The
BC government has announced an amendment to the Prevention of Cruelty
to Animals Act that will establish the Farm Industry Review Board as
the organization to hear appeals from citizens regarding animal
welfare issues where the BC SPCA has seized an animal. Previous to
this, the SPCA had powers to seize and the only way British Columbians
could appeal was to take the matter to court. Another amendment
requires the Society to provide the Minister of Agriculture with
information related to the enforcement of the Act. The Act was also
amended to allow the minister to draft bylaws outlining enforcement
procedures and to appoint others to enforce the Act. The intended
outcome is to improve transparency and fairness to animal welfare
enforcement actions.
What
was the trigger to this? The amendment began as a result of public
outcry over heavy-handed enforcement by the BC SPCA, and the
Province's desire for increased transparency. Last fall, nearly 100
rare breed Berkshire pigs were seized from a Cowichan Valley farm by
the SPCA, triggering a reaction from the community that raised
questions about the way the SPCA operates and the power that the
organization has. It seemed that the SPCA thought it would be a
textbook case of going in to take abused animals out of a poor
situation, but it proved to be more complicated than that. The
event coincided with a fall campaign to raise money for the SPCA by
raising awareness about farm animals and the SPCA certified program,
which provides a third party audit to farms that want to use the SPCA
certified label on their farm products.
The
event also coincided with the fall meetings and AGMs that farmers
have. The seizure of the pigs was an emotional topic of discussion
at the BC Sheep Federation AGM held in Duncan; many participants knew
the farmer who owned the Berkshires, a rare breed that were sold as
weaners to other farmers. There were people there who bought pigs
from Bill and found them to be in good health. They spoke of how much
Bill loved his pigs. Was it necessary to take away all of his pigs
in such a manner, which would probably result in boarding costs that
eventually exceed the value of the pigs? There were many people who
would have helped Bill out by taking some of the excess pigs, if they
had known. A group of volunteers quickly organized and contacted the
SPCA and Bill with offers to find homes for the pigs and help any way
they could. Many letters from farmers and non-farmers were written
to local papers, supporting Bill. Based on this incident and others
throughout BC, a resolution was passed at the BCSF AGM to write a
letter to the Minister of Agriculture about this situation and others
regarding the SPCA seizing livestock.
But
it isn't a simple case of an overzealous SPCA conducting their
mandate, although there have been indications that the SPCA did exert
a lot of muscle by using the RCMP. It was fortunate that the SPCA
brought in the BC Farm Animal Care Council, a new producer
organization that's role is to work with producers regarding animal
welfare. The BCFACC suggested bringing in a retired and well
respected pig producer, who was instrumental in buying Bill some time
with another two weeks to improve the housing. The pigs were overall
in better condition that the authorities expected because they are
hardy Berkshires, but there was concern over the mud and housing.
Bill was known to be overwhelmed with the work involved in feeding
and caring for his growing breeding herd, and he struggled with the
challenges of keeping several boars for the rare breed. Hindsight is
20/20 as they say, and Bill slipped between the cracks as a small
farmer who is on his own with little support. Notwithstanding
that, he worked hard to improve the housing in the two weeks, which
was recognized by the industry experts but the SPCA decided to seize
the pigs anyways because not enough progress had been made.
The
veterinarian and former pig producer were asked to leave by the SPCA
prior to the seizure, so they did not witness the loading or new
location for the pigs. There were reports that the boars were put
together and ended up fighting and injuring each other, resulting in
some being put down. The housing they were moved to was an open
barn, not a pig barn with separate pens, so the more vulnerable pigs
were at risk - while under the SPCA's care.
One
suggestion to come out of this was to have the BCFACC set up a peer
network so that if there are SPCA complaints regarding livestock,
there are producer associations and farmers institutes available to
advise SPCA and help the farmers who are trying to comply but lack
the resources and support to do so. The rapid and organized response
to Bill's situation by various farm groups and individuals in the
Cowichan Valley and beyond indicate that this approach may greatly
improve the efforts of the SPCA to achieve their mandate in a more
sensible way.
The
new changes to the Act will encourage the SPCA to adopt such changes
in their procedures to ensure that knowledgeable people enforce the
Act in a fair way. The involvement of the FIRB, an established and
experienced tribunal, is a logical choice given that the FIRB is
already empowered to hear appeals under the Natural Products
Marketing Act, The Administrative Tribunals Act and the Farm
Practices Protection Act. The board reports to the Minister of
Agriculture in matters of administration, but is independent of
government in decision-making. The board may require the animal be
returned to its owner, allow the SPCA determine the fate of an
animal, or confirm or vary the costs for which the animal owner is
liable to the BC SPCA while the animal was in its care. The BC FIRB
will only hear appeals after attempts to resolve through the BC
SPCA’s own 28-day internal review process, but knowing that the
BCFIRB could become involved, the BC SPCA should respond with greater
fairness and transparency than they have in the past.
.
