This is the question that is at the heart of the matter. We all have slightly or widely different answers, including from those people within the SPCA itself. AAS has never expected that the SPCA will ever be our version of "perfect", but it was so corrupt and anti-animal that it had to be made to change its agenda from complete self-serving to more animal-serving. More animal-serving is the immediate goal.

The AAS vision of the "perfect" SPCA is on our web site, but a summary would be:

1. Will not be the paid dog catcher/killer;
2. Will write standards and enforce them for all pounds whether municipal or private;
3. Will not "shelter" animals when that requires some to be killed or neglected to make room;
4. Will urge legislation that will expand the definition of neglect;
5. Will urge the legislation that will allow it to control pet breeding;
6. Will urge the legislation that will prevent people from desocializing dogs (chaining etc) many of which are then killed by the SPCA for "behaviour problems". (Animal control in BC, as everywhere, is almost entirely dog control)
7. Will urge legislation that will control the "commercial cruelty" of pet stores, rodeos, auctions, pony rides, petting zoos, etc.

This list is only partial; I'm sure others have many more ideas to add.

People are always asking, Why don't the other animal welfare groups all get together and get along?

That has never happened here or anywhere, for good reason: We alternative groups all do what we do because of our personal principles, and we are not willing to compromise our principles very much in order to "all work together". Doing that would mean that everyone's principles would have to be reduced to the lowest common denominator. That process is in itself a corruption, and really is the "slippery slope". Though we all have a common goal, we don't have a common way to get to the goal.

"Many oars, all pulling in the same direction" sums up how all of us can get to the goal if we just keep pulling (and pushing).

The oganizations in control, like the SPCA in BC, and all the big animal welfare orgs all over the world, do not join with each other either, so this is not just a "failing" of the alternative groups as is usually believed.

The difference is that the alternative groups remain separate to protect their principles; the big orgs remain separate to protect their incomes.

The individuals within big orgs all have jobs, and so no matter how honest an individual's intent, the paycheque MUST have influence. That is why orgs like the SPCA can so successfully present a seamless face. Disagreements are kept behind closed doors so that the public doesn't get put off. In big orgs, the bosses make the rules and those who don't follow the rules lose their jobs.

Only when some great pressure is exerted, that exposes great wrongdoing, do the cracks widen and finally break apart the org.

This happens when an org gets so entrenched, powerful, secretive, and hidebound that it no longer serves the purpose it was created for, but instead entirely serves itself.

Sometimes the pressures that cause the cracks come from an internal whistle-blower and sometimes it comes from an outsider, but these entrenched organizations never, ever, change without some pressure from somewhere.

The BC SPCA only started the process of change because of huge pressure from outside - the evidence and the internet.

AAS thinks that there must be people within the SPCA that have been silently cheering on the process of evidence gathering and exposure. We know that some tried for years to make changes from within and were always unsuccessful. So the impetus for change had to come from outside and the evidence had to be so complete that it could not be legally silenced.

The most important point of the process of evidence gathering was that it had to prove intent to deceive on the part of the SPCA and it had to prove that SPCA anti-animal behaviours were not mere slips and oversights, but were so pervasive that they could only be policy. That is what the evidence did, it "connected all the dots", and it is the internet that put the evidence before the public and attracted all the other people who had never had a way to use their evidence. Now the evidence is coming from many different sources.

The BC SPCA is in a state of great flux and the cracks are widening. But AAS believes (we hope not naively) that much good is coming, in spite of what appears to be divisive power politics. Divisiveness is not a bad thing if it opens up the SPCA to scutiny and debate.

We also believe that it cannot be left to the SPCA to get it right, not without a body that will "hold its feet to the fire" - forever. Only the web has the power to balance the SPCA's power.

So keep the questions and comments and evidence of SPCA lapses coming!