Animal advocate, Roslyn Cassells, recently asked Diane Watts, the Mayor of Surrey, to explain why the City permitted the killing of so many beavers. In Mayor Watts' reply she says that the Surrey SPCA (Surrey's contracted animal control/impound/disposer) is no-kill: "We also have a no kill policy at our City Pound. I can categorically say that I do not believe in the killing of animals. Euthanization should only be used for sick or extremely injured animals."

We believe that Mayor Watts is sincere, but may have forgotten that she herself, as Mayor of Surrey, contracts with the BC SPCA to kill Surrey's dogs that the SPCA itself has deemed dangerous. They are not sick in the reasonable sense of that word, nor are they injured.

Many discussions of the test the SPCA uses on dogs to deem them unadoptable can be easily found by putting CAMP into the AAS home page site search. We would ask the SPCA if the test has been recently significantly altered to give dogs a fairer chance, except the SPCA does not answer our questions. Do the instructions which accompany the test still demand that dogs who need some rehabilitation must be killed if room is wanted for dogs who don't? Those instructions alone, if still applied, make nonsense of Mayor Watts' words.

How many dogs has the Surrey SPCA killed in the last year alone for Mayor Watts' city? How much rehabilitation was provided for the dogs before they were killed?

The SPCA itself does not claim to be no-kill, so why does no less a person than Mayor Diane Watts call it that? Has her head been spinned too?