Did the SPCALL fail to discharge of a legal duty?

In short, did the SPCALL fail to uphold the law?

On Friday August 5, 2011 at approximately 9:00 pm, I received a phone call followed by an e-mail asking me to help locate 29 Huskies in Lachute, tied to trees in the woods, as dog rescuer groups on-line were trying to help, with the help of a rescue organization in Ontario called Canine-Feline Rescue.

At or around 12:00 am on the 6th, I located the dogs tied to trees in Lachute (video recording of dogs barking in the dark) and actually confirmed there might be more than 29, and they were extremely thin, no shelter was available to any of them, there were no signs of food nor water in sight. At or around 12:30 am, I confirmed that the dogs had been located to ****** who had organized the transport/rescue for these dogs (after an ad had been placed on the internet by the owner of the adjacent property asking for these dogs to be taken or they would end up at the Berger Blanc by that following Monday).

On Saturday August 6th, at approximately 12:00 noon, I directed the “organizers” to the location, and upon seeing these dogs, everyone was appalled and couldn’t wait to see them get rescued. We then waited for the Ontario rescue group to arrive with their transport, and unfortunately it turned into a fiasco, as the “rescue group” was just a fraud and no one was coming to help these dogs.

With the help of another Montreal rescue group who had come to help with transport if needed, it was decided that we could not close our eyes to this situation and re-grouped to find other rescues to help take these dogs in.

At approximately 3:00 pm, Mr. Daniel Charbonneau (the owner of the dogs) comes to the site (with no food nor water in sight), and decides he no longer wants “rescue” groups to take in his dogs, he wants people to come on the site to “adopt” these dogs (who are obviously not yet adoptable in their state/condition). Some discussions are undertaken, the SQ is called in to help resolve the situation (Sgt. Fillion is among the officers), and Mr. Charbonneau decides, after speaking to the SPCA/MAPAQ personnel in the file, to surrender some dogs to the rescue groups on site.

The owner of the property that Mr. Charbonneau was evicted from (next door to the wooded area where the 37 dogs were tied), had arrived within minutes of Mr. Charbonneau and mentioned to the SQ officers that the City had been advised, that the SPCA was aware, that he had another 50 dogs elsewhere, that he was squatting on “city land” and that the owner of the wooded area where these dogs were tied, had complained on several occasions. At this point, Mr. Charbonneau said that the SPCA and MAPAQ were in the file, and that they had “told” the owner she had to accept these dogs on her property until the case was “resolved”…. I did think that very weird, wanted the SQ officer to locate and reach the owner of the lot, but Sgt. Fillion claims that was impossible….

At approximately 7:00 pm, we leave with 10 dogs that Mr. Charbonneau surrendered and the agreement is to return the next day to take more in, as we had no “plan” yet as to where to put more of these Huskies if we took more in. The SPCA would then take whatever dogs were left on Monday morning.

At approximately 9:30 pm, CTV covers the story on-line

On Sunday August 7th, at or around 12:00 noon, CTV shows up on follow-up on the story, no one has yet arrived and they are turned away by Mr. Charbonneau. The “group” arrives at approximately 1:00 pm and plans are made to take in the dogs. We load 15 dogs into several cars, and as we are leaving the property, the SQ pulls me over, asks me what I am doing, I explain I am taking more of the dogs as agreed yesterday, and I am told to have a nice day and leave. We all meet up at the local McDonald’s in order to see which dogs are going where, and 2 SQ cars show up, at which time we are told by Sgt. Fillion that Mr. Charbonneau has changed his mind, that he does not want us to take the dogs and we must return them to the trees in the woods. I insist on speaking to Corinne Gonzalez of the SPCA Laurentides/Labelle, who was in charge of the file for the last several weeks/months, and after much effort to negotiate with her to bring these dogs into the SPCA right away in order for them to be safe, fed and sheltered, she assured me that they had a “file” and a “plan” to seize the dogs that next day, Monday August 7th, therefore insisting we return these dogs to their original locations, with no food, no water and no shelter (it had rained quite heavily that day).

Under the threat of being arrested, at approximately 10:30 pm, we all complied, drove back to the location to tie the dogs back up to their chains, and were let go.

Monday August 8th, 2011, CBC covers the story, showing the SPCA getting involved, at which time the SPCA declares they were “just informed” of this situation, but did not “seize” the dogs, instead, they made a deal with the owner to “surrender” the dogs to the SPCA in exchange for no charges being laid against him. In that same news report, Corinne Gonzales is clearly heard saying they had just “discovered” a new location with as many as possibly 50 other dogs, also in bad shape, that will need to be “investigated” and the dogs may need to be seized. It is also mentioned that Mr. Charbonneau is squatting with the dogs, his wife and kids.

On Monday August 8th 2011, at approximately 10:00 pm, we heard that following the Media and SPCA visit, Mr. Charbonneau had “left” the land he was squatting on. I also got confirmation from people who had been following the story, that there was in fact 2 kids living with them. At approximately 11:00 pm, I contacted Youth Protection to make them aware of the children living in this situation.

On Tuesday August 9th, 2011, I went to the Montreal SPCA to see if and how they could get involved. I was told they could not get involved as it was in the SPCA Laurentides/Labelle jurisdiction. I inquired to see if Humane Society International (HIS) could get involved, at which point I was told they could only get involved if the SPCA asks for their help….

On Wednesday August 10th, I received a call from Alana Devine of the Montreal SPCA, who assured me that she spoke to Corinne Gonzales of SPCA Laurentides/Labelle, who confirmed they very much had an open file, were following up and would be taking action. I was told that they had been “checking” on him daily, the dogs were fed and all was “under control”. However, I knew at this point Mr. Charbonneau was no longer on the site where the SPCA had “checked” on the dogs.

On the 10th, I received a phone call from Youth Protection telling me they went to the location and could not locate Mr. Charbonneau. I informed them the SQ knew exactly which lot he was on, and they could get the information from them. I tried to find the lot number from the SQ at that time, and spoke to Sgt. Filion who told me I had no more business in this story, that he had no reason to give Youth Protection any information, warned me to “stay out of this” as I didn’t know who I was dealing with.

On Friday August 12th, my “source” tells me that Mr. Charbonneau is broke, wants to borrow money as his dogs have not eaten in at least 2-4 days., at this point he was losing his mind, his wife said she would rather kill herself and all the dogs then let the SPCA take their “investment”. The oldest kid was old enough to be on his own, the youngest could go live with his grandma…

On Saturday August 13th, at approximately 1:00 am, we confirm that he no longer is on the site CBC/SPCA knew of. We could hear the dogs, but could not locate their new site.

On Saturday August 13th, at approximately 10:00 am, we drove to SPCA Laurentides/Labelle (Ste-Agathe) to see what their next step was as it was obvious nothing had yet been done. Couldn’t speak to anyone, so drove down to St-Jerome where the “seized/surrendered” huskies were temporary housed.

Upon arrival at approximately 11:00 am, I spoke to Elizabeth Pierce, employee of the SPCA Laurentides/Labelle, who tells me they cannot do anything…. A file is open, they’re investigating. I, along with my source, confirm to her that the dogs have no food (it’s now been anywhere from 3-5 days), that the wife has threatened to kill all the dogs rather than let the SPCA take them, and try to see what exactly they are waiting for in order to act on the P-42 by-law. She tells me it’s the MAPAQ…. They are the ones in charge, and are also investigating. I insist that they have to act on the very weak laws (P-42) as the dogs have no food, water nor shelter… She then tells me that if I can “re-locate” them, get visual confirmation that there are still approximately 30 dogs on site, that there is no food/water visible and still no shelters, and that if these people “sign” an official complaint, the they would have to act immediately. She tells me I would not be “credible” as I am directly involved, so it must be someone else. 4 volunteers there at the moment, decide to do this as they are appalled at the conditions of the Huskies, and certainly want to help these other dogs.

We drive back to Lachute, and at approximately 1:00 pm, we locate Mr. Charbonneau and his pack of dogs, on another City lot in the same general area of the Lachute City Dump. We come back with visual and video confirmation, hoping to get the inspector to act immediately, and I am told by Mrs. Pierce, “this information will be given to Corine Gonzales on Monday morning, for the MAPAQ to open a file”……

On Sunday August 14th, I contact Youth Protection in order to update them on the location of Mr. Charbonneau and his family.

On Monday August 15th, I contact MAPAQ and speak to Mme Hebert, trying to see why no one has acted on this file yet, why dogs have to suffer with no food, water nor shelter, when they are the ones who wrote the law, and can enforce them. She tells me they have no power, that they need a “warrant” to seize dogs, I tell her they have the power to seize the dogs for 90 days, while they “study” their case and if need be, the dogs would be returned to Mr. Charbonneau. At least they would be sheltered, fed and given water to, but she does not agree and hangs up on me.

On Tuesday August 16th, 2011, Corine Gonzales declares publicly that this case is not one of animal cruelty, but one of neglect, as according to the MAPAQ veterinary report, these dogs have been malnourished and are too thin.

At approximately 12:00 noon, a group of us decide to go looking into the woods to see if dogs have been left behind every time Mr. Charbonneau moves location, and/or to see if we find any of the dogs that have been reported through different sources, to have died…. 8 people, within 5 vehicles, meet at the local Church parking lot to organize a search through the wooded area of the City Dump, in order to locate dogs if any are there. At this point, we were unsure of whether these lots were located within Lachute or Mirabel city limits, who they officially belonged to, and wanted to see if Mirabel would uphold their municipal By-Law concerning dog control as well as to see the City cadastre map in order to locate exactly in which City the lot Mr. Charbonneau was squatting on, belonged to.

At approximately 1:15 pm, upon turning on Sources Road, off Charles Renaud road, Mr. Charbonneau happened to be at that very stop sign, heading in the opposite way. He looked directly at me, then in a rage, cut off the second car after me, almost sending the 3rd one off the road, and went after us. Feeling a little scared, I contacted all the cars behind me and told them not to stop anywhere, that the “white van” following me/us was in fact Mr. Charbonneau and his wife. Not sure of what to do (I have a broken front driver window), we thought of driving into the Dump property to get help, but having no “visible” personnel, we continued driving towards the nearest police station (which happened to be Mirabel). Mr. Charbonneau continued to follow us, at one point on a long stretch, he cut off the cars behind me and got right on my bumper. I speeded up to 115km/h (on an 80km road), hoping for an SQ officer, having to go through stop signs by fear of him catching up. At 1:27 pm, I pulled out my cell and called 911, at which point he passed me and applied the breaks (tape can probably reveal my fear at that point)….. He then drove off, up the hill a ways, waited while I was still on the phone with 911, once he “disappeared”, I drove myself and the other cars directly to the Mirabel police station where a report was made. I was told it would be “wreckless driving”, and nothing much would happen, however I explained my whole situation to the officer at the time, who explained a little about the costs associated with “seizing” dogs, and how the “Chow-Chow man” had never been stopped because of financial reasons……

We then left and proceeded to City Hall in Mirabel, checked the cadastre lots, tried to locate the “owner” of the lot to see if it was public or private land, they told us it was in fact Lachute. Not sure of where to turn to at this point, we decided to return to Sources road to look for dogs as originally planned, and not to let this high-speed chase intimidate us. We also knew at this point that SQ was in fact acting as local police, and that if no one else, they had the power to enforce municipal By-Laws (dog control). After searching the woods and finding no dogs nearby, ****** (who had a talking relationship with Mr. Charbonneau) and another lady from the group, decided to go bring him a large bag of dog food and gallons of water, as well as try to talk to him about this situation.

Upon their leaving the site, we all met at the McDonald’s in Lachute, where she relayed that Mr. Charbonneau had made direct threats, saying “si Sophie se presente sur mon terrain, je vais la tirer/tuer et ca ne sera pas un meurtre car je protege mon terrain, et la SQ sont mes amis”. The other people and myself all looked at each other and said “so he does have guns”…..At which point ***** was a little “scared”, as she had not heard about him having guns.

I proceeded to the SQ office to press charges for these death threats, and to have them investigate the high-speed pursuit of earlier that day. I met Agent Lafleur, who took our 3 statements, told us if we agreed to go to court and testify, they could act right away. I did at this point fear for my safety, thinking that even though he may not pull a gun and shoot me, he could easily hurt me with one of the chains he uses for his dogs if he was to spot me in town, track me down, follow me and corner me……I told them I could totally see him vandalizing my car, flinging one of those heavy chains at my head and wanted to see some “conditions” given to him. I also wanted Mr. Charbonneau to know that this was not going to intimidate me into letting these dogs die at the end of their chains, which is why I was in fact pressing charges. He had previously made allegations to the fact the SQ were his friends, that he had everyone’s license plate number, and that he would have us arrested if we came back to Lachute. ******* was very nervous, and Agent Lafleur confirmed that he could do no such thing, that we had every right to be in Lachute.

Later on that night, after discussing the day with others, we were informed that Youth Protection and Anima-Quebec (MAPAQ) had been there earlier that day, both had given certain recommendations, both had an “open file” and I figured that was what had angered him when he saw me in town.

On or around Friday the 19th, I contacted the Dog Control service for Lachute, Alexandre Roy, told him of the situation and asked him if he would enforce the municipal by-laws since at this point no one else seemed to want to enforce any laws to help these poor dogs. He told me he had no power to do anything, that he in fact had ticketed Mr. Charbonneau and had ordered him to be gone by Monday the 22nd. As per the By-Law, Mr. Roy has the power not only to ticket Mr. Charbonneau for non-compliance of the By-Laws, but the right to seize dogs who commit a “nuisance” on public property. Equally, the SQ has that same power, as they act as local police for the City of Lachute, and therefore can enforce municipal By-Laws as well.

On Monday August 22nd, we went to Lachute City Hall to get the dog control by-law (96-490) and were refused a copy, as well as the possibility to “consult” it. I was told I needed to fill out a request, that it would be sent to me by mail…. I then asked to consult the cadastre map, again I was turned down, claiming I needed an appointment with the Urbanist… I thought that very odd, as I just need the map to locate the lot myself, after a bit of insisting they get me an appointment that day, that I would remain in Lachute and wait, they got me an “assistant” who opened up her computer and found me the lot in question. Her answers as to who the lot belonged to was very vague, claiming she had no clue who la Regie Inter-Municipale was, who ran the dump, and so on… I asked for a copy of that cadastre plan, wanting to then locate the “owners” to see if in fact Mr. Charbonneau had permission to squat there with his family and 50 dogs, unfortunately the server was down, a copy could not be printed, a copy could not be sent to me via e-mail, I was given a pad and a pen to write down the lot numbers….. We confirmed once again their location was unchanged from the last time, and headed home.

On Tuesday August 23rd, CBC contacts me and does a follow-up story with the SPCA Laurentides/Labelle as well as with me, asking if I thought that the SPCA had done everything in their power at this point to help the Huskies as well as the other remaining dogs. I told them I felt that the MAPAQ as well as the SPCA Laurentides/Labelle, had certainly been trying to wash their hands of this situation, and were just dragging on in hopes that Mr. Charbonneau would disappear and they could close their file, claiming they had “lost track of him”…..

On or around the 23rd , we decided to organize a sort of peaceful demonstration, by organizing a “free camping week-end” in Lachute, on these lots the following week-end. Equality of the law we call it, if this family can live for free on City land, why can’t everyone” This was a way to get the City to move on this issue.

On Wednesday August 24th, I contacted RCI to try and find out who was in charge of these lots that Mr. Charbonneau was squatting on, I was given the name of Pierre Gionet, but did not have the chance to contact him. He is with the Regie Inter Municipale, the owners of the lots in question. It seems these lots are in fact owned by 4 municipalities who make up this Regie…..

Later on that day, we found video footage of a City Council meeting that seemed to expose some “not so clean” stuff going on within city administration, so decided we may have an “ally” with City Councillor Louis Seize who didn’t seem to totally agree with her administration on the way things were being handled. I also noticed that Mr. Pierre Gionet (who I was supposed to contact about this situation on their lots), was in fact the Director of the City of Lachute…. I was kind of happy I had not contacted him.

I decided to try and communicate with Mrs. Louis-Seize, she returned my phone call and I exposed this situation. She had not even heard of this guy and his dogs, squatting on City property, who had made the news….I informed her of my displeasure with the whole situation and how these dogs needed help, and at this point my only hope was with the City since SPCA and MAPAQ didn’t seem to really care…..I told her I was planning a “camping trip” on their property this coming week-end, at which time she informed me she would look into this and get back to me.

On Friday August 26th, at approximately noon Mrs. Louis Seize called me, told me she had contacted people at City Hall, and that Mr. Charbonneau had in fact been “evicted” from this lot, that cement blocks had been put on the lot to avoid him from returning, that he had left the City limits, and they did not know where he was relocated, but affirmed it was not on City land within Lachute. She then passed me the City Director, Mr. Gionet, who also confirmed this information.

At or around 4:00 pm, I arrived in Lachute, went to get gas on Bethany, went to the McDonalds on Bethany, and on my way out towards the “lot” to verify that in fact it had been blocked off by the City, I spotted Mr. Charbonneau’s truck/trailer in the parking lot of the WalMart (on Bethany street).

At or around 4:30 pm, I confirmed that the lot had been blocked off by the City and that Mr. Charbonneau was no longer “squatting” on it.

I then went back to Lachute in order to go to the SQ office (on Bethany) to follow-up on the death threat charges for which Mr. Charbonneau did not seem to have been “arrested” yet, and to ensure that they would follow up on it regardless of the fact he was no longer “squatting” where they knew.

As well, I wanted to inform them that despite their telling me they cannot enforce municipal by-laws (dog control by-law), the Police Act in fact does give them the power to uphold and respect municipal by-laws for Lachute, as they are mandated to be “local police service”.

At or around 5:00 pm, upon driving towards the SQ office, Mr. Charbonneau’s truck came out of the Wal-Mart parking lot directly in front of me at that exact time, he then gave me the “finger”, and drove himself to the SQ office, which I thought was “curious” and decided to wait in the Gas station next door to see what would happen, then I would go in to find out where the “case” was.

At that point, Mr. Charbonneau came out of his truck, waited to have someone open the door (as they are closed), eventually an officer came out to the gas station to ask what I was doing. I informed him, at which time he replied that was fine, Mr. Charbonneau “lost it” on me and was very unhappy about the fact the officer was not “arresting” me.

I was told “have a nice day”, the officer went back inside, Mr. Charbonneau waited a few more minutes in his truck, came back out, rang the bell, went inside, and within less than 5 minutes, Sgt. Fillion was coming to the gas station telling me I was under arrest.

I followed the sergeant in, Mr. Charbonneau left and gave my son the “finger” as he drove away. I was then arrested, and prohibited from returning within the City of Lachute limits. I was also told that if I did not sign a promise to appear, as well as agree to respect these “conditions”, I would be detained until Monday due to the week-end.

All these facts can be confirmed by video and audio recordings within my possession, as well as gas receipt, and times can be verified via the Facebook postings of my every move.

I feel that under section 16 of the Private Security Act, I have investigated the facts of this situation and brought it repeatedly to the attention of the SPCALL/MAPAQ, and as a result of their inaction, I am now suffering the consequences of Mr. Charbonneau’s accusations of “criminal harrassment” as I have only been trying to get the appropriate authorities to act on this very serious situation. There has never been any ill intent towards Mr. Charbonneau or his family, the only goal is to help the dogs in need through the legal methods available to me.

Considering all the events resulting from the lack of enforcing the laws applicable in this case, the SPCALL failed to discharge a legal duty resulting as a common nuisance to the public’s enjoyment, safety, health as well as putting my safety at risk, as per section 180 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

Common nuisance 180. (1) Every one who commits a common nuisance and thereby (a) endangers the lives, safety or health of the public, or (b) causes physical injury to any person, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. Definition (2) For the purposes of this section, every one commits a common nuisance who does an unlawful act or fails to discharge a legal duty and thereby (a) endangers the lives, safety, health, property or comfort of the public; or (b) obstructs the public in the exercise or enjoyment of any right that is common to all the subjects of Her Majesty in Canada. R.S., c. C-34, s. 176.

11 thoughts on “Did the SPCALL fail to discharge of a legal duty?”

  1. The Montreal SQ has agreed to take on the charges, forwarding them to the St-Agathe SQ, who in turn will “investigate” and submit this to the Crown, MRC Laurentides, Ref # 026110902001. The above article is the declaration that has been submitted to the SQ. Sophie and myself are “pressing criminal charges”, will the Crown accept, that is to be seen. If needed we will use the Civil courts as needed to facilitate this rescue effort.

  2. I’m not a bit surprised because any time Animaquebec is involved in ANYTHING, shit happens. They don’t give a flippen flop about animals, they never did, and they never will. THE END.

  3. Dear Sophie
    I am so sorry that you feel that way
    i have been a long time donor of yours
    now i feel that you have gone to far…..
    i know that the SPCALL did the best they could and are still working very hard on this
    why waste so much of your precious time ,when so many dogs need you ?
    please let it go and move on

  4. John Benoit, you’re free to have your own opinions, but a one time donation is far from being a long time donor, other than that one time donation which was ages ago. We really don’t need supporters like you. I know you work closely with Corinne Gonzales, her best is not good enough.

    It’s not the first time the SPCALL has failed to discharge of a legal duty, and for that they can also be guilty of the cruelty for encouraging others to do the same without any risk attached, such as tying dogs to tree’s no shelter.

    The law is the law, and why should the SPCALL be above it? The mission is to save the dogs, and make their lives better for the future, if that means making things change, it ain’t gonna be the first or last time, the more I rescue dogs the more I hate people. The only goal is to make sure the weak laws are upheld.

    As much as Corinne Gonzales might be trying to her best, she’s the one directing the SPCALL and their inaction of passing the buck over to AnimaQuebec and MAPAQ, but let’s start where the facts are… Obviously trying the best is not good enough… Someone is responsible for this inaction and we won’t stop…

    The SPCALL allowed Daniel to run away 3 times…

    The basics are that the SPCALL has encourage others to do the same, since there is no risk attached to the neglect, thus also guilty of the P-42. The P-42 might not use the words shelter, but the criminal code sure does…

    I had warned the SPCALL that their inaction would be met with legal resources, they told me who cares, no Judge would accept the motion. I can only guess they forgot about the criminal code, it’s law to uphold the law…

    I gave the cops the opportunity to submit my motion to the Crown, or that I would do this in the civil courts against the SQ, SPCALL and etc…, but the SQ agreed that it was a crime and I didn’t need to do this in the civil courts. So it’s in criminal court vs the SPCALL, and the deontology courts for the SQ, as they forced us to return dogs without shelter under orders from Corinne Gonzales.


  5. Sophie,
    Thank you for all your efforts. This saddens me to read, as it’s not any one person suffering, it’s the dogs. You are doing an amazing thing, don’t give up the fight.

    This world would be a better place if there were more people like you.

    I am in Ottawa, but if there is anything I can do, I’m here.

    Licks and Wags.
    – Lindsey

  6. It’s always easy to detail a story by enchancing the pure truth with your own side of the medal, your pure and unique opinion with a closed state of mind. In each story there is always two sides on a medal and despite your arguments and photos you should remember one thing : alaskans are not huskies but mixed breeds created for sledding track…. to run as fast as the musher wants. So they are crossbred with many hounds like the greyhound. Most of those alaskans .not seized but given. to the SPCALL were RESCUE dogs like your owns rescue ones. It’s a shame to see a rescue organization like yours to discriminate like this another rescue organization.
    It’s also desesperate from your part to attack a breeder / dog professionnal like me with your big mess up and pure inventions. I never ever bred Crested dogs but you claim that I produced litters. I never ever had any dog died on a chain but you again suggest that in your many post on your sophiesdogadoption facebook and elsewhere on the net.
    In fact, the truth is that you destroy rescue organizations’ reputation by doing what you are doing…. filming cars going from Lachute with dogs from PRU, registering police officers and gardians is the way you found to claim that you are there to .protect. our beloved dogs…. no no no you are simply there to put shit everywhere you go. You done problems to spcall, to PRU volonteers, to Daniel, myself and my kids and to your, how you present him… ho yeah your LONg time friend. Is it this way you treat your friends? if so guess I’m pretty happy to not be one of yours! Ray should be respected better that how you do and act with him.

    The truth is that you never ever respected the law. It is against the law to trace people like you do in car. It is against the law to publish photos or vedeos where we can easily identify teenagers or kids without written consent of the parents. It is against the law to enforce a private property to take photos or to withness things like you do. It is also against the law to publicly use facebook to destroy someone else’s reputation. ho and it is also against the law to stoll dogs and then offering them to adoption. It is you that do not respect the law.

    From my part, Daniel owns only 3 dogs. So if you have a problem with him or his dogs then attack him, not me. My own dogs are fed and watered daily. Thay have a shelter has individual dog houses… a bin? yes I use bins like many other mushers uses. Why? simply because they don’t chew them! wooden dog houses are chewed and when chewd animaquebec ask us to replace the, but speak with all mushers aropund and they will say that they will need to replace their dog houses every week due to chewing! Where in the P-42 law it is written that we need an interior kennel for spitz nordic breeds????? The law says only that dogs need food daily, water daily, exercised daily… and properly retained (by chain or in a pen. Keeping dogs in crates all day long is not, in my opinion, a way to keep dogs but all spca does it… right? most rescues does it too. What is the difference between a dog kenneled all day long in a crate versus a dog that is chained long enough to move and exercise???? I will also say that a vet in France (i said a vet…. an autority person) wrote a superb document for its doctorat…. about kennel facilities and it is clearly said that keeping dogs in kennel runs or in crates has a direct effect on their poor immunity and creates lot of stress and anxiety. Keeping dogs on grass and natural flooring is better for their immunity system. Keeping dogs in group is better for their psychologic health… but it has the inconvenient to provide more opportunity for dog fighting…. hormonal changes will have an effect on them and may create fights.

    Where in the law you can refer to say that a chained dog is not properly cared for? and if you find this… then your battle should be not against myself, but against all North America where we can easily see chained dogs in backyard…. and also attack walmart and others to sell chain links to properly attach dogs ;-)

    You suggest to people that you fight to save the life of my poor dogs because some died attached after trees…. bullshit! I never ever had a dog died like you suggest and when I have one that is ready to go to the dog’s heaven, then I go to the vet to do it. I care and love my dogs enough to sell my puppies with a lifetime genetic guarantee + a clauses that says that anytime during the life of my puppy, if the new owner can’t no longer keep it, then he should return it to me. Find breeders who offer those two clauses in their sells….. you will not count a lot! I care enough to say to people that yes I do not want to see my pups in spca or shelters like yours.

    In fact you use the distress or a pet owner to destroy its reputation when he face a problem. It is exactly what you do. Daniel face front a problem. He did not paid two months of renting because he has a verbal agreement with the owner of the house to invest those months into houses’ repairs…. but she lied and putted a family on the street with a kennel. Finding a new kennel in 10 days is near impossible, specially when you rent it. This is the true story.
    I also have ALL spcall /animaquebec inspection reports and no ones shows evidences like you suggest : lack of care for animal.

    You are only a trouble person that is knocking at the wrong door. Be careful because the energy you send everywhere in the universe is always returned. I was like you years ago. a close person mind and had a serious bad attitude against other breeders. I evoluated and now with my own experiences I should say that I was wrong, really wrong and it is why now I don’t care about what others do in their yard with their lines and breeding because I care only about what I am doing.

    You attack myself when you say that I spoke about investment. Yes my dogs are an investment in TIME and LOVE much more than in money. Money is there only to care of them, not to go into my pocket because if it was the case, I will be able since years to buy a house in cash like most puppymills do!

    You suggest that I was a bad breeder because I was suspended by the CKC. yes…. under falses accusations. They were under pressure of North American in the Eurasier breed. Those people claimed false things and even the DNA prooves where not showing 100% efficiency, they said guilty. But the truth is that I still have all DNA profiles and I know the dam was the good one. I stopped fighting for it and decided that 2 years will be over fast and I choose to no longer be a CKC member. Why? because they are not there when their members need them. Because their only goal is to make money. Many many purebred breeders in Canada choose to no longer be a ckc member and it’s not against the law.

    What is against the law is to pretend selling purebred dogs when they have n0 papers to proove it. You can sell any husky, chowchow, labrador etc, but if you don’t have a purebred certificate coming from a recognized organization like the ckc or cfc, then you can’t use the breed’s name only but use a X or another way to mention that those dogs are not purebred…. even they can be able to win in the show ring because of their beauty and ressemblance to the best in show winner! Labrador type dog, chowchow type dog, husky type dog (or alskan who is not a recognized breed).

    Your attitude against me push me to sell my dogs under cover, this means under a false name (which is not what I do) or via media. So now, until the law will finally be respected, I will met future buyers in a timhortons and will not invite them to my home…. because I know you do everything you can to find my address and it’s not so easy now… now I will look at a puppymills selling its puppies in a parking because of YOU and your attitude.

    Thanks a lot and Merry XMAS!

  7. The story of the “rescued” Alaskans (who are mutts it now seems)….

    It is one thing to rescue newborn puppies from a certain death at he hands of a musher, but it’s another thing to rescue them in order to turn them into a pot of Gold. Poor puppies, born in the cold of winter, were rescued by Daniel Charbonneau. Poor little puppies were to be killed, and he saw them and probably thought: Oh poor little things, I will save them and turn them into mushing dogs and start a lucrative business for tourists with you little darlings!!!

    So off he went with these puppies that he nursed into beautiful dogs, but ooops…. he’s unable to get a Musher’s permit through the town….. Crap… What does he do now??

    Not sure what the plan was, but years go by (a decade or so) and these beautiful, unemployed Mushing pups who grew into beautiful dogs, live outside, day after day, year after year, some in plastic bins as a shelter, as they are “approved” for Mushers…. so their life is at the end of a chain. Whatever “care” they got was the basics as this was a pack of dogs who was turning out to cost money rather than make money….

    And as a rescue who had “saved” these poor souls, maybe time had come to have them sterilized and placed for adoption…. But oh wait… that costs money, so instead they just grew old, some broke off their chains, went to see their “relatives” (siblings and what-not) and more babies were born. More possible mushing dogs… But more years went by, still no mushing permit, and these dogs ended up after so many years multiplying to almost 40, lived tied to trees in the woods at least the last few years, if not all their lives, with in the end no food, no water, and down to 20lbs on average per dog, only to be “surrendered” in exchange for no charges from the SPCALL…

    The story of the CKC breeder and those 30+ dogs (who are exotic dogs)…..

    Johanne Parent, published and renowned author, dog breeder of Finnish Lappins, Czechoslovakian Wolfhounds, Eurasians, bred and bred and bred, did shows and traveled to Europe to give seminars, to talk about dog training, behaviour, well-being, breeding and so on for years. With her spouse, Daniel Charbonneau, they had a good thing going. He was going to have a Mushing business, she was going to keep breeding her “exotic” dogs for big $$$.

    But the big bucks stopped coming in when “bad stock” made her unable to sell these puppies as “pure CKC dogs”, some she was trying to get recognized (as they are only approved in Europe as a breed) by the CKC without any success so far, so she had exotic dogs which became harder and harder to sell for the big $$$. So somehow, someway, CKC decided to “ban” her on accusations of falsifying documents, therefore lying about the dog’s bloodline. In the end, her “defense” must not have proved she was falsely accused, as she was banned from being a CKC breeder.

    But that doesn’t stop an investor from making money. Instead, having a teenage son who “loved” the breed and his mother’s breeding business, was registered as the legitimate CKC breeder for the dogs she could still sell. This information can be verified at the CKC offices. As for the Chinese Crested, that information came directly from the CKC, they were registered under the son. However, being that their license has not been renewed for the year, they are officially “unable” to sell these dogs as CKC registered at this point…. Again, info given by the CKC…..

    I do not invent what I write, I have facts before I talk. I am not one to “badmouth” people, I only state the facts that I can obtain, I am not a crazy woman on a mission to hurt this family, I am a determined woman on a mission to save these dogs from this horrible situation they are living. My opinion possibly, just like SPCA/MAPAQ’s opinion of dogs living on a bus, or a legitimate business having “too many” dogs. I have facts of one dog dead at the end of his/her chain, I have only “hearsay” about the other two. I believe it without a doubt! One is enough for me to consider this cruelty, abuse, criminal neglect. People who don’t agree with me, don’t have to.

    Now for the Law: I have done absolutely NOTHING illegal during this whole situation that started August 5, 2011. Every move I have made is in accordance with the Private Security Act, I have never gone on private property on which I was not authorized by the owner, anything outside a private dwelling or private property is fair game to take pictures, film, and look at. I have never invaded privacy, I have never followed nor tracked anyone, I have many many many allies who are helping me in my investigation and I have been “around” to confirm the pack’s whereabouts, as until November 11, 2011, these poor souls were still living outside in the woods, tied to trees, some of them with shelters such as garbage bins laid on their side. The pictures I took and showed online were taken from off the private property, they were clearly visible if you look hard enough. No laws were infringed upon, as a matter of fact SQ thanked me for getting the proof they could not obtain without a warrant.

    As for stolen dogs, there were no stolen dogs no matter how many times Johanne and Daniel will “accuse” me of doing so. For those who know the whole story, 10 dogs were surrendered by Daniel the 5th of August, and on the 6th, having changed his mind about the other 15 that he had agreed to surrender, I was pulled over by the SQ and forced by Corinne Gonzalez herself to return the dogs to their Hellhole. They had a “file” for animal cruelty and I was going to “blow” their case if I did not tie the dogs back. So all 15 dogs were returned to their trees, after a rainy day, in the mud, with no food, no water, no shelter on a Sunday night at 10:00 pm so SPCALL could “do something” the next day, and as we all know, a “deal” was struck with Daniel for those dogs…… So no stolen dogs, nothing illegal….

    Acceptable shelter and “runs” for dogs: Anima-Quebec accepts “bins” for Mushers, Johanne’s dogs are “exotic” dogs, not mushing dogs. Anima-Quebec accepts plastic bins as opposed to dog houses due to chewing… yet they seize 520 dogs as one of their “charges” are plastic bowls that can be chewed up and cause sharp edges that could hurt dogs….. Can’t a dog eat a plastic bin just like a plastic bowl???

    Chains are acceptable and that is very sad, however….. A dog who spends his life tied on a chain to a tree, where all he can do is turn and turn and turn and turn and turn and turn all day, the result is a dog who can only walk in circles, who’se back gets curved and damaged from the constant turning. Dog lives in his/her urine/excrement, as they step on them while they “exercise” around their trees. Years of that??? Yup, Anima-Quebec accepts that….. hence my battle.

    Crates like the shelters and SPCA’s for dogs: The difference????? SPCA and shelter dogs may spend their time in crates, but NEVER for years on end. We have no other options sometimes to house these dogs, but the goal is to get them out of there as soon as we can find them a home, not keep them for years on end to use when “production” time comes around. That is the difference between a dog in a cage at a shelter, and a dog in a cage/chain all his/her life.

    Now people who “care” for their dogs, should take the best care they can regardless of their financial situation. Not paying rent for 2 months and being kicked out in 10 days with almost 100 dogs and 2 kids is what I’d call a lack of taking responsibility. People can blame landlords for their problems, but having talked to the landlord in this situation, having 100 dogs in and on the property can cause damage that a landlord may not be ready to assume responsibility for. Coins always have 2 sides, defending oneself with excuses is the “addict” way, it’s always someone else’s fault. If someone has 100 dogs and cannot pay their rent, maybe it’s time to get rid of some of the “investment” that at one point was to turn into a pot of gold, but in the end turned into a pile of useless “stock”. You don’t starve them, keep them tied forever, drag them from wooded area to wooded area in order to hide this “investment” from someone who only wants to see these dogs have a good life.

    As for CKC and my thoughts on that “Club”. Years ago, the CKC was there to protect the genetic lines of good dogs, dogs that could be shown in competitions. It was a “sport”, an event for people to attend and for people who had a passion for a breed, to continue the bloodline. In the 21st Century in Quebec, the CKC should reconsider giving any kind of license to Quebec breeders, regardless of who they are and what kind of dogs they are breeding. I have spoken to them on this subject, and they have finally come to the realization that Quebec, no matter how you see it, has CKC members slowly, but surely, turning into “backyard” breeders and small or large-scale puppymills. This is due to our society of consumers, just like the PRU dogs that were seized, they will in fact be “adopted” to people who have all the wrong reasons in the world to get these dogs just before Christmas. A majority of them will end up in shelters or pounds, sold on the internet, or given to friends. But it is not the mills or breeders fault, they are supplying a market. If you can no longer sell a $1,200 dog, you will start breeding dogs you can sell for $400 and just pop them out……The more you “mass” breed, the less care and nutrition you put into them, the more money you make in the end. Not enough for some people to buy a property, but certainly enough to keep running with dozens of dogs.

    And because the media is constantly telling people to “check” where their dogs come from, selling from Tim Horton’s has become officially the puppymill way. Whoever buys a dog from a parking lot, should really question the ethics of that so-called breeder.

    I have always been an honest, fair, definitely outspoken and direct person, I am a fighter, but I don’t fight for nothing. I do not “pick” on people, I am not one to take people to court and try to sue, I am a person who will fight battles that are in need of fighting. Whether it be to defend my rights or those of animals, or help people who have been wronged fight their battles, if I feel they in fact have been wronged, but I am far from being a “trouble-maker”. Those of you who really know me, I know you understand my values, my sincerity and my fight. The ones who don’t, can believe what you want. That will not change my way of doing things. I do not rescue dogs to make people happy, proud, I do not do it for the glory, the attention and definitely not for the money, as anyone knows you will eat your shirt at this……I do it strictly and only for the dogs, and in this case, what I witnessed myself is as bad as some of the worst situations I have seen in the last 15 years of rescuing neglected, abused and abandoned dogs. This is a shame, and the biggest shame is the way Anima-Quebec, SPCALL and MAPAQ have treated this whole situation. I have become enemy number one to everyone involved, but I will not rest until I know those dogs are safe.

    All Johanne would have to do is prove to me they are in a decent environment, they are healthy and fed, and I would let this go. I have learned however, NOT to trust Marc Levasseur’s “reports” and until I have proof myself, I will not let this go.

    I will find out where they are hiding again, and I will not have to break any laws. I do believe in saving dogs, but not the way Anima-Quebec and MAPAQ do it.

    Regardless of how I see it at this point, these dogs have had a miserable life at least since July 2011 that I am positive of, and it is absolutely incomprehensible that no “competent authorities” have wanted to help these dogs, regardless of the “CKC” status of someone. Breeders who do this to their dogs, should be put in jail in my opinion.

    In closing, the battle revolves now around Johanne’s dogs, (no longer Daniel, he’s just the one hiding them)….as Anima-Quebec/SPCALL has REFUSED to do anything about these dogs who at one point were so pathetically skinny it’s cruelty in my opinion, and them seizing CCM and Paws R Us dogs who were in both cases, sheltered, fed, and had water. In both cases, dogs were not starved. In Johanne’s case, dogs have been as bad as Daniel’s Huskies. Whether they are now “safe” is a question I still have, one thing I know for sure, is SPCALL refused to take those dogs in, even for 90 days, to give them what they needed most…..

    I have therefore laid charges in virtue of Article 446 of the Criminal Code for lack of shelter for those poor dogs against Daniel and Johanne. I have also laid charges in virtue of article 180 of the Criminal Code against SPCALL for failing to do what they should have done. It is time that we, the people, stand up to animal cruelty on our own since Anima-Quebec/MAPAQ seem to not care that a dog is left like that if the “owner” is a “recognized” CKC breeder at one time in their life. It is the sad reality of what I see coming, anyone who is not CKC will be “seized” regardless of their actual conditions (like we’ve seen in the 2 seizures done while I was trying to save this pack), and anyone who pays their “dues” to the CKC and other clubs will be spared the “Laws” protecting our dogs (very weak laws, I may add, as the SQ refers to the P-42 as a rag that no one but MAPAQ can enforce).

    If you pay attention closely to the new proposed changes, it will change absolutely nothing when it comes to the puppymill problem in Quebec, it will just restrict everyone else. Before you rejoice, read every little change and see what you make of it.

  8. Crazy Lady you are sophie hahaha

    Daniel never asked for a permit like you supposed in this post.
    I bred those breeds eurasier and finnish lapphund are purebred registered dogs. I never ever sold any pup without being registered by ckc or akc.
    If you think i do a lot of money with only one or two litters yearly then you don’t know what you speak about… Specially with health clearance of parents and all !

    The true fact is that YOU want those exotics for your rescue because it will be more lucrative for you to resell them than your pittbulls and mutts.

    Continue to speak badly cause i dont Care… I met two volonteers for PRU dogs yesterday and your bad réputation is well known from them as a pure trouble maker.

  9. Sophie… You ask me to Proove you that my dogs are ok…. Under what critera i should do it? Are you a vet or any animal recognized inspector? Surely not!

    With you posts you proved me your pack of competence in dogs and laws si many times. You argued with guardians of the PRU about the fact dogs were under the control of the mapaq. It is absolutely normal because i should remember you that dogs were at first working on farms as stock animals and not pets. It is with years and generations that dogs were considered pets. Secondly the mapaq is the representant here in qc for agriculture Canada ministery and it is them who mentored the ckc and cfc to register dogs under their laws. So the mapaq is yes the best organisation to work on this.

    you are unable to distinct a fear dog from an abused or agressive dog. You are Also unable to know when you are on a private or public property and when dogs are in the woods at about 1000feets from the road which is public, from where it is impossible to take any photo! When you called people around to ask them help for your own benefit then it is not the way to go…. Specially when those people are friends of us :)

    Treating Ray like you do is not friendship…. But exploitation.

    you said you have prooves from the ckc… Then show them because my son bred only few litters of eurasiers thats it. The crested breeding is in your dream… Specially when i own only two mâles hahaha . My son is the breeder because he owns the eurasier bitches! Legally the breeder is always the owner. And for my last ckc suspension (first since i bred since 1995), did you ever see a bitch nursing puppies who at the end is not considered the mother of those puppies? But this is exactly what happened here. The true sister of my bitch was owned by somebody else in north American and they submit her dna to trying to proove that my dog was not the dam of the litter. … After they learned that the sire was dead! The dna of the 2 sisters was close enough that the ckc in doubt decided to void the litter from their registry and i was suspended for 2years. Do you want to see those dna testing? I really have those because its a true story, not a pure invention like yours.

    Wolfdogs are Daniel dogs not mine and he produced a single litter over all those years with his older girl who is 11 years!! big puppymills here yes as he sold only one single puppy to a woman in usa … A neutered male! Continue to write and Say everywhere that you have proof that we are puppymills if you want…. I don’t Care because as far as you speak about it then you think of us and its a good thing. Daniel has the same vet as yours by the way… So if he said his wolfdogs are ok then shut your mouth. You ask for prooves… If you don’t consider your vet report to the mapaq good then you should consider to change your vet for your own dogs!

    Finally, when i receive inquiry i explain to the people that a crazy extremist rescuer is on my back since august and due to that, unfortunately i cant provide my address to them and i provide them your website links to the falses words about me. And my dogs and fortunately people fully understand. one of my lappie pup will go in its new family next weekend… Yes i had one litter af lappie…. They were born info a friend’s home not in a tent or woods or wherever like you suggested!

    I love Spitz types breeds. Malamutes and akitas which i truly love dont have the caracter to share with me in a family home. I imported my first eurasier girl in 1991 as a pet and she was spayed and was never ever bred. i was against breeders as a dog trainer. And i falled in love with the breed and imported a internation champion girl and a Nice stud to start my breeding program. My best years (receiving enough réservations) i produced 3 litters but most of the years i produced only 0 to 2 litters. All registered to the ckc! so you can ask them.

    My girls never produced more than 3 litters in their entiter life and most of them had only one single litter and i still keep them as pets! you simply accused me under false arguments without having the owl picture.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.