I have been a volunteer at the SPCA for many years - was always happy to be one, and given the right conditions and circumstances would not hesitate to volunteer again.
I have also volunteered extensively for the District of North Vancouver Animal Shelter, and always offered my time, money and expertise to numerous Advocacy and Rescue groups. I am only prefacing with the above facts, to show that I am an impartial observer to all that has recently transpired between AAS [Animal Advocates Society] and the SPCA. That being said, I feel that certain issues about this "acrimony" need to be addressed.
I liken the latest attempt by the SPCA to an act of bullying, with no noble intentions. The ulterior motive here seems to be diverting AAS efforts from advocacy to defense, hence causing them financial hardship and loss of time.
In the meanwhile, what is ironic is that the SPCA's latest action has adverse effects on their own organization because, as they would undoubtedly know in all the wisdom they have acquired with many years in the business:
* there is no chance of an SPCA victory at the end of this;
* taking on the little guy makes them lose the remaining friends and supporters they have;
* it airs all their so-called "dirty laundry" in the public forum;
* based on previous history between the two organizations - and their attempts at litigation twice before - this will never go to court and will give the SPCA nothing but bad publicity, which at a time that staying under the radar would have been prudent, is the last thing they need.
I suspect the advice the board of directors of the SPCA are getting is less than sound. We all know that financial resources are limited, expertise and know-how are hard to come by, and that no organization is perfect, especially concerning passionate causes such as animal welfare. Even though one would have expected that a long-standing organization such as the SPCA would have learned to take criticism, and to co-exist with advocacy groups, this incident has regrettably made it apparent they have not. It should be noted here that some name calling by AAS has taken place that should not have, and some of the remarks may have been out of place; but time has shown that in essence, what has been claimed by AAS is true. Contesting that - in open forum - is opening a can of worms for the SPCA.
One would have wished that the BoD and the management of the SPCA had handled this in a more mature way, taken some of the advice given, and moved on with even more strength, knowledge and dignity than before. That level of maturity would have prevented the depletion of the resources that are supposed to benefit the homeless animals of our province. Please let's all, as animal lovers, put aside our human pettiness and really "speak for those who cannot speak for themselves".
Sincerely,
Ali Yazman
North Vancouver
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 25, 2005
Mary Lou Troman
President, SPCA
Vancouver, B.C.
Dear Ms. Troman
Please add my name to the long list of supporters for The Animal Advocates Society. I am disgusted that an organization such as yours wastes not only precious time, but irreplaceable monetary funds on trying to discredit societies such as Animal Advocates. Why are you not spending the donations given to you by trusting citizens on direct care for the needy animals? You should be working together with Animal Advocates to ensure the best care possible for ALL unfortunate and needy animals instead of fighting them with ridiculously expensive legal proceedings. Have you completely lost sight of the original reason behind the formation of the SPCA? Shame on all of you for mismanaging your mandate.
Mrs. Kathy Holley
North Vancouver
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr. Daniell,
How much money has been spent on suing the Animal Advocates Society? Is the SPCA getting "pro bono" legal work?
With legal bills being up to $400 or $500 an hour, I dread to think what the bill will be! Going through all the posts must be consuming hours of lawyer's work. Maybe there'll be a mistake or two here and there, maybe there won't.
People send donations for the animals. There is no need to sue other animal groups when very little, if anything, can be gained.
Anybody who has read "Bleak House" will tell you just who gains from things like this and it's not the animals!
Jean Martin
Lantzville BC
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------