"Mandatory Spay/Neuter legislation in the Lower Mainland of B.C. is actually
"ROUND-UP-AND-KILL" CAT CONTROL LEGISLATION
Round-up-and-kill is the name given by true humane organizations in the U.S. for cat control laws that result in the rounding up and killing of cats in the guise of spay/neuter or licensing legislation - laws which benefit animal control agencies, but which result in even greater numbers of cats killed.  
Why might the BC SPCA be supporting this misguided legislation?
The SPCA holds eighteen pound contracts in the Greater Vancouver area (2001), the value of which can be increased by the addition of cat control to dog control in the contracts.
"The only solution to cat-overpopulation is mass euthanasia - just like we did with dogs." SPCA superintendent Jeff Lawson.

This legislation, that at best will never be enforced because it is impossible to check all cats reproductive organs, and at worst will permit the SPCA to make a lot of money killing cats under contract, was adopted by well-meaning mayor and councils.  But just as we warned, in the municipalities where this legislation was adopted there have been no attempts to enforce it and no change in the problem of cat overpopulation, except where private cat welfare groups have established spay/neuter programs And just as we warned, the SPCA immediately used the bylaw to try to shut down a cat rescuer who was doing the work the public thought the SPCA was doing and who kept her cats in much more humane conditions than the SPCA itself.

In 1998 and1999, cat control legislation was adopted in the municipalities of Coquitlam, Maple Ridge, North Vancouver City, Port Moody, and Surrey which contains the clause, (or a similar clause):

That means almost every stray pet cat, and every feral cat could be killed under these bylaws. 

It is possible that every stray pet cat would have to go to the pound (SPCA) under this bylaw, because most cats are abandoned before being sterilized, but also because it is extremely difficult to make the determination if a cat is or is not sterilized.  Even vets can't be sure if a female is spayed or not.  So that means that all  stray cats could be forced into an SPCA pound if the SPCA chooses.   In 18 lower mainland municipalities the pound is the SPCA (when written in 2001).  And at an SPCA a cat has very little chance of survival. Brian Nelson, ex-SPCA Director of Field Operations (overseer of the Vancouver Regional SPCA's pound empire) has publicly said that only 3% of cats at SPCA's are claimed by their owners. Some of the rest are sold, but most are killed.

Every feral cat would have to go to a pound under this bylaw, because all feral cats are unsterilized, (except the ones that have been trapped/neutered/released by a cat-rescuer - but they get killed at SPCAs too [even if tattooed by the rescuer] because of the near impossibility of examining a feral cat to determine if it is sterilized).  So feral cats must be brought to an SPCA/pound, and official SPCA policy is to kill all feral cats, immediately (at the time of writing, we can no longer find the SPCA's feral cat policy).

Why would the SPCA be urging such cat-killing legislation?

     1.   AAS believes it could be used to increase the value of their animal control contracts in municipalities that adopt this legislation by adding cat control to dog control.

This legislation could be used by the SPCA to stop all the hundreds, perhaps thousands of kind-hearted people from taking in an abandoned cat  and giving it a new home or advertising to find the cat's family.   Why would the SPCA want to stop these kind-hearted people? Perhaps because if all these cats that have been historically taken in by kind strangers were to be handed over to the SPCA, the increased figures could be used to justify increases in the contract price.

     2.   This legislation could be used to shut down all the cat rescue groups who are responsible for saving the lives of thousands of cats a year, always having cats sterilized (unlike the SPCA even though it has its own clinic). This network of groups may drain away as much as a million dollars a year in donations.

AAS warned that this would happen and were quickly proven right.  The Vancouver SPCA acted aggressively to intimidate long-time cat rescuer and shelterer, Madalyn Gilmore. (below) 

"The SPCA’s relationship with other animal organizations has not always been an easy one. SPCA involvement is essential to getting progressive legislation enacted, but because the SPCA has always been so reluctant to speak out on any issue, that involvement has rarely been forthcoming. Thus its vociferous support for spay/neuter campaigns is a welcome surprise.
Nevertheless, the unease remains. Late last month, a Langley inspector turned up unexpectedly at the Aldergrove home of Madalynn Gilmore to warn her against taking in strays. Gilmore has been rescuing cats and other animals for 20 years, putting everything she has into finding them good homes. It doesn’t matter how sick the animal is when it arrives, Gilmore takes responsibility for the vet bills, as well as the injections and the spaying or neutering. A single cat can cost her hundreds of dollars to care for.
Yet here was the SPCA telling her that after 20 years, it wasn’t legal for her to pick up strays and "sell" them anymore. Animals are considered property under Canadian law. Therefore only the SPCA and municipal pounds have the authority to pick up strays and release them to new owners.
Granted, but Gilmore always notifies the SPCA of every stray she collects. Also, only five per cent of stray cats picked up by the SPCA are returned to owners. Strays left on the street are strays left to die.
Brian Nelson, SPCA director of field operations, says the inspector was only doing his job, and had no intention of harassing Gilmore.
Perhaps, but Lisa Borsato, a woman who had brought in a cat for Gilmore to look after, told me: "He made it seem like she was a criminal."
Whatever the truth, it’s not an image the SPCA can afford to have – that of the uncaring, rule-bound bully. Not if it is going to win the trust it wants.
It has gone some distance to ward shedding the image recently, but incidents like this don’t help.
If spay/neuter legislation is going to work, it must not allow the SPCA to trouble people helping to solve the problem. Not when there are still so many more people making it worse." 
Nick Read, Vancouver Sun.

AAS has asked municipalities to consider our control of breeding proposal "Too Many Cats" instead of round-up-and-kill legislation. Animal Advocates has asked the mayors and councilors in the municipalities that unknowingly adopted "round-up-and-kill" legislation to consider if they would apply the same legislated solution to other animals that live near human habitation, and which many people consider pests, such as raccoons, squirrels, coyotes and bears.

*Coquitlam B.C.'s "spay/neuter" legislation with section  7.14  that if enforced, could result in the rounding up and killing of thousands more cats a year. http://www.city.coquitlam.bc.ca/PDFs/blaw3237.pdf ,  This is the bylaw adopted in other municipalities because they all copy each other.   We have been told that where it has been adopted, that it has not worked.  We knew it wouldn't.  No municipality can afford the huge number of man-hours it would take to enforce this bylaw.  Only litters of kittens should be controlled, because only they are the problem.  An unsterilized cat is not the problem, if it is not reproducing.  And because people must advertise that they have kittens for sale or for free, then it is easy to control the production of kittens by licensing the production of kittens.  Licensing actual reproduction also allows for inspection of the health of the kittens and the mother cat at the same time.  For the full report/proposal, see Animal Advocates-Too Many Cats