# 100 Huskies shot and stabbed to save money



## grayshell38 (Mar 9, 2009)

So sick. That pretty much sums it up. :evil::-x:shock::evil:

100 huskies shot and put in mass grave by tour operator trying to save money | Mail Online


----------



## xXEventerXx (Nov 27, 2010)

yea i read about this today in the paper so sad


----------



## Carleen (Jun 19, 2009)

> ‘While we were aware of the relocation and euthanisation of dogs at Howling Dog Tours, we were completely unaware of the details.’


Bologna. The company came to the man who did it, knowing he was in some financial trouble, and offered him good money to do it and be quiet about it.

The man outed the company because he hasn't been able to sleep properly since due to the horrific memory.

I have no sympathy for the man, but it is the company that did it - and used someone's poor circumstance to get it done.

It makes me absolutely sick that this happened, and especially that it happened 2 hours from my house.


----------



## corinowalk (Apr 26, 2010)

Truly heart breaking.


----------



## riccil0ve (Mar 28, 2009)

That makes me sick to my stomach. =\


----------



## TaMMa89 (Apr 12, 2008)

That's sick :shock:.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

There is nothing wrong with shooting something to kill it. 
Shelters put down vast quantities of healthy animals every day. 

Is this sad. Yes. But it is not 'what mean and horrible people'.


----------



## GreyRay (Jun 15, 2010)

Aw, that is sad  I would love to own a huskey.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Dec 27, 2009)

I read about it in the paper too. It is very sad and sickening. But there is kind of a difference. Shelters try their best to home every pet they can. This was just cruel. And they don't shoot them or slit their throats. They HUMANLY put them down.


----------



## dizzynurse (Jul 7, 2010)

Aww that is terrible but I completely agree with AB. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

Shooting is not inhumane.


So, you would rather your dog get tossed in the car, driven to a scary place, shoved into a kennel for a few days with strangers and strange dogs all around it, then dragged into a small room and given a lethal injection? That is some how better than being at your own place and minding your own business and then suddenly being dead?

If this guy did a crappy job then yes, that is bad.


----------



## TaMMa89 (Apr 12, 2008)

Alwaysbehind said:


> There is nothing wrong with shooting something to kill it.
> Shelters put down vast quantities of healthy animals every day.
> 
> Is this sad. Yes. But it is not 'what mean and horrible people'.


Even sure it's a bit sad if a healthy animal has to be put down, I don't see there would be something horribly wrong with it basically. I still think that the way in which this case was handled is horrible, that shooting/ stabbing doesn't sound like a proper way to kill anything that lives.


----------



## bigbull (Sep 4, 2010)

this is just evil they shouldnt have done it now they should pay by going to prison


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

Alwaysbehind said:


> Shooting is not inhumane.


No, it isn't. Even some vets state that death by bullet is more humane than lethal injection. When it comes time for my old guy to be let go, I'm going to see if the vet will do it by shooting instead of the 'pink stuff'.

I think stabbing is rather violent and probably illegal in the U.S., but putting down by gunshot certainly isn't.

We had a 100 animal seizure here in my area about 4 months ago. Many of those animals have not found homes, and are set to be euthed by lethal injection in the next week or two. I think it's sad, but not inhumane. I would think the same way if they were going to be shot, instead of given chemicals.


----------



## xXEventerXx (Nov 27, 2010)

Alwaysbehind said:


> Shooting is not inhumane.
> 
> 
> So, you would rather your dog get tossed in the car, driven to a scary place, shoved into a kennel for a few days with strangers and strange dogs all around it, then dragged into a small room and given a lethal injection? That is some how better than being at your own place and minding your own business and then suddenly being dead?
> ...


Shooting a DOG isnt bad but when there are lots of people who cant afford an expensive breed like a husky i think he could have given them away for free, shooting one dog isnt inhumane, but shooting 100 is inhumane


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

xXEventerXx said:


> Shooting a DOG isnt bad but when there are lots of people who cant afford an expensive breed like a husky i think he could have given them away for free, shooting one dog isnt inhumane, but shooting 100 is inhumane


Why? Shelters put down more than that on a daily basis. Many of them purebred dogs. Stating that because they were Huskies they'd have a better chance at finding homes, isn't borne out by the reality of many breeds of purebred dogs right now in shelters. Unsocialized dogs are especially hard to place, regardless of their breed.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

xXEventerXx said:


> shooting one dog isnt inhumane, but shooting 100 is inhumane


When does the number change from OK to bad?

Shooting 2 OK? 5? 20?


These dogs were not house pets. There are not vast numbers of people who can properly care for a dog that is used to this life style.


----------



## Hrsegirl (Mar 16, 2010)

I think its wrong all around. I own a husky myself and it kills me to know that many dogs were gunned down and some had their throats slit. That's disgusting and I can't believe anyone has the mind to do that to a poor animal. Why didn't they think about this when they started their business? Why didn't they question a situation like this saying "Oh, well what if our bookings happen to go downhill, what are we going to do with all these dogs?" If they would've thought about that and not had so many dogs it would've been different. 
Now I know there are some of you that are going to reply with snide nasty comments and that's fine. It's your opinion. But what they did was still wrong. Those people had no heart. Those were innocent animals. 
I would've gladly taken all of those dogs if I would've known about that. There are plenty of people I"m sure would've wanted to re-home those beautiful creatures. Sure there aren't alot of people around that can properly care for a dog that is used to that lifestyle, but I gave it a shot and I love the decision I made. Maverick is the most beautiful and trusting creature I've ever met. He's the sweetest dog I've owned and I could never do that.

I know those dogs were not house pets but they could've certainly changed. It's never too late to teach an old dog new tricks. Yeah they're energetic, trust me I do know that, but there are many ways to keep up with their lifestyle. We hook Mav up to a sled all the time and he loves it. 

Yes unsocialized dogs are hard to place but it's not impossible to do. I can't believe those cold-hearted people didn't give the dogs a chance. That business should be shut down immediately.


----------



## xXEventerXx (Nov 27, 2010)

100 dogs is like a massacre


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

Hrsegirl said:


> I would've gladly taken all of those dogs if I would've known about that.


Please, call them now and let them know that the next time they are needing to get rid of dogs that you are ready, willing and able. You will pay for transport and such too.


----------



## xXEventerXx (Nov 27, 2010)

Alwaysbehind said:


> Please, call them now and let them know that the next time they are needing to get rid of dogs that you are ready, willing and able. You will pay for transport and such too.


Just because people feel for these dogs doesn't mean they are wrong! No need for sarcasm here.


----------



## Hrsegirl (Mar 16, 2010)

Oh don't be such a smart alec. Don't you have any concern when it comes to animals? Obviously not...


----------



## JustDressageIt (Oct 4, 2007)

Huskies are working dogs. Racing Huskies would not transition well to completely "domestic life" (I.e. Not working every day for the entire day) and for most of these dogs, a swift painless death is preferable to trying to transition the dog. They are high energy dogs - especially racing Huskies - that need to be worked. They develop neuroses (destructive or otherwise) very quickly, and novice racing Husky owners can have a very very difficult time dealing with them.
ETA... As I recall... These dogs were shot. Not stabbed. I think perhaps (I don't know for sure) the media has added the stabbing for effect?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## xXEventerXx (Nov 27, 2010)

JustDressageIt said:


> Huskies are working dogs. Racing Huskies would not transition well to completely "domestic life" (I.e. Not working every day for the entire day) and for most of these dogs, a swift painless death is preferable to trying to transition the dog. They are high energy dogs - especially racing Huskies - that need to be worked. They develop neuroses (destructive or otherwise) very quickly, and novice racing Husky owners can have a very very difficult time dealing with them.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


But there are many other racers, and husky owners who would gladly take them. I know there are many Husky adventure companies in BC who take rescue dogs for there sleds..


----------



## xXEventerXx (Nov 27, 2010)

Hrsegirl said:


> Oh don't be such a smart alec. Don't you have any concern when it comes to animals? Obviously not...


 
WHo me??


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

Hrsegirl said:


> Oh don't be such a smart alec. Don't you have any concern when it comes to animals? Obviously not...


Always has quite a bit of concern for animals, but the reality of certain situations is that these dogs, for whatever reason, would not be easily placed.

There are plenty of pet Huskies sitting in shelters waiting for euthing right now, so why is giving them a lethal injection better than shooting? At least shooting is faster and the animal isn't aware of it happening, unlike being put in a strange place with strange animals, people, and unnerving smells, until it's time to be dragged into a room and given an injection.

The way this was done saddens me, but that's only because I'm an animal lover. The more pragmatic part of my brain says if the animals were going to be put down anyway, faster is better.


----------



## Katesrider011 (Oct 29, 2010)

No need to start a fuss folks :shock: What's done is done. Shooting is humane, the stabbing wasn't so much, that is if they were actually stabbed. Arguing isn't gonna bring them back.


----------



## TheLovedOne (Jan 26, 2011)

Here's the full story - warning it's pretty graphic.
CBC News - British Columbia - Sled dog killings prompt vigilante threats 

The truth is that the dogs were not just shot and that's it. Dogs saw the first ones being shot and then they panicked and starting fighting for their lives - no kidding. The guy had dogs attacking him and so he starting slitting throats and throwing injured dogs into the hole. I think that by anyone's definition that is a horror show. I applaud the guy for coming forward because maybe now we will start to see some change in Canada. Animal rights are much weaker in Canada compared to the US.


----------



## TheLovedOne (Jan 26, 2011)

That's the thing it wasn't fast at all.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

xXEventerXx said:


> Just because people feel for these dogs doesn't mean they are wrong! No need for sarcasm here.


Hu?
She said she would have taken them if she knew about them.

I am just suggesting she call this facility now so if they are in the same boat in the future they know of this great person who is willing to take all of their unwanted dogs.

I am not the one who posted "I would have taken them all", she is.


I am not sure what I posted that makes me ignorant. And realistic does not really mean cold hearted. 
I feel for the dogs. Along with all the dogs and cats and such that I have had to help PTS at a shelter.

Feel free to call me all the names you want, though. It obviously makes you feel better.


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

TheLovedOne said:


> Dogs saw the first ones being shot and then they panicked and starting fighting for their lives - no kidding. The guy had dogs attacking him and so he starting slitting throats and throwing injured dogs into the hole..


I read the whole article and nowhere did it say the dogs were panicking, or attacking the person who killed them. It _does_ state that he admits to slashing some of their throats with a knife, which I find to be barbaric.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

Speed Racer said:


> I read the whole article and nowhere did it say the dogs were panicking, or attacking the person who killed them. It _does_ state that he admits to slashing some of their throats with a knife, which I find to be barbaric.


I agree.


----------



## TheLovedOne (Jan 26, 2011)

Sorry on the right hand side there's a linked = related stories and it's the WCB document that has all the details.


----------



## TheLovedOne (Jan 26, 2011)

If you just think about it logically it wouldn't be fast with one guy killing 70 dogs. I don't think that's possible. He had to do it out in the open with the other dogs chained up right there.


----------



## corinowalk (Apr 26, 2010)

The trouble really is *how* they died and not *that* they died. While we are animal lovers, you have to be realistic about this situation. This particular situation is probably more common than you think. 

These dogs are working animals. Not your normal house pet. They have a job to do. Since there was no more work for them, they had to either be rehomed or put down. Since rehoming 100 dogs is a daunting task, they elected to have them put down. The article itself states that the owner wanted them all put down by a VET. The vet refused to put down healthy animals. They had to resort to drastic measures. 

The way some of these animals were killed was horrific. That is, if you can believe a man who wanted the public to feel badly for him after he singlehandedly killed 100 dogs. Had he been prepared and did his job properly, this wouldn't be an issue. Had he put some forethought into it, had a plan in place, the animals would have simply been shot and had it done with. 

Most people don't want to think of putting an animal down by gunfire. It is a crude way to do things. However, in the right hands, a bullet can be far more humane than the euth process the vets use. I have personally had horses PTS via gun. They went quickly with no fight. I have also seen horses that fought a vets euth for over an hour.


----------



## TheLovedOne (Jan 26, 2011)

Probably everyone should read the Workers Compensation Report 'cause then I think we can all agree.

Yes it is not uncommon for these situations to occur and I guess whether or not the practice should continue is a whole other conversion that would probably be pretty emotional - I'm sure.


----------



## corinowalk (Apr 26, 2010)

TheLovedOne said:


> If you just think about it logically it wouldn't be fast with one guy killing 70 dogs. I don't think that's possible. He had to do it out in the open with the other dogs chained up right there.


I imagine this was *his* decision to do it fast. What is one extra day?


----------



## RusticWildFire (Jul 6, 2008)

You cannot tell me that this is humane...

"The dogs were shot or had their throats slit, while those that proved hard to kill had to be ‘wrestled to the ground and stood on’ before they could be shot in the head."

"‘He also had to perform what he described as “execution style” killings where he wrestled the dogs to the ground and stood on them with one foot to shoot them.’"

"The report added: ‘He described a guttural sound he had never heard before from the dogs and fear in their eyes.’ 
It also told how he had run out of ammunition when he was attacked by an injured animal, so had to use a knife to kill it."

"By the end of the slaughter he was said to be killing dogs ‘in a haze’ and was covered in blood."


If you had no idea what was going on would you want to be "wrestled to the ground and stood on" before you could be shot in the head? What a tragic and inhumane way to go. If I had to guess I would say that the dogs knew something awful was happening as they sense when things are wrong and were probably trying to fight for their lives...rightly so. Humane? I think not. A proper way to put down an animal that gave this company its life to bring them profits? No...I don't think so. 

"But the size of the cull in April 2010 meant he had to kill the animals in full view of other dogs."

Sick. 

If you read the article I'm not sure how you can say this was a humane way for these animals to go. I could continue on with quotes from it that make it all the more disgusting but I don't think there is any need.

I'm not saying these animals could be re-homed easily but I sure hope they tried before they did this. Sure, the article says they did but with the way these animals were treated I'm not sure I entirely believe it. There are more than just a few people who enjoy dog sledding in this world who I would bet would pay to have the animal(s) transported. If even just a handful could have been spared this disgusting death it would be better than nothing.


----------



## TheLovedOne (Jan 26, 2011)

I think it was done over two days but I think it could not be fast anyway and I have no idea if it was his decision or not. I'm pretty sure it wasn't his decision to do it in the first place.

I too had to put a horse down and I shot it correctly in the head. It was fast and although the other horses were near they knew she was dying long before she got shot.


----------



## TheLovedOne (Jan 26, 2011)

Ya ya it is definitely a horror show - it's undisputable.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

If you go by that theory then getting my rottie's nails trimmed is inhumane. It takes three people. Two people to wrestle him and hold him down and one to clip his nails.

I do think this guy did things wrong. I have already said that.


----------



## corinowalk (Apr 26, 2010)

Oh I agree! I don't want anyone to think that I agree with stabbing a dog to death. The trouble is, the people who owned these dogs ordered them to be dispatched. I am sure he thought he could simply take them all out back and shoot them easy. If he had a plan together, it would have gone easily and without any undue stress to the animals.


----------



## RusticWildFire (Jul 6, 2008)

Speed Racer said:


> There are plenty of pet Huskies sitting in shelters waiting for euthing right now, so why is giving them a lethal injection better than shooting? At least shooting is faster and the animal isn't aware of it happening, unlike being put in a strange place with strange animals, people, and unnerving smells, until it's time to be dragged into a room and given an injection.


If it were anything less than say... 10, it probably would have been quick, but killing 100 dogs by gun and knife cannot be quick. There are better ways he could have gone about killing these 100 dogs himself. Perhaps take more than one day to do it and take them a few at a time out of the view of the other animals? Yes, critiquing him is not going to change this situation but there are better ways this could have been done that would have made it so that it were not so inhumane, or maybe not inhumane at all. Because yes, a gun can be quick and less stressful than an injection. 



Speed Racer said:


> I read the whole article and nowhere did it say the dogs were panicking, or attacking the person who killed them. It _does_ state that he admits to slashing some of their throats with a knife, which I find to be barbaric.





Alwaysbehind said:


> I agree.


100 huskies shot and put in mass grave by tour operator trying to save money | Mail Online

I think perhaps you two should go back and read the article again because yes it does say that they had "fear in their eyes" or something of the sorts, and the one attacked because it was wounded and not killed. Also, killing the last 15 dogs was a haze and he got some and wounded others. 

"By the time he had shot his 15th husky, he noticed the dogs were ‘experiencing anxiety and stress’, the documents revealed."


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

My Rottie has "fear in his eyes" when he gets his nails trimmed too.


I highly doubt these dogs knew the cause and affect of guy with gun means I am dead soon. 





I think the guy who did the killing, who is now trying to get sympathy, is a moron. He took on a job that he obviously was not prepared to do correctly. I do not find it wrong that the dogs were destroyed though.


----------



## TheLovedOne (Jan 26, 2011)

Oh come on what are doing on this forum if you don't love animals anyways - what happened to these dogs is not at all like getting you dog's nails trimmed. You must be joking.

Rusticwildfire I guess you just have to leave people in their worlds sometimes and just be glad that you're more enlightened.


----------



## RusticWildFire (Jul 6, 2008)

Alwaysbehind said:


> My Rottie has "fear in his eyes" when he gets his nails trimmed too.
> 
> 
> I highly doubt these dogs knew the cause and affect of guy with gun means I am dead soon.
> ...



Your Rottie isn't being killed, though. 
It's difference of opinion and beliefs, but I've seen enough and also heard enough from others to believe that animals know when there is doom. 


I do not find it wrong that the dogs were destroyed. I just think there are a million better ways to go about it. Going at it in a haze and firing so that you miss the dog you are supposed to be hitting and wounding another so badly that it had to be euthanized as well when it wasn't supposed to be is definitely not OK.


----------



## Katesrider011 (Oct 29, 2010)

TheLovedOne said:


> Oh come on what are doing on this forum if you don't love animals anyways - what happened to these dogs is not at all like getting you dog's nails trimmed. You must be joking.
> 
> Rusticwildfire I guess you just have to leave people in their worlds sometimes and just be glad that you're more enlightened.


I think I recall AB specifically saying she loved animals greatly, earlier in this thread. Just throwing that out there


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

RusticWildFire said:


> Your Rottie isn't being killed, though.
> It's difference of opinion and beliefs, but I've seen enough and also heard enough from others to believe that animals know when there is doom.


Do not assume things to the point of knowing what my dog thinks. But you are right, my dog is not being killed. He is tortured for as long as nail trimming takes (which is not fast since it is such a battle) and then has to recover from the trauma. 
If you saw this dog you would for sure think he is being killed imminently.


----------



## TheLovedOne (Jan 26, 2011)

Ya right. If AB did love animals then AB would just come clean and agree this is a horrible tragedy.


----------



## Katesrider011 (Oct 29, 2010)

TheLovedOne said:


> Ya right. If AB did love animals then AB would just come clean and agree this is a horrible tragedy.


She said it was sad. She knows it could have been handled differently, but the *shooting* of them wasn't inhumane. If she didn't love animals she wouldn't be here.


----------



## ladybugsgirl (Aug 12, 2009)

That is horrible...


----------



## RusticWildFire (Jul 6, 2008)

Alwaysbehind said:


> Do not assume things to the point of knowing what my dog thinks. But you are right, my dog is not being killed. He is tortured for as long as nail trimming takes (which is not fast since it is such a battle) and then has to recover from the trauma.
> If you saw this dog you would for sure think he is being killed imminently.


I am not saying that I know what your dog thinks, I am only saying what I stated. In my experiences animals seem to know when bad things are happening. I think they are smarter and more inclined than lots of people give them credit for. 



TheLovedOne said:


> Ya right. If AB did love animals then AB would just come clean and agree this is a horrible tragedy.


I don't think this is necessarily true. You can love animals and still let them go. The way this happened can be labeled as a tragedy that could have been avoided. Had they done things in a more humane manner it wouldn't have been the big deal that it has turned into.


----------



## corinowalk (Apr 26, 2010)

See, my dog Trusty hates having his nails clipped to. He isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. I am 100% positive that when we hold him down and lay over him to clip his nails, he really does think that we are going to kill him. His breathing slows, he takes long deep rattling breaths. The trouble is, with Trusty, this is the only way it can be done. 

Oh and LovedOne, just because someone doesn't think the way you do, that doesn't make them automatically wrong. I know for a fact that AB is an avid animal lover and that she doesn't agree with the way the dogs were dispatched in the end.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Dec 27, 2009)

I think they could have found other companies who would have taken few already trained huskies for free to add to their own business (of dog sledding).

Death by bullet could be humane. But when you do it wrong it could be very harmful and cruel. The way he did it was cruel. Using knives and randomly shooting is cruel.

(The story of dogs being scared of nail clipping) I think is like I put up a fuss when I have to clean my room when my mom tells me too (not on my own time when I want to, a lot less fuss) Doesn't mean it is going to kill me. But just my opinion on that.


----------



## Mike_User (Oct 24, 2006)

TheLovedOne said:


> Oh come on what are doing on this forum if you don't love animals anyways - what happened to these dogs is not at all like getting you dog's nails trimmed. You must be joking.
> 
> Rusticwildfire I guess you just have to leave people in their worlds sometimes and just be glad that you're more enlightened.





TheLovedOne said:


> Ya right. If AB did love animals then AB would just come clean and agree this is a horrible tragedy.


I understand that you have strong feelings about what happened to these animals, but please avoid saying things like the above if you wish to continue to participate here. Just because a member disagrees with you doesn't mean that they don't love animals or are ignorant or otherwise not "enlightened". If your disparaging remarks were met with retaliatory remarks, this thread could get very ugly very quickly. Please consider the goal of fostering civil, mature discussion when you post, and avoid doing the opposite.


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

Thank you, Mike. It's sad that the Admin had to step in, when we already had a Mod on the thread. :?


----------



## corinowalk (Apr 26, 2010)

Ray MacDonald said:


> I think they could have found other companies who would have taken few already trained huskies for free to add to their own business (of dog sledding).
> 
> Death by bullet could be humane. But when you do it wrong it could be very harmful and cruel. The way he did it was cruel. Using knives and randomly shooting is cruel.
> 
> (The story of dogs being scared of nail clipping) I think is like I put up a fuss when I have to clean my room when my mom tells me too (not on my own time when I want to, a lot less fuss) Doesn't mean it is going to kill me. But just my opinion on that.


See, I have to disagree. There is no 'reasoning' with a dog. I can tell Trusty all I want that I am doing it for his own good and I just want to make him comfortable...it doesn't change the way he feels.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Dec 27, 2009)

Meh, some times people say things in the heat of the moment.


----------



## Mike_User (Oct 24, 2006)

Speed Racer said:


> Thank you, Mike. It's sad that the Admin had to step in, when we already had a Mod on the thread. :?


We ask moderators who are actively participating in a thread in their capacity as a member, as opposed to as a moderator, to recuse themselves from moderating the thread when another member of the team is available to address it.



Ray MacDonald said:


> Meh, some times people say things in the heat of the moment.


That's true, Ray. But if enough people were to say whatever they thought in the heat of the moment without consideration of its impact then entire threads would become heated.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Dec 27, 2009)

corinowalk said:


> See, I have to disagree. There is no 'reasoning' with a dog. I can tell Trusty all I want that I am doing it for his own good and I just want to make him comfortable...it doesn't change the way he feels.


I don't mean that my little theory is true or not but how would you be able to tell him that? you don't speak dog. And maybe it does hurt him or he had a bad experience and can't get over it.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

corinowalk said:


> See, I have to disagree. There is no 'reasoning' with a dog. I can tell Trusty all I want that I am doing it for his own good and I just want to make him comfortable...it doesn't change the way he feels.


Thank you, Cori. That is exactly how it is. My dog just knows what we are doing is way scarier than he likes and he is totally freaked. No ability to rationalize that this is not causing his death, etc. 
If he was able to rationalize it, next time we went to trim his nails he would not freak out. He would know that last time we did him no harm, etc, etc.

Thank you, Mike. 




​


----------



## corinowalk (Apr 26, 2010)

That is my point. I can't explain to him that after I am done, he will feel better as he always does. In the meantime, he needs to have his nails clipped which to him, means that I am trying to kill him and eventually, I stop.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Dec 27, 2009)

Very true Administrator. And for the most part this forum is quiet and calm. Good Job!


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Dec 27, 2009)

Do you need to cut his nail? Not saying that it is cruel or anything, just that we never clipped ours.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

Some dogs, like some horses, do a better job than others keeping their nails at a reasonable length. 
Since my three dogs spend the vast majority of their time on soft or smooth surfaces they do not wear their nails down well on their own.

I am pretty sure Cori's dog is old and does not get around much anymore, so I am guessing the chances of him wearing his nails down on his own are slim to none.

When their nails get too long it is uncomfortable for them to walk since it shoves their toes in weird directions.


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

Administrator said:


> We ask moderators who are actively participating in a thread in their capacity as a member, as opposed to as a moderator, to recuse themselves from moderating the thread when another member of the team is available to address it.


Was not aware of that, and it's certainly fair enough. Thank you for the explanation.


----------



## Walkamile (Dec 29, 2008)

corinowalk said:


> See, I have to disagree. There is no 'reasoning' with a dog. I can tell Trusty all I want that I am doing it for his own good and I just want to make him comfortable...it doesn't change the way he feels.


Cori, this triggered a memory of my Great Dane Merlin. He also was terrified of having his nails trimmed and it was quite an ordeal for us both. However, when the time came to let him go , he , who was also frightened of vets, laid that massive head down in my lap and his eyes never left mine. We both knew it was time, if not past time, and he wanted to be released. So, I have always puzzled over how he could show such courage and calm then, but carry on so for those blasted nails!

As far as this horrible incident concerning the 100 Huskies, all I will say is , don't do something that you cannot face yourself in the mirror over. No one held a gun to that gentleman's head to do this, so he must have been okay with it until something changed during it. Not for me to say either way. Also, not something I would find myself involved with.


----------



## grayshell38 (Mar 9, 2009)

What I find most upsetting about this is the fact that this company didn't have the forethought to say "Well, we MIGHT get more business, but just in case we don't lets wait to get more animals." But, No. With money signs in their eyes, they brought 100 more animals into their care that they knew they couldn't take care of without more business. 

That is nothing more than heartless greed. Period.

I have no problem with animals needing to be culled. I have bred fish and various rodents and sometimes it's best to remove individuals that are physically or mentally unsuitable for the overall goal in the program. But no person should ever take on more living creatures than they can currently handle on the pretense of _maybes_. And ideally, there should be back up plans in case of the worst scenario and the animals need a place to go. 
They ignored both of these basic (IMO) rules of animal husbandry because it didn't fit into their business plan. 

There were also strict rules on the method and conditions in which the animals were killed in ahead of time. 

These are the issues that bother me most. They ignore basic animal husbandry laws which should be in place not only for the well being of the animals, but to save them trouble in the event that the proverbial **** does hit the fan. There is no reason not to have plans like this except for laziness. 

Of course, the fact that they didn't have any contingency plans in place besides calling one vet and assuming that they would do it and thinking of an even cheaper method leads us to the other things I hold issue with.

This should not have been put on one man. This should have been taken care of with a team to be handled with as little stress and as humanely as possible for everyone. Animals and humans alike. 

Firstly, the killing should not have been within the sight of the other dogs. Whether they knew they were going to be killed or not, all animals know what the smell of blood is and they know when another animal is wounded and upset. 

There should have been at least one other person to hold the dog so that the person with the gun could get a good clean shot off. This would have avoided 
simple injuring the dog and eliminated the use of a knife at all. 

The animals should have been taken away one by one depending how many teams there were working on the cull. This would have caused much less stress.

And another thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is the biological hazard this can be. 

Burying one dog in your back yard, what ever. It will be bones or close to it in a few weeks. But one hundred decomposing dog corpses in a hole is a major hazard to the water system. That is even more meat than a horse or other large animal which you are not allowed to bury due to the same issue. 
The animals were not disposed of properly at all. And that is not just the companies' issue. That is a health risk to anyone who might have a well that draws from the underground water system that this would contaminate. 

Those are logical things that should have happened in this situation. I have more personal opinions on the situation, but this is long enough as it is.


----------



## Kiki (Feb 7, 2007)

Im going to be Switzerland on this xD

Its a horrible thought and its sad considering those animals would have had no idea why this was happening. And the tour operators should have been more responsible. Lets face it they were probably facing financial difficulties for awhile, so they should have taken steps earlier, perhaps sold some dogs and MADE MONEY!!!
But at the same time, the above do have a point. Shelters put down animals every day and provided it was humane....well........you get the point


----------



## corinowalk (Apr 26, 2010)

I think it is also noteworthy that the business owner that ordered the cull has since sold his company and a new company now runs the business. The new company claims to have no idea that this happened. 

In my experience, most vets refuse to put down a healthy animal. However, if you keep looking, you may just find someone who can do it for you. I think if this had been planned better with more people helping and a set order for things to happen, the dogs would not have suffered an this would have never been a big issue. 

Oh and Trusty is 13 years old with severe hip dysplasia. If his nails are too long, his hips ache terribly. He walks oddly enough as it is. With long nails, he barely gets around. If he could make the association between the few minutes of terror and how much better he feels after it is all said and done, he would probably cut his own nails. He can't though. He is just a dog. And not a very bright one at that.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Dec 27, 2009)

Aww, my doggie had hip issues too, she also had cancer, And we had to put her down 

We have a new little pup now, we had a pedi-paws I think it's called. We never used it yet though.


----------



## grayshell38 (Mar 9, 2009)

corinowalk said:


> Oh and Trusty is 13 years old with severe hip dysplasia. If his nails are too long, his hips ache terribly. He walks oddly enough as it is. With long nails, he barely gets around. If he could make the association between the few minutes of terror and how much better he feels after it is all said and done, he would probably cut his own nails. He can't though. He is just a dog. And not a very bright one at that.


Yay! I love the oldies! It's good to hear someone that takes care of them properly and doesn't just let it slide because it is difficult or inconvenient. 

At the vet clinic that I am the kennel staff at, we regularly have a geriatric german shepherd come in that is the sweetest old guy. He has very bad hips, but his owner never clips his nails. We always clip them when he comes in because we feel bad since his owner doesn't take hints that they are really long and should be done. He's so good about, so it leaves me to believe that it's just laziness...:-(


----------



## JustDressageIt (Oct 4, 2007)

xXEventerXx said:


> But there are many other racers, and husky owners who would gladly take them. I know there are many Husky adventure companies in BC who take rescue dogs for there sleds..


Do you know for certain they didn't try?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## xXEventerXx (Nov 27, 2010)

No but when i lived in BC, the town i lived in used to rescue old racing dogs, and use them for husky adventure rides at ski hills. They had all different breeds pulling sleds


----------



## TheRoughrider21 (Aug 25, 2009)

I honestly think this is horrible. That's like a horse trainer/breeder whatever going "uhoh, I have too many horses." and then shooting them and the ones that he/she couldn't shoot, slitting their throats. That's what I'm comparing it too. I've had to shoot 2 dogs and 1 horse. Did I want to do it? No. Did I know it was for the best and the right thing to do? Yes. One case was where we were bear hunting up north and one of the dogs got mauled by a bear. We had no cell reception and the closest vet clinic was at least an hour away. I put the gun to my shoulder, aimed at the dog, and pulled the trigger. I didn't want to do this but the dog was in obvious pain and he would have died eventually and his death would have been painful and long. These Huskies weren't injuried. They weren't attacked by an animal and had life-threathing injuries. The company should have thought before buying 300 dogs. It is completely irresponsible in my mind. This never should have happened in the first place...just my 2 cents.


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

What is the alternative? 

So there are 100 dogs. Like has been mentioned, these are working dogs. They are not going to be best suited for a domestic pet and will require training and habituation to their new situation which someone will have to provide. The shelters and rescues are full of plenty of purebred dogs who can not get adopted. The burdon of training, feeding, vetting, and caring for these dogs while they are out of work will fall on the shelter or whoever is working to rehome them. 

It is likely that many other sled businesses are already full of dogs since it is a business and they are unlikely to want any extra dogs just out of the kidness of their heart. The economy is not the greatest and sledding is a tourist thing. With the end of the Olympics, a chunk of those tourists are now gone. 

I agree that is irresponsible that the dogs were in this situation to begin with. But hindsight is 20/20 and hopefully they won't repeat this again. I'm guessing they won't because this exposure has probably ruined their business and the fastest way to a business owner is through his wallet. 

What happens if the dogs can not get immediatly rehomed, adopted, donated, etc? I understand that we are responsible for these animals when we take them in, but that is not always how it works in life. I can accept that it is morally wrong. Everyone on this forum is an animal lover. But realistically, adoption and donation are not always viable. 

I think the way it happened was wrong. I do not think that a well placed bullet is wrong. 

Of course I would rather them live out their lives happily. And of course I wish the business would have done it differently. 

Being realistic about the situation though does not make you inhumane, heartless, or any variation of the word.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Dec 27, 2009)

TheRoughrider21 said:


> I honestly think this is horrible. That's like a horse trainer/breeder whatever going "uhoh, I have too many horses." and then shooting them and the ones that he/she couldn't shoot, slitting their throats. That's what I'm comparing it too. I've had to shoot 2 dogs and 1 horse. Did I want to do it? No. Did I know it was for the best and the right thing to do? Yes. One case was where we were bear hunting up north and one of the dogs got mauled by a bear. We had no cell reception and the closest vet clinic was at least an hour away. I put the gun to my shoulder, aimed at the dog, and pulled the trigger. I didn't want to do this but the dog was in obvious pain and he would have died eventually and his death would have been painful and long. These Huskies weren't injuried. They weren't attacked by an animal and had life-threathing injuries. The company should have thought before buying 300 dogs. It is completely irresponsible in my mind. This never should have happened in the first place...just my 2 cents.


I agree 100%


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Dec 27, 2009)

Sorry Dove, I love you and all, but I don't like being realistic when it comes to animals. The whole thing shouldn't have happened in the first place. Stupid stupid owners.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

Spastic_Dove said:


> What is the alternative?
> 
> So there are 100 dogs. Like has been mentioned, these are working dogs. They are not going to be best suited for a domestic pet and will require training and habituation to their new situation which someone will have to provide. The shelters and rescues are full of plenty of purebred dogs who can not get adopted. The burdon of training, feeding, vetting, and caring for these dogs while they are out of work will fall on the shelter or whoever is working to rehome them.
> 
> ...


Very well said!


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

Spastic_Dove said:


> Being realistic about the situation though does not make you inhumane, heartless, or any variation of the word.


Thank you, Spastic. As usual an excellent post, especially this last part.

Ray, we're all agreed that it shouldn't have happened the way it did. However, _someone_ has to be realistic about live animals that need food, water, shelter, and take up time and money that may not be available.

Euthing is not cruel whether by lethal injection, captive bolt, or a bullet. It's the _way_ this dispatching was carried out that horrifies me.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Dec 27, 2009)

I don't like the real world.........

I just wish they tried harder to keep them alive. But they are stupid for having too many dogs without thinking things through.

I think we should start euthing people.... BUT people think THAT is cruel.... I dont think it is.


----------



## Speed Racer (Oct 21, 2009)

You're still very young, Ray. Your outlook will change as you get older and understand the world better.

You say you love animals, yet come off with some very cruel and hateful remarks against humanity. If you have no compassion for your own species, you're no better than the most abusive animal hater.


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Dec 27, 2009)

AM NOT! I just don't like humans.... I LOVE animals. And I think we should hav the death penalty.....for jail, not like good people who don't deserve it.

I'm 16, I am allowed to be illogical sometimes. 

But I did take offence to that.


----------



## wyominggrandma (Nov 4, 2009)

We euthanize dogs, cats, horses at the vet I work for. An animal has no concept that the needle in its leg will kill it, all it feels (if done correctly) is a sensation of sleep and then the heart stops and they die. Euthanasia is an overdose of phenabarbital and it happens quick. Do they have a "scared look" in their eye? Sure they do, most animals that come into the vets have that look, they have mostly learned from their owners that "the vet is gonna hurt you cause they will stick you with a needle, or clip your nails, or whatever" poor little princess, but after the "nasty person" gets done with it will be all better mentality. The owner usually causes the anxiety of the vets, not the staff at the clinic. We spend lots of time getting an animal to like us. My dogs run into the vet clinic, they know they will be getting lots of pets and cookies no matter what we do to them. Don't give animals human feelings and emotions, they don't think like we do.
Now, did the dogs panic when all that was happening? I am sure they did, but not because they thought: oh a man with a gun, the loud pop and that dog chained up is now dead". No, if you have never walked into a sled dog operation where hundreds of dogs are chained up to dog houses, they get all wound up, barking, trying to excitement fight with dogs next to them, running in and out of houses because the first dog got excited thinking it was getting fed or getting to go to work and it was a domino effect. If one of my dogs me, he starts jumping around which gets the others jumping around. Do they think I am going to shoot them? Feed them? take them for a walk? They don't know anything other than" here comes mom". The gun shots made them more excited, not because they saw a gun, but because they heard the noise and thought something exciting was happening. Again, dogs, cats, horses do not think like humans, they think like animals.
Was this situation wrong the way it was handled? Yes, sounds like it would have been better to have two or more folks doing this , not just one. Unfortunately, actual sled dogs trained to run are ot acceptable as house pets, they live to run and when not running, they are sleeping or barking in excitement. Too many dogs in pounds, etc to try to place 100 active running working dogs.
Personally I think this whole situation is weird. Yes the dogs were destroyed, but it was done almost a year ago and is just now making the news. The person who did it is NOW claiming lifelong stress and upset. After a year? Bet he continued to work at the same place, fed the same dogs and did the same thing day after day until either he decided or somebody told him about "post tramatic stress" and he decided to cash in. If it was such a haze, how does he know he culled the right dogs? And lets be honest, if you or I was given that order and really cared about "slaughtering" the dogs, you could always refuse and quit your job. He wanted the extra money he got paid for doing this, then decided to get more money by bringing this to attention now.
It probably could have been handled more efficiently than was done, if that is the truthful story, but nobody can force a person to do what he did if he had not wanted to. Why wait a year to bring this up?


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Dec 27, 2009)

I agree wyominggrandma.


----------



## Amblin Cowgirl (Apr 27, 2010)

I think this is a horrible thing, not BECAUSE the dogs died, but because of how it was done. Euthing dogs and cats is humane, shooting them ( when done correctly) is also humane .. but slitting there throats is NOT! I do agree that dogs do not think like people do. They can't tell that this man has a gun, and is going to kill them. All they know is something different is happening, and if one dog gets worked up, they all do. This man should have thought out a plan of action, had other people to help and made sure he was comfortable doing it. We have had to shoot one of our own horses, just recently actually. He was suffering to great lengths, and he needed to be let go. The vet couldn't make it for another half an hour .. and I could not let him suffer till then. I didn't have to shoot him myself thankfully, but if i had to, I would have because i would rather the animal be dead then suffer! 
So I guess I am kind of on the fence about this one!


----------

