The PRU facilities v. HSI facilities

PRU had old pig pens converted for dogs with running water and an automatic cleaning system; HSI had travel crates stacked up which need to be manually cleaned. PRU welcomed the media and public with open arms to visit their facilities while HSI turned a Transport Quebec garage in Lachute into Fort Knox, an impenetrable fortress.

What did HSI have to hide?

A LOT of the small dogs were so lethargic they couldn’t even stand up on their own.

Many of the big dogs were VERY thin…. I won’t say skinny…. because I do know healthy dogs that are VERY thin because of their metabolisms… So I wouldn’t say weight was my main concern..but for some…yes it was. These dogs were like this when they arrived.

NOW…. what I found even more appalling was the way this place was organized.  UNFORTUNATELY… I was not allowed to take pictures or video.. or I would have. I am not sure who was leading this thing… the humane  society??? not sure  so many organizations were around….

All the volunteers seemed to have the best intentions. HOWEVER…. the conditions these dogs were in were insane.

I work at a Grooming Salon…. and I went in to help with the more severe grooming needs… medicated baths…. shaving out very bad mats that could lead to skin irritations…. cleaning out ears & paws to help with infections etc…..

When I got there… there was a very badly organized grooming team. They had a list of dogs that had to be done in order of priority…however when we got these “priority” dogs out of their cages… they were OBVIOUSLY not that bad. A few knots here and there but nothing like what we were seeing…when we tried to take out the dogs that were most in need… we would get in trouble.

FINALLY… we just left to cut some nails where the big dogs were (their nails were INSANELY LONG and we were worried about the dogs splitting them and than causing infections) When I saw the big dog warehouse.. OH MY GOD was bad. I think they might have been better off at the puppy mill. The cement floors of the kennels were COVERED in pee and poo…… and I KNOW the volunteers cleaned every cage VERY often.. almost every hour or 2.. but the paws of the dogs were never cleaned. These dogs were getting infections and sores between their pads… I THINK because they were soaking in their own waste!!!

We wanted to take each dog out individually to wash their paws and maybe apply some kind of paw wax to help protect their pads…but apparently that was not a “priority”…and even though we said we would stay later than our 8 hours we were originally gonna stay.. we were not allowed.

ANOTHER THING… only the big dogs are taken out of their cages, and even at that.. only the VERY large ones like the great danes….dogo argentinos etc.. and they only get to go outside to pee and poo and then come back in their cages right away. I UNDERSTAND that they have limited time and volunteers…but there were people willing to stay extra time to do it and they were not allowed! the little dogs r not taken out of cages unless to clean the cages or to wash the dog.

ANYWAYS… I just wanted to let you know my point of view since I saw how the dogs were when they arrived and how they just got worse staying there….

  • By an Anonymous volunteer.

With HSI collecting $800,000 in donation, charging PRU $500,000 in boarding fees which MAPAQ by law is responsible for, one would think these dogs were now provided with the best possible care. HSI makes off with $200,000 in profits for putting these dogs in conditions worse then where they originated from! Why were volunteers forced to leave their cell phones and cameras at the door? What about the 150 or so dogs that needed around the clock vet care? Dog shit it was, the only one on site around the clock was the security guard.

Does HSI, AQ and MAPAQ only care about the end sales?

La Société pour la prévention de la cruauté envers les animaux (SPCA) de l’Outaouais prévoit une hausse de ses dépenses avec l’arrivée de la nouvelle loi sur la protection des animaux, en juin prochain. Pour amortir ses coûts, l’organisme devra se fier davantage sur la vente d’animaux retirés des chenils et chatteries insalubres, comme elle l’a fait avec les bêtes saisies dans le Pontiac, en septembre dernier.

The new version of the P-42 as suggested by Bill 51 solves this problem. HSI failed to provide better conditions and it was allowed to legally plunder PRU by doing what real puppy mills do, that is, to provide as little care as possible for a profitable return. So how was the animals’ welfare to benefit from this seizure? HSI sold the puppies, PRU would have sold the puppies. This wasn’t a case of hoarding, eventually the puppies all face the same faith by being purchased by humans. So why do we allow such legal plunder to financially benefit HSI and SPCAs? It solved nothing.

Section 55.9.8 of the Act is amended by adding the following paragraphs at the end:

“The seized animal may be kept at the place of seizure if the owner or occupant of the premises agrees to it in writing, according to the terms agreed to by the parties. If the owner or occupant of the premises does not agree to such custody or fails to respect the terms attached to it, the seizor may apply to a judge for authorization to keep the seized animal on site, according to the terms and conditions that the judge deems appropriate.

In the case of an emergency, the seizor may, before obtaining authorization from a judge, establish interim custody measures to ensure the safety and welfare of the animal.”

5 thoughts on “The PRU facilities v. HSI facilities”

  1. I worked at that Emergency Shelter for a month. That is just what it was. A temporary facility until the dogs could get turned over to HSI for adoption. If you think they were better off at PRU, perhaps you should go work at a puppy mill.

    The thing that those dogs did get was good food or much of it, clean water and love. Yes, love. Many of them didn’t know how to handle that nor did they know what solid flooring was. Many of them sleep standing up to this day because at PRU they didn’t want to sleep in their own feces. The dogs ate rats because that was the most food they got. They did have to catch them themselves.

    Did you go into the PRU facilities? Did you see how the dogs were treated? I would hope not because I don’t think you would be saying the things you have if you had visited it. If you had seen the place, and you still think they did a better job than HSI, you’re as bad as PRU. PRU let everyone in because they were a puppymill. Dogs were just a cash cow for them. They weren’t pets. PRU didn’t know any better.

    If you had listened to anything that was said, you would know why media weren’t allowed in.

    I would also suggest that you go ahead and save 500 dogs with another 100 puppies to be born. Maybe you can do a better job. That would be wonderful because it sounds like you could.

  2. If you worked for HSI instead of volunteering, how neutral can you be! Food & clean water they got from PRU, It’s kind of hard to pee in a tube that distributes water on suction. I agree they perhaps didn’t get the so called love of human interaction as they should, but that ain’t the legal issue at hand now is it. They might not of known what solid flooring was, do you even know why? Their cages had holes (smaller then paws) so the feces could drain out with a flow of water. Keep in mind it’s a farm.

    Your ignorance astonishes me. Eating rats you say lol! I was in the Court room in Campbells Bay, yes the facility had rats, and rat traps. The Judge loved that argument, rats in a farm, in the country side, 90% of the farms in Campbells Bay probably have a rat problem. As for eating rats, I wonder why that never made it in trial? Speculations that is, strangely that’s all the prosecutor had, speculations and no proof of 90% that was alleged.

    Yes I did go into the PRU facilities, I didn’t see the dogs or how they were treated since I was there after the Court date, thus empty and cleaned up. Funny the media didn’t show the before or after images. Nor did HSI defend it’s claim by releasing images, I have the proof to defend my claims.

    I recorded the security guard telling me what the reason was for such secrecy, it sums up to the Court case and integrity of the proof. However in Court, they had 7 vet reports. So much for the integrity of the proof. The Judge only allowed evidence collected on the day of the seizure, everything else was tainted.

    500 dogs, Mira doesn’t even have the facilities that can compare with PRU’s farm, Mira has 1000+. So no I can’t do a better job, nor can HSI, nor can Mira. That is without using what’s already existing, thus the amended article by Bill 51, next time you might just have to go help HSI inside the PRU facilities, and they won’t be moved for the volunteers convenience again.


  3. Not sure who told you this but it is all BS. I have been to both PRU farm and was a volunteer at the E-shelter and there is no way that the E-shelter was anything but fantastic for everyone of those dogs. Each time I went I saw a huge diffrence from the time before and saw the progress with the dogs!! Funny thing what kindness and love can do for the soul. Not to mention clean cages everyday fresh water good food…

  4. 3 volunteers confirms it, the CCM also broke in to the e-shelter so that makes 4 eye witnesses. He was the first to expose it’s location. We later confirmed it.

    You should also listen to the CBC Radio tomorrow at 7:30am, a PFL saga is to be exposed. The best is to come next week in the Mirror paper, PFL selling to breeders. Nice to see you’re linked to to it all once again. I’m also still waiting for that lawsuit of yours, you keep google’ing your name. How did the Canadian government react? Did W5 ever call you? Your husband connected the missing dots…

    I would question what business you had with PRU…

    Your credibility is shot Tauny… oh and why did PFL shutdown their website after this Jazzie saga?

    Page 1
    Theft Report of Dog #11-57908 (Constable Griffin)
    Further to my initial report dated February 25, 2011 I wish to bring to your attention some new developments regarding the theft of my dog Jazzie on February 24, 2011. I contacted you on Sunday, April 10, 2011 and left a message regarding these new developments. As of today, April 18, 2011 I have not heard back from you so I sending you this report outlining incidents that occurred on April 10, 2011 on a Facebook “Bring Jazzie Home”. April 10, 2011 – This incident involved conversation between a Tauny Nixon-Lafleche and a Cassey Sequin here Cassey Sequin admits to having Jazzie in her possession.

    Cassey further states that she open the door and Jazzie ran out somewhere in the Woodroffe/Carling area. This conversation was registered on Facebook “Bring Jazzie Home”. I am sure that the two people involved did not realize they were having an open chat and not close chat. The reason for this is because at the same time this Tauny Nixon Lafleche was on this chat with Cassey Sequin, she sent me a message asking whether I had found Jazzie or if anyone had phoned stating that they had seen her. Tauny has yet to mention this conversation with Cassey to me (even though she is a regular on Jazzie’s Facebook). Very strange!


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.