Question by Dale A: What was the vet’s responsibility?
Recently a news story has come to light here:
http://www.canada.com/news/RCMP+investigates+report+sled+dogs+killed+following+tourism+lull/4197883/story.html
Where approximately 100 sled dogs were ‘euthanized’ by a lay person (using a gun and exsanguination). Some of the dogs apparently didn’t die humanely. (Multiple shots, panic over their pack members being shot).
In the story, it states that a vet was contacted and refused to participate in the matter.
What do you think would be the right thing for the vet to do?
Encourage surrender of the dogs? (apparently the guy who did it tried to adopt out the dogs with limited success — remember these aren’t the most well socialized dogs)
Perform the euthanasia of the animals under more controlled circumstances? (I don’t know about you, but I would have a hard time euthanizing 100 dogs at one time).
Offer training to the person doing the job in appropriate euthanasia (and risk condoning the act — knowing that he would be unable to provide the person with the appropriate drugs or training that would be used in a vet’s office)?
Deny flat out (which seems to be what was done and probably resulted in a worse end for the animals)?
Something else?
As a future vet, I don’t know what I would have done in this situation, and what would have led to the best outcome for the animals in question.
The animals were healthy.
This was a sled dog operation. The speculation (which hasn’t been confirmed) is that they were trying to expand their business for the Vancouver Olympics. After the Olympics, the demand wasn’t there, and they had 100 dogs too many. So — they elected to euthanize.
@More Bored Collie — The article says they tried to rehome (how hard they tried, I don’t know…), but I can imagine it might be difficult to find a homes for 100 relatively poorly socialized dogs (certainly not used to living in houses), heck its hard enough to find homes for 100 ‘normal’ dogs.
@Hollie — Obviously they have the right to refuse, the question is should they? This is actually a fairly common question during vet school admission interviews. “How do you feel about convenience euthanasia”. The stock answer is always — “Encourage to surrender, if they won’t, turn the client away”. In an ideal world, obviously every one of those dogs would have a home, but we don’t live in an ideal world. When you don’t have to actually make the decision, and deal with the consequences, its easy, but the fact is any time you turn away a euthanasia there is the possibility that they will take matters in to their own hands — so where does that leave you? You *know* you can do it more humanely than they can. You have the training, and expertise (and equipment) to do the job properly.
Best answer:
Answer by ladystang
why did they want them put down?
if healthy i couldn’t do it.
What do you think? Answer below!
Posted in 
Tags: 
The way the situation was handled could have been a lot better.
The vet had no responsibility. The dogs were in good health and could have potentially gone to another facility or even homes for some of them.
Add:
I know that they claimed that they tried.
But no sled dog rescues/”sanctuaries” are making note of the facility contacting them for help.
No other sled dog facilities are saying that anyone asked them for help.
They really didn’t have a whole lot of choice.
This was 100 dogs that were NOT suited to family life, and were liable to end up spending the rest of their days rotting in the shelter.
I think he should have encouraged them to keep looking for homes or rescues willing to take the dogs on. I agree with his decison not to euthanize healthy animals, I don’t think he would have known what was going to happen though. If I KNEW the person was going to kill them himself, I’d have probably done it – just to avoid the dogs suffering – and thats only if I knew all other measures had been taken out to rehome them. I know a shelter or rescue couldn’t take that many dogs at once. I’d ask him to go to multiple shelters and rescues who were willing to take on a few dogs and have them pick out the most adoptable ones, before euthanizing the remaining ones that would either face a life confinedto a cage or a painful death.
This whole thing should never have happened. I felt sick when I read about it.
The vet had every right to refuse. The fault in this case is 100% on the owner of the company. He brought on all these dogs when the Olympics came, but did he for a second think what would become of these dogs afterward when business slows down? No. Obviously not.
I am in college hoping to become a veterinarian as well. If someone called me up and wanted me to euthanize 100 healthy animals, I don’t think I could be a part of it either. Killing that many animals for no reason except for they weren’t wanted by their owner would be heartbreaking.
The business owner should have contacted more than one vet for this. If he would have tried hard enough, I’m sure he would have been able to find someone willing to do this.