SPCA guilty of cruelty to humans

There are SPCA’s, or Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in many cities in America. They are charged by city governments to “stop animal abuse” and have the right to confiscate and sell all the animals of any owner with a judge’s warrant. In states like Texas, the SPCA can seize the property of owners without the right of appeal. Even in states where the owner can appeal, judges usually rely on the expertise of the SPCA and dismiss the owner’s appeals.

Often, the seized animals are sold within days of seizure, and the unsold animals put to death. (The SPCA charges $50-150 for all “adoptions,” and more for show animals.) When the SPCA seizes animals, it will typically seize the entire inventory of a breeder, including both “sick” as well as healthy animals, often putting the breeder out of business. Sometimes, there really are sick animals – but because of diseases, not abuse. Other times, photos of dirty but empty cages are enough to put a breeder out of business.

The SPCA is run by volunteers and employees, and rarely involves veterinarians in requesting a warrant from the judge or evaluating the condition of seized animals. The Dallas SPCA is one of the biggest SPCA’s in the nation, but (according to 20/20) its highly paid manager has no professional education treating animals, and does not involve veterinarians anywhere in the process.

Does that sound like a recipe for abuse? Aside from the fact that the entire premise of the SPCA is unjust and unconstitutional (animal owners have the right to treat their property however they wish, even if they wish to starve or torture their animals to death), such cruelty to humans is shockingly common. Many victims of the seizures complain that SPCA seizes healthy animals and sells them for profit. Often, the amateur SPCA employees rely on the ignorance of judges to get warrants. For example, some breeds of show dogs and healthy nursing bitches are naturally thin, and some animal feces on the ground are unavoidable in any breeding facility.

SPCA’s injustices are rarely presented on appeal because of laws that deny owners the right to appeal and because the media vilifies the animal owners by uncritically repeating the SPCA’s claims. Abused owners have a hard time getting justice because of the media’s vilification of animal abusers and the deference given to the (presumed) expertise of the SPCA. The targeted owners are usually poor and unable or unwilling to hire lawyers to defend themselves after their entire inventory is confiscated and the animals quickly sold or killed. The publicized seizures and condemnations are major money-makers for the SPCA, which uses the income from donations and seizures to bulk up the often-respectable incomes of their employees.

If you love animals and are thinking of donating or volunteering for your local SPCA, you might want to think again – they may be guilty of cruelty to humans.


Filed under General

12 Responses to SPCA guilty of cruelty to humans

  1. Pingback: Truth, Justice, and the American Way » “Animal rights” activists versus animal lovers

  2. Diane

    So true. They seized healthy animals from me.

    They did blood work and all came back negative for the things they tested for.

    No appeal … Who do you call?

    One lawyer wanted $5000 to talk about it.

    Something needs to be done with the SPCA.
    They have a license to steal.


  3. Lynda

    I work for spca uvongo kzn. And i wish to open eyes to many people who doesnt know whats going on in there fraud,corruption,abuse and everyting. First the so called manager is not trained to do the job and you find him locking himself in the toilet counting the donated money,the white inspectors bit up black workers and the National Council is doin nothing bout it. You have to be a real dog to work there.

  4. To Diane: Please Contact me ASAP!!!!!
    [email protected]

    Can help you.

  5. Loreen Schwab

    […] 2005, I wrote about the cruel and unjust tactics of the SPCA (Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Anima…. Today I came across a 2006 story which demonstrates their power-mad tactics, ignorance, and […]

    Where is the rest of this comment please?

  6. Loreen Schwab

    (animal owners have the right to treat their property however they wish, even if they wish to starve or torture their animals to death),

    This comment is a discredit to the writer even if it were true. But it isn’t. There are anti-cruelty laws everywhere because, even if animals are property, it has been recognized since the 19th century that they are property with a difference – they feel and suffer.

    I agree that many SPCAs are corrupt, but that doesn’t make cruelty to feeling beings acceptable or a “right”.

  7. The Spca just seized 17 of my horses I am fighting it . They took all my stock and closed my bussiness, only because I had over 30 yr old horses and a horse with lyme disease that cribbed plus I had just bought 3 horses from a slaughter auction that were thin and needed food and with time would of been fat because that is what I love to do. But they took my daughters show horses and the young stock intimidated us into forfeiting the just bought auction horses, they said it wouldnt be held against us if we did, but it was and we were charged. Needless to say I have been awarded 6 of them back and everyone I have gotten back is lame and 100 pounds less than when they left. The Spca is corupt and someone needs to do something because I dont see what write they have taking someones property and just giving to anyone they want.

  8. ellie

    Alright, I know its wrong that they can potentially and have put people out of business, but the fact is that Some of thoose cases are in-deed legit cases of animal abuse. an no you do not have a right to treat your ‘property however you like even if that means starving it’ and that is a messed up statement…Look up the laws in your state…Pretty sure that all 50 states have statues regarded the care of animals(and as of July 2008, 45 states have enacted felony-level penalties) …Infact animals have been protected under the The Animal Welfare Act that was legitimized in 1980. Saying that beating your property”” is okay is like claiming that children (who are legally under your care until age of 18) can be miss treated. and that is sick. also…along the lines of animal abuse. 85% of battered women in shelters report that their batter-er abused their pet as well…if you catch someone beating animals they might be beating their wife or child and by persecuting them you could be helping more than just that animal. Also, 83% of thoose guilty of animal abuse are later involved in other violent crimes. Notorious killers such as the Columbine High School students, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, had bragged about mutilating animals to friends before killing 22 of their classmates (Mitchell Zuckoff). Even the serial killer Keith Jesperson (“The Happy Face Killer”)admits that :”Abusive behavior towards animals is one of the symptoms on the road to being a murderer…we should stop…cruelty…before it develops into a bigger problem, like me.””….So yes, the SPCA should look into cases more clearly before confiscating animals but who knows what could happen if they wait too long. And no you are exaggerating about the dirty pen. If you have looked into cases or watched the show or contacted any of the ASPCA authorities, the majority of the cases are treated as misdemeanors or the pets-owners are warned and then if on further inspection later on they haven’t improved then they take the animals. Know your facts before making claims like that.

  9. ellie

    and excuse me, “cruelty to humans”…? if your going to write an article do not exaggerate on such a large scale. I know from personal experience and believe me, potentially ending jobs and taking money for income is nothing CLOSE to human or child abuse.

  10. Tom K

    Ellie, you have got to be kidding. Crippling a person’s income and robbing them at gunpoint are definitely cruel acts. This definitely is human abuse.

  11. AJ

    Is there anyway to stop the SPCA (New York) from publishing in their own press releases and in stories in the newspaper the name of someone who pleaded guilty to animal neglect (only b/c the person did not have money to fight the charges) and other information that has been proven false (with records to prove that it is false) in order to promote their fundraising efforts? It has been six months since the seizure and three months since the plea agreement, but in the newspaper over the past weekend, an article asking for donation for this SPCA in New York provided wrong and/or misleading information about the case as well as is continuing to use the person’s name. Can anything be done? This case is no longer about this person. They expect this person to pay restitution, but how can the person get a job if the name is constantly in the paper along with the misleading/wrong information?

    On a related note, this SPCA is beginning to adopt out the animals seized. However, many of the animals they are advertising for adoption do not belong to the person they were seized from (with records to prove ownership). The true owner was sent a letter asking the person to contact the SPCA but when a representative for the owner contacted them, the SPCA refused to speak to the representative (with records to prove the contact, since it was a long distance call). Now the SPCA has put the animals up for adoption on thier website- Is this legal?

  12. You may have seen in the news this last week where the ASPCA and Best Friends seized the dogs of the HSGRV and K-9 Hospice down in AR. Early media releases were full of tales of unsanitary conditions, deplorable conditions, all the 123 dogs being in “critical” condition, etc. I’ve always liked the work of the ASPCA but not now. Found out the dogs were healthy and the few conditons found were being treated by a vet already. The unsanitary conditions had to do with one part of a building were dogs were not supposed to be. The media releases they put out are full f half-truths that make the caretakers look like hoarders and animal abusers, which they’re definitily not.

Leave a Reply

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