If AAS had the money for lawyers we would choose an SPCA (any SPCA would do they all keep dogs in brutally cruel cells and most keep cats that way too), and a case (any one of thousands of animals in "distress" at any SPCA would do) and we would privately charge the BC SPCA with cruelty to animals so that a court could decide if SPCA policies and facilities are in a conflict with the SPCA's Mission statement.

"THE MISSION OF THE BRITISH COLUMBIA SOCIETY
FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS
IS TO PREVENT CRUELTY TO, AND PROMOTE
THE WELFARE OF, ANIMALS."

(See: Money to burn - just how poor could the BC SPCA be? http://www.animaladvocates.com/cgi-bin/newsroom.pl/read/3831 and Selling sick pets http://www.animaladvocates.com/cgi-bin/newsroom.pl/read/3813, and many other posts on the AnimalsNewsRoom that describe the cruel conditions at SPCAs)

Years of AAS investigation and documentation showed conclusively that the BC SPCA's claim that the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (PCA Act) only defined the offence of "causing or permitting an animal to be in distress" as a lack of food, water, or shelter, was false, and that it had systematically used this false definition to avoid preventing cruelty. This was one of the first and major allegations AAS published when it started its web site and twice the BC SPCA paid big law firms to try to silence AAS. (See: http://www.animaladvocates.com/lawyers-opinion.htm)

We believe that it is our duty to suffering animals in BC to raise the money to prove this conflict. The only agency empowered to prevent animal cruelty in BC must be made to prevent its own cruel policies and practices.

A dog at an SPCA being driven to "unadoptability" by the SPCA....