Residents of Cold Lake are reeling after the euthanasia of a dog they had rescued from deplorable conditions, despite ongoing communication with the city’s Animal Control. Precious, a female dog, was brought to the Cold Lake Animal Control facility in late November 2024 by Kristy Janzen and Melissa Chipman after they discovered her living in squalor on a rural property.
The two women had been visiting a storage property when Chipman noticed the dog confined behind a wire fence, surrounded by filthy conditions. Janzen described the pen as being filled with junk, children’s toys, and uncollected feces, while the dog had no proper shelter or food. The women, concerned for the dog’s welfare, contacted the property owner and, after receiving permission, took Precious to Animal Control for care.
Once there, the women were reassured by staff that Precious would receive the necessary care and would not face euthanasia. They kept in close contact with the shelter, receiving updates and photos of Precious’s recovery from skin infections and tapeworms. However, on March 31, 2025, Chipman was devastated to learn that Precious had been euthanized after a 30-day deadline set by a newly enacted city bylaw.
The bylaw mandates that animals at Cold Lake Animal Control be euthanized after 30 days if they are unclaimed or unable to be rehomed. Janzen and Chipman, who had remained actively involved in Precious’s care and had expressed interest in adopting her, were never notified about the impending euthanasia. They also questioned why local rescue organizations were not contacted as a last resort, especially given their involvement in rescuing the dog.
The euthanasia of Precious was discussed at a City of Cold Lake council meeting on April 8, 2025. CAO Kevin Nagoya explained that the policy was created following a major disease outbreak at the facility several years ago, which led to overwhelming capacity issues. Mayor Craig Copeland emphasized that while the city does not wish to euthanize animals, it must make difficult decisions when shelters become overcrowded.
City officials acknowledged that the new procedures and the 30-day deadline were intended to manage long-term care of animals in crisis situations. However, Janzen and Chipman expressed frustration over the lack of communication and transparency. They argued that had they been informed of the bylaw or given more time, they could have explored alternative rehoming options for Precious.
The case has sparked local outrage, with residents questioning the city’s policies and calling for a review of the procedures surrounding animal intake and euthanasia. The city’s council has indicated it may reconsider the policy in response to community concerns.