I can't find it at the moment, but a month or more ago I found and presented on another forum a statement from the Director of the actual gallery where the event was staged. It appeared to be a legitimate gallery website.

The Gallery Director stated that the dog was a street dog, that it was fed and watered and exercised except for the fairly short periods it was tied in the gallery space. After hours, it was given the run of a large part of the gallery. Unfortunately (according to the director), although they made every effort to keep the dog inside, a maintenance person accidentally let it out of the building, after which they were unable to find it again.

The artist stated that his doing this was to point out the hypocrisy of people getting all worked up over the fate of a dog they would normally allow to starve in the streets anyway, while also having no emotional or sympathetic response at all to the recent death, by being attacked by dogs, of a homeless man the artist knew.

I think the artist expected and desired the responses he's gotten, because he believes it proves his point. I believe most of this piece was theatrical in nature, like almost every other performance artwork with animals I've ever seen, many of which have elicited similar responses in spite of the fact no animal was actually hurt in the process of the artwork.

I think my estimation of the incident is backed up by the Costa Rican Ministry of Art & Culture's continued support for the artist, as they are well aware of this controversy and most likely investigated thoroughly.

Do I think it was a good piece of art? Actually, no, it is too derivative of pieces performed as early as the late sixties with dead rabbits, and the early seventies with a German artist who pretended to be starving a cat in a closed box in a gallery, and various other artists since then. Great public outrage accompanied those works as well, and often people recalled the piece but not the reality behind the piece (no animal actually abused).

Why am I familiar with this kind of art? Because I spent the late sixties and early seventies attending art colleges and schools in Canada and the Netherlands which were closely affiliated with and sometimes taght by the artists that were at the time well known for their outrageous pieces. I know the territory.