Sue Wilson is part of the latest feelgood fad - "rescue". But rescue is only feelgood for those who are content to shuffle pets (and in Wilson's case, sell puppies on the side). Without advocacy, the pet shufflers are part of the problem. Shuffling animals, without attempting to stem the free supply flow, is immoral, and contributes to the problem.

Like so many "rescuers", Wilson admits that she does it because it is emotionally rewarding. It makes her feel good about herself.

We wonder whether she has the best interest of the animals at heart at all, or if she is just one of the many well-meaning but uncomprehending pet shufflers who have latched onto the feelgood fad called "rescue".

One of the most disturbing comments Wilson makes is that while she would not give a family with small children a dog, she WOULD give them a guinea pig. Thus, we know that not only does she condone keeping small animals in cages as pets, she also condones keeping fragile, nervous little creatures as children's playthings. This is not in the best interest of the animal, and anyone who truly loves and respects the right of every living creature not to suffer a life of imprisonment and fear, would never consider sentencing a small creature to a miserable life as a child's pet.

Wilson also provides pet dumpers with guilt free easy disposal of their animals, as she admits that she takes owner surrenders. The evil of unlimited surrender, and its role as an enabler in the neverending cycle of pet dumping has been covered many many times on this board.

Also disturbing is the comment Wilson makes about being happy that she was able to track down the owner of the starving dog with the pups abandoned in the bush and have her relinquish her dog. Wilson comments that she never takes a dog without an owner's consent. Are we to infer that she would have returned the dog and pups to her abuser, had the woman asked for her dog back? That is not rescue.

The argument could be made that Wilson just doesn't know any better, that she is just one of the many good intentioned but uncomprehending "rescuers". But that argument doesn't fly here, because AAS has Wilson in its puppy traffickers database, selling litter upon litter of puppies, for as much as $450 each. AAS knows that Sue Wilson is a breeder of Jack Russell Terriers. We wonder if the Jack Russell Terrier she boasts about taking from the 83 year old woman who could not walk it was one of her own puppies, a poorly judged sale gone wrong. This is not rescue.

No, Sue Wilson is a dog breeder, puppy seller, and used pet shuffler who is cunning enough to recognize cheap product, a buying market, and the latest sales angle. If she were a true "rescuer", she would be advocating for spay and neuter, and control of breeding regulations, instead of pushing more product. If she were a true "rescuer", she would be spaying and neutering the dogs in Mexico that she speaks of, not bringing back the small ones (the most sellable) to retail in Canada.

The Victoria Times Colonist would have done better by the animals to have given free publicity to a TRUE animal welfare group like Greater Victoria's Animals Crusaders instead.