We think it can be safely said that every single donation made to the SPCA is made for "animal welfare". All the expenses that true animal welfarists must pay are legitimate animal welfare expenses, and this is true, even for the SPCA. The SPCA is far too big to run on volunteers so wages are legitimate animal welfare expenses - if the wages are paying for true animal welfare.

The BC SPCA's mandate to prevent cruelty cannot be done by volunteers. Trained constables are required, and cruelty prevention is certainly animal welfare, so all the wages and vehicle and other expenses of enforcement of the PCA Act are legitimate animal welfare expenses - if the cruelty prevention is legitimate animal welfare.

And using some money to raise more money is not only a legitimate expense, but except at the garage sale level, it is the only way to get the money to do the work. If it takes $100 to raise $200, then you have $100 more for your work than you had before you spent the initial $100.

All branch "sheltering" expenses are animal welfare too, if those expenses were actually animal welfare expenses. But if, as we allege, and as we are being sued by the BC SPCA for alleging, almost all those expenses are actually the expenses of the SPCA's pet disposal business, which business is the ethical opposite of animal welfare, then donations are not being used as donators intended.

This raises an interesting discussion point: Will we prove that the SPCA did not ever use any but a tiny fraction of its donations for their intended purpose - animal welfare? Perhaps this question will be settled in BC Supreme Court and AAS will set a precedent that can be used around the world to hold to account, all the big business animal welfare organization everywhere.