Dog breeder acquitted of neglect charge
Published Thursday November 5th, 2009
Lawsuits | Man sues SPCA over seizure; SPCA launches countersuit
A dog breeder who was accused of neglecting his animals was exonerated in Fredericton provincial court Wednesday.
Judge Mary Jane Richards acquitted Hawkins Corner resident Philip MacFarlane on Wednesday of a May 21, 2007, charge of failing to provide necessary food, water and shelter to eight dogs.
The province's chief animal protection officer received an email complaint about MacFarlane that prompted him to send officers to his property to check his kennels.
The officers found several dogs with feces matted into their fur, one overturned water bowl and other water bowls with wood chips floating in them.
They also observed other conditions that caused concern.
The animal-protection officers seized eight dogs and took them to the Oromocto SPCA, where they were cared for.
At trial, the officers testified that the dogs were initially seized for education purposes, as a means to alert MacFarlane to the importance of tending to them properly.
However, he refused to pay housing, grooming and other fees to the Oromocto SPCA. He said he didn't want the dogs back because they could have picked up viruses while at the shelter.
The officers told MacFarlane if he didn't pay the fees and drop a lawsuit he had filed during the summer of 2007 over the seizure of the dogs, he'd be charged with animal neglect.
The Crown's veterinarian testified that the matting in the seized dogs was abnormal and was the result of a lack of consistent grooming and can be accompanied by disease.
However, a vet who testified for the defence said he inspected photos of the seized dogs and the kennels. He said the dogs were in good health and the kennels were properly tended.
He said there was nothing inhumane about MacFarlane's breeding business.
Also testifying for the defence were former clients of MacFarlane's, who said he always cared for his dogs well and performed proper maintenance and cleaning of the kennels.
In her ruling Wednesday, Richards found not only that the Crown hadn't proven its case but that MacFarlane cared for the dogs properly.
"There was ample evidence as to the daily care of human treatment of the animals and the photos taken the evening of the seizure gives a good overall view of the kennel," the judge said.
"Mr. MacFarlane did not have all of his dogs groomed the day of the seizure, but there was ample evidence of consistent care."
She said all witnesses, including those for the Crown, testified all of the dogs were healthy.
Richards also noted that MacFarlane had just been licensed again by the provincial dog constable shortly before the seizure.
"Although one container of water was overturned and there was testimony that one kennel had no water, there was ample testimony that
Mr. MacFarlane watered the dogs adequately, and that there were water buckets in every (dog) run," she said Wednesday.
"An offence based on one overturned water bucket or wood shavings in some water buckets cannot be sustained when proof has been offered of routine care, including watering the animals twice daily."
MacFarlane said Wednesday he feels vindicated but also anticipates the results of his small-claims lawsuit against the New Brunswick Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
The provincial SPCA has filed a counterclaim for the fees incurred by the seizure and care of the dogs.
MacFarlane said he runs a legitimate, reputable business, but the May 2007 incident has tainted it with the suggestion that he was running a puppy mill.
"My kennel is always open to the public," he said. "I plan to continue my business."
Business has been slow since the incident, he said.
"It's been impossible to sell pups."
More City & Region
Search Articles
More CE Network Sites & Partners:
Comments (21)
All comments are subject to the site Terms of Use. For a full commenting tutorial click here.
Our editorial team relies on filtering technology and our visitor community to identify inappropriate comments. In the event that a site user has submitted offensive content that has evaded our filter, please select the option to Flag As Inappropriate presented within the comment. Thank you for helping to keep this site clean.
"The officers told MacFarlane if he didn't pay the fees and drop a lawsuit he had filed during the summer of 2007 over the seizure of the dogs, he'd be charged with animal neglect."
I am not a lawyer but is it not a criminal offence to threaten someone with criminal charges if they do not withdraw a pending lawsuit?
Imagine if this were a child instead of a dog and a Family and Community Services officer told a parent to either drop a lawsuit against the department or face being charged with neglect. Just does not sit well.
This organization needs to be knocked back into reality and maybe an empty bank account will make them, think twice about abusing animal lovers.
Way to go Mr. MacFarlane. You da man!
It was provincial animal control officers who seized the animals, not the SPCA. The SPCA was then asked to care for the animals while the situation was resolved. All they've done is ask (as a charitable organization) to be reimbursed for the cost of the animals' care.
The SPCA has done nothing wrong in this case. They do good work, and bad-mouthing them merely demonstrates to the world that you didn't read the article closely before deciding to publicly pronounce on it.
Perhaps you'd like to volunteer to take in some of the genuinely abused or abandoned animals that will have no place to know once you get your wish that he "knocks" them "back to reality".
Talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Give your head a shake.
If it had turned out that this was in fact a puppy mill, then everyone would have been pleased that the animal control officers seized the animals and shut it down.
If this man had been smart, he would have paid the fees to the SPCA, taken the dogs, and then tried to recover the costs. But he didn't do himself any good by leaving the dogs at the SPCA and refusing to be responsible for them. He didn't appear to care about the dogs themselves at that point, only about himself.
I hope the dogs found good homes.