| AAS
does not have enough information about SPCA finances and other data to
make specific suggestions to the SPCA on how it ought to pay for the
care of its animals in a way that is fair to the animals throughout the
province. But we believe it is corrupting to accept animals that cannot
be humanely cared for - that the solution is to limit surrender to the
number of animals that there is space, money, employees, and programs
(the resources) for. As more resources are made available for the
animals (and if they don't the SPCA is hopelessly corrupt and deserves
to go under), more animals can be accepted, sick animals can be
accepted, difficult animals can be accepted. Unlimited surrender is the
cause of the dilemma the SPCA finds itself in now that the internet
prevents it from killing the unsellable unseen. An unlimited surrender
policy is corrupting and it is going to do the SPCA in sooner or later -
corruption always does. It would be nice if the BC SPCA Board of
Directors grasped this in time to prevent more disasters.
As soon as AAS
saw the direction that reform was taking under the previous CEO, Douglas
Brimacombe, we warned that the SPCA had chosen to start at the wrong end
of the continuum: it chose to spend money on itself, not the animals in
its power. If we were running reform of the SPCA we would have started
(after amalgamation and changing the constitution to limit surrender)
with the animals. We would have put someone at H.O. in charge of local
fundraising to get local volunteer contractors to build cat gardens and
puppy playgrounds, turning the grim Alcatrazes for animals that put off
so many potential donators into true shelters.
And
when the Vancouver volunteers went on TV in February 2002, to tell the
world that the SPCA had killed six nice dogs, we would have said that we
are going to try to make sure that never happened again. Instead, the BC
SPCA lied - on television and blamed the dogs saying they were
aggressive. The volunteers proved this was a lie: they had been allowed
to walk and groom the dogs for months, so there was no provable
aggression to explain the killings and the volunteers were right - the
dogs had been killed for space. (Read the whole story)
Brimacombe panicked and declared a moratorium on killing for space, and
then the SPCA cobbled together an internet "proof of aggression" test
that it calls CAMP to scientifically justify why the moratorium still
permitted so much killing. CAMP was met with howls of outrage from the
branches who resented quasi-science and callow trainees coming from H.O.
to order the destruction of dogs that staff knew were rehabilitatable.
CAMP is now largely being ignored.
And
then Brimacombe hired Craig Daniell away from the Ontario SPCA to make
the SPCA look good and get donations by seizing abused animals. But the
SPCA had spent nothing on its facilities so it had only its animal
Alcatrazes to keep the seized animals in. Some of the animals were
better off where they had been. The SPCA used CAMP to justify selling
some of them, others died of shelter diseases such as parvo. Instead of
earning piles of money, the SPCA earned the continuing enmity of its
critics, such as AAS. We believe that if the SPCA had chosen an
animal-focused approach to reform that the money would have come in.
But
any change that is based on true animal welfare is going to fail because
of finances, if surrender is unlimited. That must be understood or there
is no point in making changes. They will only disintegrate under the
pressure of numbers - if the numbers cannot be kept in control anymore
by killing the unsellable.
Limiting surrender is not the only way to reduce the pressure of
numbers. Others are a free public sterilization program; aggressive
cruelty prevention of yard dogs; education; breeding regulations;
mandatory microchipping; expensive licensing differential between intact
and neutered dogs; assisted feral cat TNR programs. The cycle of
surrender/shuffle must be broken.
The more
financially successful the SPCA is, the more hope there is for animals
in BC. The BC SPCA was, until recently, amazingly financially
successful, but it achieved this by what I will call Business
Plan A,
that was entirely self-serving:
1. accept all free product
2. sell the sellable
3. kill the unsellable
4. kill for cash
5. hire disposers
6. contract to do this and make money at it
7. run dirt cheap facilities
8. spend no money on cruelty prevention
9. spend as little money as possible on programs such as spay/neuter and
education
10. keep the public in the dark
Then
Brimacombe tried to move the SPCA to Business
Plan B:
1. Increase cruelty prevention: This had to be done as too many
people had finally wised-up that the SPCA was doing none and the SPCA
believed the money would roll in and more than pay for the seizures.
2. Killing for cash was probably not a significant source of revenue so
it was dropped.
3. Permitting employees to breed and sell was so blatant and didn't cost
the SPCA anything to drop, so it was stopped, with new employees at
least.
4. The hired pet disposers were being paid too much and were the ones
that the public most loathed and had to be got rid of. This may be being
achieved by bidding high on the contracts that the Vancouver SPCA is
obliged to bid on because of a deal it cut with its CUPE union.
5. Get control of the branches and the money.
6. Unionized clinic employees drove the clinics into the ground so they
are being phased out.
7. Re-image the BC SPCA using expensive consultants.
8. Try to silence AAS using expensive lawyers.
AAS
supports points 1-5. But Plan B did not limit surrender or start with
the animals themselves, so it is staggering from one disaster to
another, not least of which is financial disaster.
Plan C
- the AAS plan - would begin with the animals. Not one single animal
taken for any reason that cannot be given the maximum care. That is the
"ethical starting point" . All other decisions must be built on that
immutable ethic. Once there is no permission to kill, then other
solutions will be found.
We
don't think the BC SPCA has a choice anymore - the internet is watching.
Messages In This Thread
GO AHEAD SPCA - PUT
US OUT OF WORK
AAS -- Monday, 10 November 2003, at 7:21 a.m.
This is one place
the BC SPCA could start with Plan C
Carol Sonnex -- Tuesday, 11 November 2003, at 4:23 p.m.
To see more about the SPCA
click here
|
