Mary Lou Troman, President
Members of the Board of Directors:
Bonnie Bischoff, Dale Campbell, Laura Cull, Michelle Grant,
Ralph Hutchinson, Dave Hamilton, Vanessa Lycos, Vicky Renneberg,
Gillian Smith, Kara Kingston, Leanne McConnachie, Carla Maruyama,
Cindy Soules, Kathi Travers, Marguerite Vogel
BC SPCA
1245 East 7th Avenue
Vancouver, BC
V5T 1R1

by e-mail

Dear President and Board:

I have been a board member of many charitable organizations and understand clearly the role of a Board of Directors. It is a policy making body to oversee the organization and ensure those policies reflect the mandate of the organization.

Direction from the board is carried out by Administrative officers through direction to staff. Therefore, I am addressing my concerns to you about the ongoing lawsuit you are directing against Animal Advocates. You are the policy makers and you have agreed to a policy to sue another charitable organization.

I would ask the following questions:

1. Does the SPCA have as its mandate the exclusive responsibility for the safety and well being of all animals?

2. Does the mandate make the SPCA the only and final word on what constitutes cruelty to and abuse of animals?

3. Does the mandate provide for the use of donated funds to litigate against anyone who disagrees with the SPCA?

4. Does accountability for use of donated funds include reporting to the public how much is being spent to litigate against other animal advocate groups?

5. Does the mandate, in a free society, include the right to silence anyone who speaks out against SPCA policies?

If the answer to any of the above questions is “No” then the SPCA Lawsuit against Animal Advocates and Judy Stone is a violation of your mandate.

SPCA MISSION

The BC SPCA is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting and enhancing the quality of life for domestic, farm and wild animals in British Columbia. Through its 36 branches located around BC and its provincial office in Vancouver, the BC SPCA provides a wide range of services for more than 53,000 homeless, abused, and abandoned animals around the province. The BC SPCA was created under the auspices of the Provincial Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, and is the only animal welfare organization in BC which has the authority to enforce laws relating to animal cruelty and prepare cases for Crown Counsel for the prosecution of individuals who inflict suffering on animals.

The Mission of the SPCA talks about animal welfare, its role under the Provincial Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act and its “policing” powers to enforce laws relating to animal cruelty and to prepare cases for Crown Counsel for the prosecution of individuals who inflict suffering on animals. There is nothing in the mandate that remotely suggests cases should be prepared for Crown Counsel to silence critics of the operation of the organization.

The SPCA board should review the BC Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, particularly under Part 4 – subsections (21-26),:

Policing powers Subsections 21-22;

Obstruction of a person empowered by the Act as defined in Subsection 23(1-2); Offences under the Act, subsection 24 (1-5);

Order of Custody, Subsection 25 (1-3);

Power to make regulations, Subsection 26 (1-2).

Nowhere does the legislation provide the SPCA powers to use donated funds to litigate against public disagreement with the SPCA or against organizations who criticize the SPCA.

SPCA Complaint against Animal Advocates

There appear to be two major issues in the SPCA complaint against Animal Advocates.

1 Animal Advocates is publishing materials that are “defamatory of the BC SPCA” and “has made itself a clearinghouse for the ingathering and publication of such criticisms authored by others.”

2. Allegations by Animal Advocates about the SPCA has “seriously injured in its character, credit, reputation and has suffered damages, loss and expense.”

In a free and democratic society that provides for freedom of speech, it is inherent on the public to have the freedom to enjoy the right to criticize and evaluate any organization, particularly one that is run by donations from the public and that enjoys a legislated mandate.

That includes people who work together to gather information to substantiate claims against the organization (see 1 above: “clearinghouse for the ingathering and publication of such criticisms authored by others”).

To have found itself to be injured by the work of a group that is provided and criticism by the public, (see 2 above) the SPCA claims to have suffered damages, loss and expense. The SPCA, instead of responding to the criticism and changing its policies to mitigate the complaints has chosen to litigate to silence those who disagree.

Conclusion

I have long been a supporter of the SPCA and for a very long time have resisted the temptation to enter into this ill advised dialogue between your organization and other Animal Advocate groups believing that there are such abuses vested on animals in our society there is more than enough room for all to play their part in advocating for creatures who are defenseless against the unkind and uncaring of some people. I have resisted rhetorical commentary and even anecdotal evidence.

I have however, found myself no longer able to ignore the criticism and have personally seen some of the mismanagement that the SPCA is accused of. When I put all the evidence together, and consider the mandate of the SPCA and the legislation that provides the organization with not only privilege of serving but obligation of accountability I can no longer remain silent.

I have come to believe that much of the injury to the SPCA’s character, credit, and reputation and the damages; loss and expense it claims to have endured are very much the result of its own behaviour.

The SPCA is litigating against a small advocacy group instead of looking inward to the possible causes of the concerns being expressed by people who also care about animals. It is small wonder people who care are questioning if their precious donation dollars are being used for the care and well-being of those you are charged to protect or being used against another, smaller organization whose goal is also the protection of animals.

With regard to the expense. Litigation is expensive and for the SPCA to be using donated funds and forcing another organization that depends on donations to spend time raising a legal fund to protect itself is nothing less than outrageous.

I urge BCSPCA to reconsider its policy decision and withdraw from this lawsuit.

Yours truly

Joy Langan
former MP for Mission-Coquitlam

cc: Mike Farnworth, MLA for Coquitlam-Burke Mountain
Public Safety and Solicitor General Critic
Diane Thorne, MLA for Maillardville-Coquitlam Housing Critic
Corky Evans, MLA for Nelson Creston
Agriculture and Lands Critic
Judy Stone, Animal Advocates