By Taylor Chartrand

Investigation into the SPCA concludes

Mar 30, 2019 | 12:57 AM

MEDICINE HAT, AB – After six weeks of controversy surrounding the SPCA, the investigation into certain matters have concluded, following their Annual General Meeting (AGM).

Emotions were running high throughout the room and there were many questions surrounding the SPCA and some of those were answered.

John Haney is the director of ThreeSixty Analysis Inc. and was hired to conduct an investigation in regards to three highly-discussed topics.

“We had two incidents regarding canines that were euthanized and they were deemed to be unsupported,” explained Haney. “Then, we also had a third incident where four cats were transferred to a partner agency and that event was supported.”

Haney says there was no evidence found that the Medicine Hat SPCA violated its euthanasia policy in regards to Luhan and Karlos. 

IN OUR COMMUNITY

Medicine Hat girls choir to perform never before heard piece in spring concert

May 16, 2024

EDUCATION

Medicine Hat Public School Division launches anonymous reporting pilot program

May 14, 2024

IN THE COMMUNITY

Medicine Hat YMCA requests support camp for kids with trauma

May 14, 2024

However, there was evidence that supported four cats being inappropriately placed at risk of euthanasia when they were transported to APARC.

Haney says whether or not these findings were supported or unsupported, that doesn’t mean things were done right by the SPCA. 

“We know in all the circumstances there was a lot that could’ve been improved upon and there was a lot of things that could’ve been looked at differently.”

Personal dog trainer in Medicine Hat, Tara Martice, certainly believes things could’ve been looked at differently. 

“If there was a recommendation for a dog to not go to a certain home and that was not followed, that is setting the animal up for failure,” explained Martice. “If the animal needs to solicit a response to protect itself, then fair enough, it’s going to elicit a response, a bite and in this case (Luhans case) it was returned in a more negative state, warranting a state for euthanasia because the animal is too far gone.”

Following the results of the investigation, members of the public were not able to comment on the matter, as the meeting ended abruptly.

“I understand they have an agenda and a time restraint, but there should be time allowed for questions from the community, regardless of whether they’re voting members or not. These are people that are donating their time, money and they have a right to ask questions and have those questions answered.” 

Now, Martice wants change.

“They’ve had 40-years of operation and they have no policy on how to help their staff manage complex dogs and I find that very questionable. At this point and moving forward, I hope they do implement something and I’d like to see a timeline and I’d like to see that presented to the community in the public.”

Martice hopes the SPCA doesn’t go back to their previous ways.

“I hope they actually say what they’re going to do to increase transparency. They need to make new policies for staff, public and volunteer safety.” 

If not, she feels this issue will continue to snowball out of control.

“The community had their eyes opened and the curtain has been withdrawn and a lot of issues have been exposed and it is incomparable. You can’t close those doors, you can’t close those curtains. It’s too late. I hope they take this information to help them move forward because if they don’t, I fear for the longevity of the SPCA.”

Another member of the public that kept a watchful eye on the results of the investigation was former SPCA Assistant Manager, De Seaton.

“I’m glad he supported the cats. I do hope the person responsible is fired for what she did and I should have my job back. The dogs, I don’t agree with it.”

Seaton believes she was wrongfully dismissed after approaching the media on these hot-topic issues. Now, she wants a massive overhaul of the SPCA.

“I don’t have a lot of faith in it. Practically most of them need to be gone and there needs to be new management. That would fix everything. If they had new people, they could get trust back. They could start fresh.”

She believes it’s now up to the public to decide what to do.

“They know the truth, they’ve got most of the truth. There’s a lot more that they don’t have, but they can put the pieces together. They can now see what they’re truly dealing with.” 

Unfortunately for Seaton though, the decision now lies in the hands of the SPCA and their Board of Directors.

They closed the evening by saying this:

“We appreciate the integrity, honesty and the accuracy of the information that he has provided us with,” explained Tarynn Hagg. “As a board, we have not had time to process this information and we will be addressing the changes needed in a timely manner, as we hope to not be reactionary, but diligent, mindful and prudent in our decision making process. Please know we are committed to the changes that are needed to restore the trust levels and the transparency to our community.  2019 will be a year of change and we cannot do it without our staff, volunteers and donors that show passion for our animals of our organization.”

There is no timeline on when the SPCA and the Board of Directors plans on addressing these in-house issues.