Archive for March, 2011

Bulletin from the cause: Stop animal cruelty in Canada with effective legislation!

Legitimate ways 2 help C-229 (effective animal cruelty legislation) and animal news!

Todays news! (Please scroll down! Tons of important links here!! TY!)

Pair fined for ferret’s death

Outrage over sentencing for Edmonton cat lady


Dog walking event to rally for animal cruelty law reform

Steve-o fights for Lucy the Elephant

Northern Gateway Project threatens wildlife

Calgary police shoot, kill dog

Woman attacked by dogs in north Edmonton

Coyote traps catch puppies living wild

Deer under attack in north Nanaimo
Animal activists, city consider Nanaimo deer solutions

Stay away from seals on shore: DFO

MP introduces bill to protect Canadian sealers from anti-sealing protesters

Reminder.. Ways to help stop animal cruelty in Canada!!

Upcoming RALLYS/WALKS for the sled dogs and C-229!
Paws for the Cause: Join Us for a Peaceful Walk for Change on March 18- https://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=190845787622911
Boycotting Outdoor Adventures in BC, Whistler- Events
Prev rally pics!
A Vigil for the lost lives of 100 Sled Dogs on April 23 Events

LETTERS 2 MP’s, PM, Just. Comm. media, etc
Easy link 4 all! http://stopanimalabuse.ca/
Or.. Link to find your MP’s mail, email and ph #:

C-229 PETITION!! CDNS- http://markholland.liberal.ca/files/2010/07/petition_AnimalCruelty_2011.pdf
Non- Cdns- http://stopanimalcrueltyincanada.wordpress.com/help-with-petition/

Please join CEAC! (Group 2 post MP responses)
News from the North! Action for the Protection of Northern Animals-

K please let me know if I forgot anything and please..
Pass it on! Stop animal cruelty in Canada with effective legislation
fb group- http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2559701041
fb cause- http://www.causes.com/causes/8495-stop-animal-cruelty-in-canada-with-effective-legislation?m=611b54ab

Yesterday’s News!

Group wants tougher laws to protect animals

Animals should be treated as family, not objects

‘Cage fighting’ pit bull owner fined

Baddeck ranch under investigation for animal neglect


Limit placed on animal rehabilitation groups

Edmonton says elephant better, but too sick to move

Musher scratches after resuscitating dog on the trail
Sled dog task force report may come in two parts
Going off again: Protesters miss the mark when they target mushing
Signatures needed for animal cruelty petition
Another online sled dog petition asking 2 upgrade BC laws..

Endangered green sea turtles may get new lease on life

Beavers, rats, gophers targeted in rural Sask.

There’s something fishy about Alberta’s caribou

Join the 2011 European boycott of Canadian seafood to save seals

Back 2 the proposed changes of taking away charitable status of any group that speaks out against animal issues.. Please C and help! x

Thank you
Sarah West CFAWR Canadians For Animal welfare Reform
SEND TO consultation-policy-politique@cra-arc.gc.ca CC to pm@pm.gc.ca ( Harper)

March ?, 2011

Dear Sir:

As an active volunteer with our local SPCA, it was with absolute shock and horror that I read that tax exemptions of most animal advocacy groups will be revoked. Apparently “an activity or purpose is only charitable when it provides a benefit to humans”. Any organization that polices cruel vivisection practices, or wishes to keep an eye on slaughterhouses, or even disagrees with any government policy considering the treatment of wild or domestic animals, will be subject to penalties.

This would allow many barbaric practices to continue without scrutiny. It is a step backward for civilization. Perhaps you are unaware of the implications of such actions. Cruelty towards those who are weaker and less able to defend themselves is easily escalated to society’s weakest members, including women and children. Many of the nation’s serial killers started their career by disregarding the pain they caused to animals. By not enforcing cruelty laws, or allowing animal charities tax free status so that they can expose unconscionable acts of cruelty, you are condoning this depraved behavior.

Your department should be aware of public opinion, which is becoming less tolerant of crimes against animals. It would be unconscionable to not recognize human activities that are insensitive to the suffering of living creatures. Would Canada want to be world renown for displaying so little compassion to those who are weak or have no voice? It is time that people were educated to realize that animals feel pain and fear. Only the very basest of human beings are incapable of recognizing this. I hope that you will use your position to recognize the valuable service that animal charities provide.




Read Full Post »

Anyone who has had to deal with government bureaucracy on any level has undoubtedly experienced sheer frustration. If one is not left on hold, then one will find themselves transferred to various departments, speaking to numerous individuals that for the most part, either cannot answer your questions directly or who have no idea at all whom you should actually speak with.

As to the process of lobbying for improved legislation that is a different matter entirely. One’s frustration levels rise beyond description, patience rapidly becomes nonexistent and faith in one’s elected representatives rapidly becomes mute.

The process, which I began three long and arduous years ago, to convince the Territorial Government to enact Legislation to Protect Animals in the Northwest Territories, fits well with the description in the above paragraph. It appears that moving forward into the 21st Century must be a source of intimidation and fear for many GNWT Ministers and certain MLA’s. It is also evident that in one specific instance faith in an elected representative of the people is precarious.

On February 9, 2005 Ms. Sandy Lee, MLA, Yellowknife (Range Lake),now Minister of Health, stood in front of the Legislative Assembly and spoke out for the need of Animal Protection in the NT.

The following excerpt is quoted from the GNWT Hansard date February 9, 2005.

Friends: by Ms. Sandy Lee – MLA, Yellowknife (Range Lake)

“Speaking of roosters, Mr. Speaker, I believe one of the most important jobs we have as MLAs is to crow out loud like roosters about all the issues that are important to our constituents, especially on behalf of those who are most vulnerable and voiceless. At this point, I think we would be hard pressed to find too many who are as voiceless and powerless as our canine friends.”

“Over the last few months, Mr. Speaker, we have really been subject to stories filled with harrowing and inhumane treatment of four-legged residents in our community. In January, Mr. Speaker, we read in The Hub [Ed. Note – Hay River, NWT newspaper] about a puppy being rescued lying on top of his dead sister puppy after they were both thrown into the dumpster and left to freeze to death in sub-arctic temperatures. Most recently, we have been hearing about the six sled dogs shot in the mouth and face; not shot in a way to euthanize them quickly and humanely, but left to die by bleeding to death or by choking in their own blood inside their broken jaws. Mr. Speaker, I feel compelled to state this in a very descriptive and dramatic way because I believe this government has an obligation to say something about how this is not acceptable and stand by and give some teeth to the NWT Dog Act that is already in place as well as enforcing the criminal court provisions that speaks to inhumane and cruel treatment of animals. Mr. Speaker, many studies have shown that those who exercise violence against their family, spouses, and children, also show tendencies to be violent towards animals or treat them in an inhumane way. I believe it all speaks to the behavior of those who are not able to empathize with the pain and suffering of others. In the days and weeks ahead, I will be pursuing these issues. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.” February 9, 2005 – NWT Hansard (copyright Government of NWT).

Ms. Lee’s statement is also contained on the link below, in a brief whereby various areas in Canada are noted for animal cruelty. One may also view the satellite images of various dog yards in the NWT and elsewhere on this site.


Given the statement made by Ms. Sandy Lee, on February 9, 2005 one must ask the question as to why Ms. Lee failed to hear and acknowledge the protest not only against the original deadly clause in the amended Dog Act, but also failed to respond to the added protest of the reworded deadly clause which replaced the first one. Obviously the constituents in Yellowknife who opposed the clause were not represented in the manner that they expected.  One may also question as to why Ms. Lee failed to initiate any proactive measures in 2005 to begin work on Animal Protection BACK IN 2005

As for the arguments made by Mr. David Krutko, MLA, MacKenzie Delta, Fort McPherson to keep the loophole within the new Dog Act, one can see why: these pictures speak for themselves. You can clearly see that one dog is tied to a stake and shot, and the unacceptable set up where animals are penned waiting to be shot. A most common practice within Mr. Krutko’s riding and a situation that apparently he does not wish to see changed.


Pictures provided by Beaufort Delta Regional SPCA: taken in Fort McPherson, Mr. Krutko’s riding


As for Minister Michael Miltenberger, MLA for Fort Smith who voted in favor of keeping the reworded loophole, a person  cannot begin to  imagine what Fort Smith residents are thinking of their MLA.  A special trip was made to Fort Smith by the Public Hearings Committee, the Committee heard them  speak passionately and unanimously against any “exceptions”. These voiceswere from so many different perspectives, including aboriginal, traditional, long-term and new residents of NWT.  It is shameful to have the clear voices of the voters and tax payers of this town and elsewhere trampled on by Cabinet, and to have our public’s moral standards sullied by Cabinet’s voice.

So much for moving into the 21st Century! and trusting in Democracy!

Now onto Inuvik, Premier Floyd Roland, MLA for Inuvik Boot Lake and MACA Minister Robert C. McLeod, MLA for Inuvik Twin Lakes, who as Cabinet Ministers voted in favor of keeping the loophole within the new Dog Act.

Just two years ago, the situation with the Inuvik Animal Holding Facility administered and owned by the Town of Inuvik came under fire for the deplorable conditions of the dogs held within this facility as well as the environment in which they remained, some for up to 6-8 months. When Ms. Eccles brought RCMP to inspect this facility, animals were found with eyes reddened from the high concentration of ammonia built up from filthy pens, the stench and strength of fumes so strong that both she and RCMP Officers could not remain inside for more than mere minutes. Note that there was no ventilation system in place or windows that could be opened. Approximately 10 dogs were involved, some of which were actually tied outside, tangled on too short leads, overturned water buckets and dog crates were also found in the yard of the facility, some overturned crates containing living, breathing dogs.

Now in accordance with Inuvik By-Laws: dogs were to be held at the facility for only up to 3-5 days, also specified within the By-Law is the appropriate length of chain to be used to tie an animal and that it must be on a swivel. Also in place is the Relocation Program that Ms. Eccles had established whereby dogs would be sent to Calgary Humane Society. Ms. Eccles, President of the Beaufort Delta Regional SPCA, Animal Cruelty Investigator and Humane Educator and former By-Law Officer along with the Town resident veterinarian had approached the Town many times in an attempt to remedy the deplorable conditions at this municipally owned and operated shelter and had confirmed that no animals had been relocated to Calgary in months. Ms. Eccles also had her offer of assistance made to the Town Officials denied. Her request, as the President of the Beaufort Delta Regional SPCA (which she founded) to be permitted to regularly inspect the dogs held at this facility, was also denied

Unfortunately for the animals, the attempts by Ms. Eccles and the town’s resident vet  to alleviate the conditions these animals were subject to were unsuccessful. Additionally Ms. Eccles took the issue to the Crown. MACA Minister Robert C. McLeod, MLA for Inuvik Twin Lakes was made aware of the situation, as was MLA Paul Delorey. Mr. McLeod was requested to intervene however failed to do so stating that the Territorial Government had no authority to intervene in municipal affairs. Untrue in accordance with the Act related to Towns, Hamlets and Municipalities.

This incident was covered by Northern News services. The end result is that the dogs were ordered destroyed by the Town, rather than relocated, and the facility was cleaned up. No charges were laid in this case. In addition, Ms. Eccles and members of the BDRSPCA received emails from an out of territory lawyer threatening a slap suit would be filed against them on behalf of specific former Town Officials should this issue receive further public scrutiny and if the pictures taken of the animals in the presence of RCMP Officers at the time the facility was inspected were made public.

The point being made is that this situation was allowed to go on for a lengthy period of time, under the very noses of both Premier Floyd Roland and MACA Minister Robert C. McLeod, both of whom are MLA’s for Inuvik.

Moving on to MLA for the Sahtu, Mr. Norman Yakeleya, who voted to keep the “exceptions” clause based on his argument that the Committee did not go to the smaller communities.

Mr. Yakeleya in his statement before the committee stated: “We certainly heard very passionately from the larger centers that we went to, but we did not go to the predominantly smaller communities of Aboriginal people, we did not get their view.” Excerpt unedited GNWT Hansard March 3, 2022 Page 65.

Smaller community members were invited to attend the Public Hearings held in the larger centers, and provisions were in place in order to provide any residents of these communities with transportation so that they could attend the Public Hearings. Unfortunately the Committee conducting these Hearings did not receive such requests from smaller community residents.

It is  ironic and  seemingly hypocritical that the Government of the Northwest Territories has moved ahead with the new Wildlife Act despite the fact that the very same point has been raised that aboriginal residents in the smaller and more remote communities were not able to voice their concerns and input.

The research used in the decision making process for this new NWT Wildlife Act  is ten (10) years old and not current and as pointed out, times have changed, population densities have changed, herd counts have changed in the last ten years.

Mr. Norman Yakeleya’s use of reference to smaller more remote communities not having had a say in the new Dog Act was his primary argument for allowing the “exceptions” to remain in the new Dog Act yet the same thing can be said about the new Wildlife Act…..so why is he not screaming as loudly about that?

As for Kevin Menicoche, MLA Nahendeh who voted to keep the loophole, according to the unedited Hansard Transcript (page 5) he felt that “the power was best left to the municipality”. He also referenced the Public Hearing held in Fort Smith where he stated “They cited…many examples of possible animal cruelty. It depends on your perspective.”

Is allowing for one’s perspective the condoning of:


PAULATUK, NT          “DECEASED”                                                   BEAUFORT DELTA REGION:  ‘DECEASED”





Ms. Eccles did approach the owners of these young dogs, offering assistance and recommendations for proper care. No charges were laid in this incident and the dogs remained on that property, outcome unknown.


As evidenced by the Whati case, the Tuktoyaktuk case involving Lucky Pokiak’s dogs, the Beh Choko case whereby 44 dogs owned by Dene Artist Archie Beaulieu had to be destroyed, the six puppies found in the Beh Choko dump with their tiny throats slashed, the Inuvik incident and the recent Hay River Hoarding case, and given that on February 4, 2011 Judge Malakoe threw out three charges under current Hay River By Laws Animal Control brought against a town resident, it is clearly obvious that Municipal By Laws fall very short in providing any form of Animal Protection whatsoever and to rely on common sense as was also mentioned during the recent discussions before Cabinet is clearly not an option as exampled in the above mentioned cases.

Left:  Pokiak dogs, Tuktoyaktuk: no charges laid, no help given to dogs!!!

As to the other Cabinet Ministers who chose to take the unprecedented move in actually voting themselves, normally Cabinet Members do not; one must use their own imagination and speculate as to why they did so.

Puppy found : Inuvik: 2011 in the back of abandoned pick up truck:  sub-zero temperatures.  Rescued and relocated to southern rehab center. Inuvik!

In Northern News coverage February 28, 2011, Mr. Ramsay stated concerning this reworded loophole “If I can’t interpret that or if Joe Public can’t interpret that legislation, once a court gets it and lawyers get it, there will be no charges laid, you can derive a truck through it.” He also went on to say that during the hearings he heard ‘overwhelmingly’ ‘there should be no exceptions for cruelty, neglect and abuse of dogs’. He is quoted as saying “I agree with that, I don’t think there should be any exception at all”.

Ms. Bisaro (page 64 of unedited Hansard) disagreed with MACA Minister Robert C. McLeod’s agreeing that retaining the loophole was the will of the committee, initially the committee had been divided on whether the three sections actually needed to be in the act. However, once the Committee heard the protest against any “exceptions” they felt relatively confident that by bringing the voice of those opposed to these “exceptions” that these clauses would be removed from the new Dog Act.  As Ms. Bisaro pointed out, their decision was that these issues would be debated on the House floor, discussed further and debated.

It appears the MACA Minister’s decision to not debate these concerns as wished by the Public Hearings Committee he thereby backed those in favor of the “exception” clause and was of great influence possibly sealing the future fate awaiting dogs of the NWT and the wiggle room allowed!

Mr. Bromley (page 60 unedited Hansard) brought up the issue as to the actual length of time taken in this process, pointing out the limitations in the ability to draft legislation quickly. Mr. Bromley also mentioned that the commitments that were indicated earlier were not met and that the public was understandably disappointed.

In her motion to have subsections 4(3), 4(4) and 4(5) deleted Ms. Bisaro presented her argument and quoted an Aboriginal with whom she spoke :   he said:

“Abuse of dogs is abuse of dogs. There is no reason, whether you are using your dog in a traditional practice or other. It is abuse of the dog and it shouldn’t be. That in the course of normal activities, Aboriginal people do not mistreat their dogs.”

Ms. Bisaro agreed with this respected elder and felt that these three clauses relating to the notion of accepted activity were not needed. Mr. Menicoche disagreed with this respected elder and voted to keep the “exception” clause!!   Hhhhmmmmm!

Mr. Ramsay’s Committee conducting the Public Hearings also raised a good point when they recommended exploring options to expand access to veterinary services across the NWT.   Mr. Yakeleya did bring forward this motion, this motion was seconded by Mr. Jacobson and hopefully will be explored further.

As pointed out before Cabinet by Mr. Ramsay, (page 63) (unedited version) “When we went out to public hearings, we heard, again, overwhelmingly that we shouldn’t be allowing for any exceptions to the abuse, neglect or cruelty to dogs. If folks are in accordance with the legislation, they have nothing to fear.” BRAVO MR. DAVID RAMSAY!!

Sincere gratitude must be given to the following MLA’s who fought the good fight to ensure that dogs in the NWT would have the protection (without loopholes) that these animals rightly deserve. These MLA’s believe in moving forward into the 21st Century, and that includes providing an Animal Protection Act that should live up to and should have set a shining example to the standards set out by Provincial Acts administered by the rest of Canada. An Act which should be without any exceptions and loopholes big enough  to “drive a truck through it”.

It is most unfortunate, most disappointing and most certainly reflects poorly on the Territorial Government that despite the opposition to any/all exceptions being contained within the new Dog Act, that those Cabinet Members and few MLA’s who chose to ignore the protest of NT residents as well the North American and International protest which wrang loud and clear, made a rather  highly unusual move, by standing up and voting themselves in order to defeat the motion to remove these three “exception” clauses.

A very special thank you to the MLA’s who had the courage to speak out against the decades of unabated, unprosecuted animal cruelty prevalent across the Northwest Territories.

Mr. David Ramsay, Mr. Robert Bromley, Mr. Paul Delorey, Ms. Jane Groenewegen, Ms. Wendy Bisaro, Mr. Beaulieu, Mr. Hawkins and Mr. Jacobson. Thank you also to Mr. Paul Delorey, MLA Hay River North and Speaker of the House (not present for vote) but who was the first MLA to actually sit down and discuss and address this issue with me personally in 2008.

The above named MLA’s did what Ms. Sandy Lee who spoke to the Legislative Assembly February 9, 2005 addressing the issue of animal cruelty and clearly stated: “Speaking of roosters, Mr. Speaker, I believe one of the most important jobs we have as MLAs is to crow out loud like roosters about all the issues that are important to our constituents, especially on behalf of those who are most vulnerable and voiceless. At this point, I think we would be hard pressed to find too many who are as voiceless and powerless as our canine friends. “

“Over the last few months, Mr. Speaker, we have really been subject to stories filled with harrowing and inhumane treatment of four-legged residents in our community. I believe it all speaks to the behavior of those who are not able to empathize with the pain and suffering of others. In the days and weeks ahead, I will be pursuing these issues. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.”

By voting to keep the “exceptions”  within the new Dog Act: Is Ms. Lee now “unable to empathize with the pain and suffering of others”?

Special Thank You also goes out to those private individuals of conscious who wrote their own letters supporting Animal Protection in the NWT, to those thousands from across North America and the International Community who signed the initial petition circulated in 2008, who spoke out opposing any exceptions and to those 780+ persons who signed the petition opposing the loophole, and to those who continue to sign in protest.

Thank you to those members of the community who turned up at the Public Hearings and to those Animal Welfare Organizations who presented their own critiques, comments and valued input into the Amended Act and who continue to provide encouragement and support towards a Comprehensive Animal Protection Act. These organizations are:

Animal Defense League of Canada, Animal Alliance of Canada, Humane Society International Canada, Canadians for Animal Welfare Reform and the Canadian Federation of Humane Society.

Thank you Linda Eccles President of the Beaufort Delta Regional SPCA for the tremendous work you continue to do in Inuvik, thank you Nicole Spencer, NWTSPCA and to the Fort Smith Animal Society and the dedicated group of volunteers in Hay River.

To be at least somewhat gracious, one must also thank the GNWT for actually taking the time needed and the distribution of expenditures throughout this whole process. As we have seen the government wheel of process turns extremely slowly.

In Summary the Northwest Territory now has an Amended Dog Act, and despite the contained loophole so highly protested, the new Act is a good start. It is the First Step towards a Comprehensive Animal Protection Act. A motion to begin work on the Comprehensive Animal Protection Act was seconded, and the work started now will be carried forward to the newly elected Territorial Government. Elections are scheduled for this Fall, and hopefully it will be remembered by the voters who protested this loophole, exactly which of their MLA’s and Cabinet Members voted in favor of allowing the “exceptions” (against the wishes of their constituents) and in doing so allowed wiggle room for those who commit acts of neglect and violence against the dogs of the Northwest Territories.

All of you who were opposed to any form of exceptions to the new Dog Act are urged to contact, with thanks, their MLA representatives who opposed the loophole.  These representatives LISTENED to you, they SPOKE OUT for you, they made your voices HEARD before the Cabinet.  They SPOKE  FOR THE THOUSANDS OF ANIMAL VICTIMS here.



David Ramsay, MLA Kam Lake david_ramsay@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320
Yellowknife, NT X1A 2L9
Phone: 867-669-2296
Fax: 867-873-0276

Wendy Bisaro, MLA Frame Lake wendy_bisaro@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320
Yellowknife, NT X1A 2L9
Phone: 867-669-2274
Fax: 867-873-0276

Robert Bromley, MLA Weledeh bob_bromley@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320
Yellowknife, NT X1A 2L9
Phone: 867-669-2272
Fax: 867-873-0276

Jane Groenegen, MLA Hay River South jane_groenewegen@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9
Phone: 867-669-2292; Fax: 867-873-0276
Constituency office:
3 – 66 Woodland Drive; Hay River, NT; X0E 1G1
Phone: 867-874-6141; Fax: 867-874-6143

Robert Hawkins, MLA Yellowknife Centre robert_hawkins@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320
Yellowknife, NT X1A 2L9
Phone: 867-669-2265
Fax: 867-873-0276

Jackie Jacobson, MLA Nunakput jackie_jacobson@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320
Yellowknife, NT X1A 2L9
Phone: 867-669-2276
Fax: 867-873-0276

Tom Beaulieu, MLA, Tu Nedhe tom_beaulieu@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320
Yellowknife, NT X1A 2L9
Phone: 867-669-2287
Fax: 867-873-0276 

Mr Paul Delorey, MLA Hay River North, Speaker of House paul_delorey@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320, Yellowknife, NT X1A 2L9

Phone:  867-669-2234

Fax:  867-873-0273

Constituency Office

Suite 202, 76 Capital Dr., Hay River, NT X0E 0G2

Phone: 867-874-6301  Fax: 867-874-6079

You are also urged to contact those Cabinet Ministers and MLA’s LISTED BELOW who supported and voted to retain THE “EXCEPTIONS” CLAUSE and to voice your own views on the retention of this clause.

Unfortunately the Consensus Government of the Northwest Territories FAILED TO LISTEN, FAILED TO HEAR you!!!




P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9 P: 867-669-2311; F: 867-873-0385 Toll free: 1-800-661-0784 Constituency Office: Box 1998; 181 Mackenzie Road; Inuvik, NT; X0E 0T0 P: 867-777-4693; F: 867-777-4694

J. Micheal Miltenberger, MLA Thebacha and Minister micheal_miltenberger@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9
P: 867-669-2355; F: 867-873-0596
Constituency office:
#206 McDougal Road; Upper Level; Fort Smith, NT; X0E 0P0
P: 867-872-5511; F: 867-872-5642

Jackson Lafferty, MLA Monfwi and Minister of Justice jackson_lafferty@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9
P: 867-669-2399; F: 867-873-0274

Michael McLeod, MLA Deh Cho and Minister michael_mcleod@gov.nt.ca 

Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9
P: 867-669-2377; F: 867-873-0169

Constituency Office:
PO Box 149; Fort Providence, NT; X0E 0L0
P: 867-699-4003; F: 867-699-4005

Bob McLeod, MLA Yellowknife South and Minister bob_mcleod@gov.nt.ca  

P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9
P: 867-669-2388; F: 867-873-0169

Robert C. McLeod, MLA Inuvik Twin Lakes and MACA Minister robert_c_mcleod@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9
Phone: 867-669-2366; Fax: 867-873-0431
Constituency office:
P.O. Box 3130; Inuvik, NT; X0E 0T0
Phone: 867-678-2429; Fax: 867-678-2431
Sandy Lee, MLA Range Lake and Minister sandy_lee@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9
P: 867-669-2344; F: 867-873-0169

MICHAEL MCLEOD, MINISTER, MLA DEH CHO michael_mcleod@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9  P: 867-669-2377,  F: 867-873-0169


P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9
P: 867-669-2388; F: 867-873-0169

Robert C. McLeod, MLA Inuvik Twin Lakes and MACA Minister robert_c_mcleod@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9
Phone: 867-669-2366; Fax: 867-873-0431
Constituency office:
P.O. Box 3130; Inuvik, NT; X0E 0T0
Phone: 867-678-2429; Fax: 867-678-2431

P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9
P: 867-669-2344; F: 867-873-0169

DAVID KRUTKO, MLA MACKENZIE DELTA david_m_krutko@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9
Phone: 867-669-2285; Fax: 867-873-0274
Constituency office:
Box 266; Fort McPherson, NT; X0E 0J0
Phone: 867-952-2652

NORMAN YAKELEYA, MLA SAHTU norman_yakeleya@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9
P: 867-669-2270; F: 867-873-0276

KEVIN MENICOCHE, MLA NAHENDEH kevin_menicoche@gov.nt.ca

P.O. Box 1320; Yellowknife, NT; X1A 2L9
Phone: 867-669-2294; Fax: 867-873-0276
Constituency office:
Box 266; Fort Simpson, NT; X0E 0N0
Phone: 867-695-3780; Fax: 867-695-3781

The watchful eyes of North America and the International Community will remain focused on the Northwest Territories. Just what will they see? and will their opinions change? We can only hope so.

Read Full Post »



Read Full Post »




Additional Links













Read Full Post »

Will the New Amended Northwest Territories Dog Act containing the reworded loophole protect animals from future abuse?  Only time will tell.

There are far too many pictures to post, far too many stories of tragedy and indifference.  Thankfully the last two photos of the puppies were rescued in time and survived.   Will others be as lucky?

Pictures have been provided by numerous persons, in numerous locations across the NWT.

Read Full Post »

Three years ago the battle to have animal protection legislated in the Northwest Territories began.  This battle is not yet over.  As you will see in the last CJCD link, the new Act has passed, and the initial “deadly loophole” was replaced by crafty rewording, and despite desperate attempts that were made to have this reworded loophole totally removed from the new Act, those Committee Members that opposed the loophole, as well as the hundreds of private individuals across Canada, those who spoke against it during Public Hearings and those of the International Community who spoke against the clause, were ignored.  The GNWT Cabinet, who for the most part do not vote, vetoed the motion to delete this clause.

While the new Act does provide for much needed improvement, the fact that there remains wiggle room for offenders of animal cruelty to be considered an “exception” dependent upon how and why an animal is in duress or crisis, is a disgrace.

As of this date, it is unknown on what exact date this new Act will take effect.

One good note:  the motion to begin work on a Comprehensive Animal Protection Act during this session, carried through which means it will be continue to be worked on with the next Territorial Government.  Elections should be held this Fall.

An additional post on this topic will be made shortly.





NWT animal cruelty legislation worst in Canada

June 11, 2010


GNWT sluggish on revising Dog Act – animal rights activist

October 26, 2010





GNWT to revise animal cruelty laws

November 1, 2010



GNWT amends animal protection laws

November 2, 2010



MLA expects lots of debate at Dog Act hearings

January 7, 2011



Hearings begin into NWT Dog Act

January 14, 2011



Over a dozen attend Hub hearing on Dog Act

January 20, 2011



MLAs to look over NWT Dog Act again this week

February 22, 2011



Animal rights activist not impressed by Dog Act change

February 25, 2011



Controversial clause in NWT Dog Act replaced

February 24, 2011



Controversial Dog Act passes in NWT Legislature

March 5, 2011







Read Full Post »

Contained below are only just a few of the CJCD reports that one can fine online.  Many more reports and published articles may be found on sites such as : Northern News Services which publish newspapers across the North, such as the Yellowknifer, Decho Drum, News North.  Many links to various articles have been posted in this Blog’s Archives.

Here is a short review thus far.  Please take the time to go to each link and read for yourself.



Hay River creating by-law against animal abuse

March 24, 2010

In January 2010 Hay River Mayor Kelly Schofield was approached and a discussion within his office took place about strengthening Hay River By-Laws, as well as a proposal to put into effect a “Zero Tolerance Policy on Animal Cruelty” in place for Hay River.  For all intent and purposes the Hay River resident  presenting this policy was lead to believe that this was well received.  Two follow up meetings, almost one year later, with a Hay River Councilman, not the Mayor, further discussed the issues in Hay River.  As of this date the question remains as to just WHAT the Mayor’s office and Town Council have actually done to revisit and strengthen existing Hay River By Laws to ensure that animals are protected.

It must be noted that on February 4, 2011, Judge Malakoe set a precedent by throwing three charges brought against a Hay River resident who was allegedly in violation of current Hay River By Laws (Animal Control) out of court due to a technicality whereby the By Laws did not explicitly reference the consequence to the violation nor the penalty payable.  Hub Publications covered this story which can be found on their website. “Animal control by-law lacks teeth, judge says” Hub Publications February 16, 2011.


Hub goes without by-law officer for over a year

September 14, 2010


HR’s new by-law officer taking gradual approach to enforcement

November 18, 2010


New bylaw officer starts off in Hay River

November 18, 2010




Over 100 dogs found neglected in HR, woman charged

June 2, 2010


Neglected dogs under care of SPCA

June 4, 2010


Lack of resources forced town to euthanize puppies — SPCA

September 8, 2010


What happened to the rest of the dogs? – animal welfare group on Hay River hoarding case

September 21, 2010


HR accused dog abuser faces more charges

December 3, 2010


Woman pleads not guilty to dog neglect

January 20, 2011


Trial date set in animal cruelty case

March 4, 2011

As it now stands, 83 of the original dogs found on Hobson’s property remain there, as wards of the town and supposedly monitored by a Town employee.  Logically it may be safe to believe that additional puppies have been born on that property since May 29, 2010.  Question:  What is the actual number of dogs now on that property???  Unfortunately while the Animal Alliance of Canada has already written two requests for information, they have yet to receive a response.

The additional question of just WHO the Mayor’s office has monitoring these dogs and this property remains a mystery. According to CJCD post of March 4, 2011 – “Town authorities have not told CJCD who’s monitoring the remaining dogs on Hobson’s property.”

Note that having been provided information straight from the horse’s mouth, so to speak,  David Ryan the newly hired Hay River By Law Officer has, according to Mr. Ryan himself , never been to the property nor seen these animals that remain on the property. Apparently it is being handled by a “higher authority”.

As this writer has been told that Mr. Ryan tape records conversations, (and has admitted that he  sometimes fails to tell the individuals) a record of this conversation has been made.

The fate of the remaining 83 dogs remains a mystery as well, already deemed to be ‘aggressive, vicious and unpredictable’ by Mayor Schofield in one other published media interview, these animals would be posing a threat to public safety moreso than those young puppies held at the shelter that  Town Authorities chose to designate in the same category and which they destroyed. Which raises yet another question:  Why were these 83 animals immediately not destroyed? Reports of a pack of 6 highly aggressive animals  in and around that property have made to this writer; the animals on this property are outside and what happens should any break free of their chains or escape their cages and maul or kill a town resident, or family pet?

So again, just WHO is monitoring these animals?  WHY is the new By Law Officer who is also to enforce the Hay River By Law on Animal Control, not monitoring these animals?   Very interesting, is it not.

As for the puppies that were seized, removed and relocated to the Hay River Municipally owned shelter and cared for by volunteers for 2 1/2 months, medicated for worms, receiving proper nutrition, fresh water from May 29, 2010 to mid August 2010; an offer to assist in the relocation of these puppies to fully equipped southern facilities run by trained professional animal care and rehab specialists was made a number of times.  However, no response came from the Mayor’s office, no attempts to socialize and rehab any of these rescued pups was made.  The end result:  puppies were removed from shelter and destroyed in mid August 2010 by order of Town officials who deemed them aggressive and unpredictable…they aged between 2 to 12 months old.  This information was finally released to the public on August 31, 2010 by the Deputy Mayor, only due to the blast of Press Releases issued by Canadians for Animal Welfare Reform.  Pictures of these pups were published by Northern News Services.

The Town of Hay River as been severely criticized by CFAWR, and once again as of this date, details as to just how these pups were killed remains a mystery.  With no resident veterinarians in this town….one may use their own imagination as to how these pups lost their lives.

As for the remaining 83 dogs left on that property, Mayor Schofield is quoted as saying ” The dogs are still in her care. The Town will be making sure the dogs are taken care of”.  Hub Publications June 9, 2010.  In addition SPCA President Jennifer Larkin is quoted “We did receive complaints (about this property) this time around, and we have received complaints in the past”. “But we are not an authority figure. We are an organization that cares for animals. We have to direct people to the RCMP.”

Given that previous Municipal authorities, as well as town residents had known of this situation being allowed to continue for over ten years, WHY was nothing ever done to correct the situation?  Further it is rumored that the accused also applied to the Town for a new Kennel License!!!!

In one Editorial:  the statement is made ” Ultimately , the blame for the animals deaths lies squarely on the shoulders of the person who was keeping them…” quote taken from published Editorial “Sad but not cruel”  Northern News Service concerning the killing of the rescued pups.

Also see:  Hub Publications Website:  “Town finds itself under attack after destroying 23 dogs”; “Dog seizure a disgrace to community” (June 9, 2010); “Dogs seized following tip” (June 9, 2010);

“Puppy deaths unnecessary”  Northern News: September 20, 2010.



Vehicle break-in leads to tragic dog death

January 29, 2011


Musician charged with killing dog banned from lounge

February 1, 2011



Musician accused of animal cruelty in jail pending next court date

February 3, 2011


Local musician pleads guilty to animal cruelty

March 2, 2011



Local musician sentenced to four months in jail



Behchoko puppies saved

November 18, 2010



Mountie says animal cruelty in Whati ‘heart-wrenching’

December 9, 2010


NWT animal rights activist happy with charges against abuser

December 14, 2010

In summary it has not been a good year HERE for dogs  in 2010.  Just as it has never been a good year for dogs in the Northwest Territories for decades.


Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »