Currently, the SPCA adheres to an unofficial no-kill policy, says Chortyk.

But "it's not fair to mislead the public," she adds, saying that euthanasia is sometimes necessary to ease suffering from disease or to kill an animal that is too aggressive.

Only the Prince George shelter must occasionally euthanize "for space."

With the estimate of homeless cats in the thousands in the Lower Mainland, there is an unending need for volunteers and donations at both the private rescue groups and the SPCA.

Chortyk adds: "It's a challenge for us just as it's a challenge for any rescue group."

What terrific news - the SPCA's spokesperson says that it's not fair to mislead the public. Except she has misled the public with the statement that the SPCA adheres to an unofficial no-kill policy which permits the "euthanasia" of sick animals. The reader naturally has a mental image of some poor animal with an incurable disease, but the SPCA admits that it kills cats with colds (upper respiratory disease) and cats that "might" have a disease, and not just in Prince George. The Kamloops SPCA killed 150 cats in a few months last year on those grounds.

Killing dogs for being "too aggressive" is also misleading. The SPCA claims to have a scientific test to determine which dogs are aggressive. This is the test that was used to justify the attempted killing of the pup Cheech in 2004. This is the test that has resulted in the selling by the SPCA of dogs that had "passed" and yet bit a new owner or their child. The test can't be "scientific" because the results are not repeatable, and in fact, are all over the map. But the SPCA says it can be (unofficially) no-kill because killing failed dogs is not killing - it is "euthanasia.

Ms Chortyk said, "It's a challenge for us just as it's a challenge for any rescue group." The other cat rescue groups that we know of do not feel so "challenged" that they resort to euthanasia on those grounds.

This is still gobbledygook in our opinion.