The Nature and Temperament of the Working Sled Dog………..Part I The Tragedy at Whistler

On April 23, 2011, the press carried stories about the one year anniversary of the deaths of a large number of sled dogs in Whistler British Columbia. Newspaper articles on that day indicated that memorial services were taking place throughout the world. This has prompted me to ask if there is not a connection between the tragedy of the Whistler dog deaths and the care and portrayal of sled dogs over the past hundreds of years?

When this very disturbing story surfaced in February 2011, there was an instantaneous eruption of strong public sentiment condemning what the media headlined the “Whistler Dog Slaughter” and anyone who might have been involved. Anything that is generally known about this event has come from or through the media. Certainly there is no doubting the fact that a large number of sled dogs were put down in a very inhumane manner, but that is essentially all that is known as a fact.


This matter has not been publicly discussed by sled dog organizations or in the sled dog media. What is probably the largest and most referenced sled dog discussion forum in the English speaking world, Sled Dog Central, made discussion of this issue off limits. This was probably a very wise step on the part of the moderator of this forum for the intensity of the public reaction to this event was (and is) powerfully overwhelming. Other (non-sled dog) media forums have received virtually hundreds of posts from concerned, very distressed and often extremely angry members of the public. While sled dog owners have spoken about this tragedy amongst themselves, and while many concerned “sled dog people” have been very proactive in an effort to respond to the issues that have been raised, it is probably not wrong to state that at least initially, many sled dog owners simply “ran for cover”.

Actually, this is probably not a kind or accurate statement. As a kennel owner, sled dog event organizer and someone who has made sled dogs a big part of my life for 40 years, when I heard this news I was numb. I now realize that I was going through the very first stage of dealing with significant loss…..denial. I didn’t want this thing to have happened and for about 24 hours I refused to allow myself to think about it. But I could not escape the reality that these dogs had been killed, my acquaintances were asking me about my reaction and virtually everyone was talking about this event. My denial then became mixed with feelings of confusion and anger. I did not want this thing to have happened but if it did, how could it have been possible? And then very quickly I became overwhelmed with a deep feeling of sadness. After 40 years of raising sled dogs I have accepted that death is a reality for all living things, but these dogs did not have to die in the manner in which they apparently did. I felt very, very sad.

I believe that for all of these reasons, sled dog owners have not spoken publicly about this matter. True, I am aware of some very special kennel owners who have carried more than their share of the load and who have stood tall and spoken with the media and have invited the public into their kennels and who have demonstrated just how much their dogs are loved and how well they are cared for. But I also believe that it is only now, with the symbolism of a “first anniversary” and the timely publication of the report of the Whistler Sled Dog Task Force that it is possible for those whose involvement with sled dogs is a big part of their world, are able to begin to speak publicly about this event. Actually, writing this is helpful for me and is probably a big step towards the acceptance that will allow me to personally move on regarding this issue.

To their great credit, the British Columbia government established the Whistler Sled Dog Task Force to undertake a study of this tragedy. The Terms of Reference of the Task Force indicated that the focus of their work was to be on four areas:

A review of the circumstances, chain of events and exchange of information related to the reported mass killing of 100 dogs on April 21st and 23rd, 2010. Also to be included are the contributing factors as well as individual and organizational responses to the event;
A review of existing legislation, organizational mandates, policies, procedures related to the dog sledding industry;
Determination of recommendations to prevent any future occurrence including mechanisms to monitor implementation and compliance; and
Any further issues that arise during the course of the review

The Task Force Report was released in late March 2011 and can be found at www.gov.bc.ca/agri/taskforce.html

The Report only really comments on areas 2, 3 and possibly 4 of the four areas of the Terms of Reference that were outlined when the Task Force was created. The first area outlined above has not been addressed in the Task Force Report and there are several reasons for this, including the fact that it appears that it isn't totally clear just who has jurisdiction to undertake an investigation and pursue charges at this point in time. Despite this confusion, it has also been stated that an investigation will be ongoing and as a result it would not have been prudent for the Task Force to pursue area #1 of the Terms of Reference right now. There may also have been breaches in terms of protocol and it is my belief that responding to this particular part of the Terms of Reference will raise many questions about the actions of some of the groups involved. Unfortunately, the fact that this area was not addressed in the report means that we are still dependent on the media’s description and interpretation of the reasoning and actions of the persons directly associated with the dog deaths. It will be interesting if there is some kind of subsequent report or addendum that will address this part of the Terms of Reference.


The main recommendations of the Report include:

• Amending the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act to define standards of care for all animals. One positive thing about this is that consideration is being given to the protection of all animals, not just sled dogs. They also recommend an extension of the period in which it would be possible to bring proceedings against an offender under the PCAA which is provincial legislation, right now it is only 6 months and this is one of the reasons why they have not been able to fully investigate the allegations about the dog deaths, over a year has passed since they occurred. Investigators are now only able to look at charges under the Criminal Code of Canada rather than under the PCAA.
  
• The Task Force are also recommending that the Government of Canada strengthen the Criminal Code provisions related to animal cruelty. This recommendation also touches on the very important fact that at present, domesticated animals such as dogs, cats and horses are considered domestic property, not sentient beings with rights, so owners can pretty much dispose of them as they see fit, as long as it is done humanely.
  
• Consider increasing penalties for offences committed under the PCAA (and the Criminal Code)......right now the penalties for animal abuse are really quite minimal
  
• The development of a group from within the sled dog "industry" to set standards and to monitor the care that sled dogs receive. Such a group already does exist, I would refer you to www.mushwithpride.org The Task Force report references a submission from the Board of Mush With Pride and the fact that voluntary standards of care for sled dogs have been developed by this group. Most sled dog owners would agree that this recommendation is a positive one that re-enforces something that is already largely in place. There is also another group that is being organized in British Columbia by those sled dog owners who offer guided tours (outfitters).

• Recommendation #3 of the Task Force Report also refers to certification of kennels that meet an established standard of sled dog care and husbandry and this is also recommended by Mush With Pride as a voluntary action that kennel owners may pursue.
  
• Task Force Recommendation #6 refers to mandatory reporting by veterinarians of suspected cases of animal abuse.
  
• Recommendation #7 is to "enhance the capacity of the BC SPCA to undertake animal cruelty investigations". Right now, officers of the SPCA have the legal status of a bylaw enforcement officer. This is granted by the provincial government and they do have the authority to go onto private property to investigate allegations of cruelty and to seize animals. However, while the government has given them this authority, it has not given them one cent to undertake these investigations, consequently, the SPCA is essentially funded by donations from the public, in other words, their ability to do their task is severely limited and compromised. When this report was released, the government also announced that they were giving the SPCA a one-time only grant of $100,000.00 to assist with the undertaking of investigations however it is reported in the media that the Whistler investigation will cost $250,000.00.
  
  But this blog is devoted to sled dog history and no doubt the reader is asking just what does this recounting of the Whistler events have to do with that topic?
  
  Throughout the ongoing discussion of this topic in the media, there has been considerable mention of the fact that one of the reasons that these Whistler dogs were put down was because they were not suitable candidates for rehoming, simply because they were sled dogs. The implication is that because of their “nature”, sled dogs don’t make good pets. It has been stated in the media that at least one animal behaviourist who had been consulted before these dogs were put down had deemed that the negative aspects of the sled dogs’ “nature” were even further exacerbated because these animals had been cared for in a large kennel. The suggestion is that they had developed behaviours that would make it impossible for them to make the transition from life as a working dog to life in a pet home. It was stated that the lack of socialization and stimulation, the fact that they were either tethered or housed in pens and that they had to “compete” with large numbers of other animals made them prone to irreversible behavioural issues such as various “neurotic” traits, undue shyness or aggression. There was also the inference that it is the norm that sled dogs are treated with harsh physical discipline and/or emotional indifference by their owners or caretakers.
  
  This has prompted me to ask just how accurate is this characterization of the working sled dog? If it is not, just where does this stereotype of the sled dog comes from? In Part II of this blog entry, I will try to look into the history of sled dog husbandry as well as just how sled dogs have been portrayed over time.