It was not until Dr. Ian Welch DVM was testifying in the animal cruelty trial of Carly Young on 29 January 2026 that the public had real insight into the horrendous distress and suffering that Dakota endured.
Dr. Welch laid out methodically what was done to Dakota to cause her death. A death in which Dakota would have experienced “extreme distress” as per Dr. Welch.
A muzzle put on SO tight that Dakota could not open her mouth to pant – therefore unable to regulate her own body temperature.
On a brutally hot July day, Dakota collapsed, began seizing and died. The necropsy results found cause of death was heat stroke and asphyxiation.
It was in that moment, on 29 January 2026 listening to Dr. Welch testify that it became crystal clear to the public that the AWS Inspector in charge of the case screwed up, failed to do her job and right then failed to get justice for Dakota.
What I learned on that date, Animal Welfare Services knew many many months before. They knew that what Carly Young was accused of doing MORE THAN MET the threshold of Canada’s Criminal Code 445.1 and DID NOTHING!
YET, despite knowing that what was done could very well be a criminal offence – the Inspector DID NOT – CHOSE NOT to contact Niagara Regional Police Service to present the evidence and ask for the police to investigate if a crime had been committed.
Provincial Animal Welfare Inspectors do not have the authority to press criminal code charges – only provincial offence charges. BUT, they most certainly do possess the authority and duty to reach out to local police. This Inspector did not.
Being the accountable and transparent government that Doug Ford runs, of course the PAWS Act (Part III – COMPLAINTS, Section 9) allows for complaints to be made by members of the public.
BUT, when you look at Section 11 – REFUSAL TO INVESTIGATE – there it is in all its glory – bad faith personified!
The Chief Animal Welfare Inspector (Melanie Milczynski) has a multitude of disingenuous loopholes to choose from.
- 11 (1) (a): the facts on which the complaint is based occurred more than six months before the complaint is made.
- The public was not aware of the necropsy results until Jan 2026. Based on the above loophole – any complaint would exceed the timeframe.
- Thus fully arming Chief Milczynski to refuse to investigate my complaint
- 11 (1) (b): the complainant was not affected by the conduct of the person who is the subject of the complaint
- What a ridiculous reason why a member of the public with knowledge would have their complaints refused.
Dakota was killed on July 30, 2024.
- Dakota’s body was taken by AWS to University of Guelph for a necropsy
- according to staff at the shelter who picked up Dakota’s body from the street, when AWS showed up they presented no business cards, no paperwork or any receipts
- The necropsy results were shared with AWS – why did they not engage the police?
- The level of intentional distress and suffering inflicted warranted a police investigation YET AWS did nothing
- The responsible AWS Inspector never did or has she ever interviewed the 3 key witnesses
- Why would the Inspector not have interviewed these people. She never even contacted them even though they reached out to AWS
Sure the government can check the box “Provide Public with Complaint Reporting Mechanism” BUT if this is not made available in good faith, in an honest effort to make the process transparent and hold themselves accountable to the taxpayer what the hell is the point!!!! They are simply going through the administrative show of being open to scrutiny to keep the Ombudsman and Auditor General off their backs.
NOTE:
HAPPENING RIGHT NOW, THE ONTARIO AUDITOR GENERAL IS IN THE PROCESS OF DOING A 12 MONTH DEEP DIVE AUDIT OF PROVINCIAL ANIMAL WELFARE SERVICES!
THE REPORT WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC ONCE COMPLETE
A CALL TO ACTION:
A letter writing campaign is underway: Please can you spare 5 minutes. The letter is prepared for you…you just need to make a couple of clicks and its done.
Please for Justice for Dakota!!!
#findyourvoice
One thought on “Intentional Loopholes Permit Poor Performance of AWS Inspectors”
I really believe that the animal welfare system should be revised and the inspectors should do a better job at influencing the police when criminal charges are warranted.
I realize that they have a hard job and they deal with many cases on a weekly basis. However, the more criminal charges were laid. The less animal abuse will occur.
This is especially true in the case of Dakota, where it was a blatant example of animal abuse and the police should’ve been contacted to consider more serious charges being brought against the perpetrators.
Thank you for your time.