SPCA: And you were complaining about the RDCO?

[Lore]

read the thread and you will see exceptions have and should be made . What are they "THE PET NAZIs" ?

Da, of course I have already read the thread and know the exception you are referring to.
Quite frankly we do not know for a fact that the exception took place and if it did we do not know what the circumstances were around that situation.
And what the SPCA is are people who truly care about animals.
Thats right, I said animals because that is what they are there to protect.
In case you don't know, the SPCA stands for Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

[SmokeOnTheWater]

My opinion on this, like many others is that these original owners were not able to provide the proper care for this dog. This isn't a matter of ageism for a lot of us here. It wouldn't matter to me whether they were 29, 49, or 79...they surrendered the dog because they weren't able to care for it properly.
Change the ages and keep the other details of the story the same and I bet a lot of you would be changing your tone.

Great post !!
I had my first master ( kitty cat ) at the age of 19. Took care of her, vaccinations, spayed, etc ... If I would have surrendered her to the SPCA, they for sure would not give her back to me, although I was young and could outlive her. All a matter of responsabilities.

[kibbs]

In case you don't know, the SPCA stands for Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

Are you saying that he was cruel to the dog?And should not be allowed to have one?
It went from help to worship and human discrimination.

[kibbs]

This is where we are thinking different in that I do not believe it was age discrimination but rather that he was unfit to care for the dog.

why did the spca not say this instead of saying we found a more suitable home. they did not say he was unsuitable. just not as good as a young family (said in falcetto) DISCRIMINAAAATION.if he just dropped it off and had no contract no problem . he had a contract to retrieve his dog after pups were born , Not knowing that within that contract they could discriminate. The spca does have the right to discriminate but not when it violates human right.

[ifwisheswerehorses]

why did the spca not say this instead of saying we found a more suitable home. they did not say he was unsuitable. just not as good as a young family (said in falcetto) DISDRIMINAAAATION.if he just dropped it off and had no contract no problem . he had a contract to retrieve his dog after pups were born , Not knowing that within that contract they could discriminate. The spca does have the right to discriminate but not when it violates human right.

You were there? Why didn't you say so? To think we had the one sole witness that everyone's been looking for and didn't even know it.

[Lore]

why did the spca not say this instead of saying we found a more suitable home. they did not say he was unsuitable. just not as good as a young family (said in falcetto) DISCRIMINAAAATION.if he just dropped it off and had no contract no problem . he had a contract to retrieve his dog after pups were born , Not knowing that within that contract they could discriminate. The spca does have the right to discriminate but not when it violates human right.

I'm beginning to wonder if your posts are for real.
He did not have a contract to retrieve his dogs after the pups were born.
There is no such contract.
However , there is a pet surrender contract,wait...........
Oh yeh, thats the contract he signed.
Can't wait to see what you come up with next.
Can you please keep it to facts.

[kibbs]

contract to retrieve his dog after pups were born

within that surrender contract there was an exception that was suppose to be written in the surrender contract.i dont know if it was or not i would like to see the original surrender form.even if she neglected to write in the exception the spca worker and the man had a verbal contract,which i will accept as truth .when the man returned to get his dog he believed that his contract would be honoured ,he would not return if there was no contract.at this point the spca do have the right to discriminate .they could have said at that point we believe you are unsuitable dont come back.but they led him to believe the contract would be honoured .at this point they decided to discriminate not based on an unfit owner but his advanced years.If someone just walked in and said i want a dog they can say no for any reasons because they have the right to discriminate do not have that right when there is a contract to which the spca admit to there being.they felt it better to renege on it for the dogs sake ,
These are the facts presented to this forum.The contract supersedes the spcas right to discriminate .despite the animal worshipers wish to take away this humans rights in preference for a preferred home for an animal.he has the human right to have his contract honoured.

[kibbs]

You were there? Why didn't you say so? To think we had the one sole witness that everyone's been looking for and didn't even know it.

read the thread these answers are there the spca admited to a contract and dicimination

[robik]

I can assure you there was no contract pertains to return the dog to the Hodson's nor was there an exception to he terms of the surrender contract.

[kibbs]

I can assure you there was no contract pertains to return the dog to the Hodson's nor was there an exception to he terms of the surrender contract.

how just by saying so.

[ifwisheswerehorses]

Nowhere does it say the SPCA agreed to give the dog back after these people surrendered it. You are basing your assumptions on hearsay as MUCH as you are accusing others of doing so. I suggest you make up your mind as to whether hearsay is a viable source.

[kibbs]

hat is when a friend suggested the SPCA could help them out. The couple brought Fifi to the Kelowna shelter where they signed papers to turn her over into the society’s care. However, Ardyth says they emphasized they wanted to re-adopt the dog after she finished giving birth.

Read it on Global News: CHBC Okanagan | Seniors claim age discrimination by Kelowna SPCA

Pugh would not confirm or deny the couple wanted to re-adopt the dog and would not comment on whether the couple’s age was a factor.
Pugh would only say Fifi has since been adopted by another family who is “a better fit”.

Read it on Global News: CHBC Okanagan | Seniors claim age discrimination by Kelowna SPCA

this original article from chbc

i believe there was a contract the spca would not deny and discrimination"a better fit"

[kibbs]

"We are both 79 years of age...(the dog) likes lots of exercise, which is ok but now (she is) pregnant!! Seems too much for us to cope with at this time. She is a very nice dog and we are extremely upset having to do this but we realize it will be the best for (the dog). (To surrender her). If (the BC SPCA is) unable to adopt (her out to new home) we may come and get her back at a cost we realize". The surrender process was followed and all the information regarding surrender explained to the couple.

i would also like to see these full supplementary notes and not the just the parts taken from it.if these notes are true and not manipulated (who wrote the notes?)i will believe the spca. but do not approve of their discrimination.

[Always Sunny]

"We are both 79 years of age...(the dog) likes lots of exercise, which is ok but now (she is) pregnant!! Seems too much for us to cope with at this time. She is a very nice dog and we are extremely upset having to do this but we realize it will be the best for (the dog). (To surrender her). If (the BC SPCA is) unable to adopt (her out to new home) we may come and get her back at a cost we realize". The surrender process was followed and all the information regarding surrender explained to the couple.

i would also like to see these full supplementary notes and not the just the parts taken from it.if these notes are true and not manipulated (who wrote the notes?)i will believe the spca. but do not approve of their discrimination.

"But now she is pregnant!" - seriously...she's is pregnant because they did not fix her...after she was vet checked..."Seems too much for us to cope with at this time"...

Kibbs...please explain why it is perfectly fine for anyone (yes, anyone...because we're not making this an issue of age) to state this.

[robik]

how just by saying so.

Nope, while I have not seen the documentation, I am the father of someone who has and she has assured me, before I state unequivocally, that what I had said previously is indeed fact.