aware of Ducky's fate, wonders whether the actual rules were really followed, as Animal Services claims is the case. 

He asks, "How many Brindis have there been as a result of this bylaw? How many cases like Jean Hanlon's cat have there been? How many more broken hearts will there be, before some common sense and supportable legal principles win out over a heartless bureaucracy?"

My answer: TOO MANY. Killing innocent animals is absolutely unacceptable, regardless of how many or how few. 

Therefore, until enforcement procedures are reviewed and the law is improved–and this is not likely to happen until after the October election–I propose an immediate indefinite moratorium on all euthanization orders in HRM.  

I call upon all HRM vets to refuse to carry out an HRM order to euthanize an animal unless and until they are absolutely convinced it is justified by the animal's condition, i.e., visible signs of agony or a severe injury from which it will not recover.

Please join me in making this demand by contacting your elected officials and anyone else who will listen!