I don't see what else Lorrain could do after Sophie was returned to the shelter, but this is a fair discussion point. I don't pretend to have all the answers. I know that a lot of people disagree with me.

It does not show arrogance to ask questions. Questions of fact can, and should, be answered candidly by shelter staff, but there is plenty of room to discuss what goes on. A lot of arrogance lies in the refusal to indulge in open debate. I don't think that anybody intended to make a personal attack on Lorrain. She has made an attempt to keep euthanasia numbers down.

I think that whether a rescue group should have been used initially for Sophie is a fair topic for discussion, as is the recent loss of seven animals in one morning. There is no need to attack, just to discuss what the appropriate action should be should such a tragedy occur at some future time.

If four dogs pass assessments and are then euthanised without further assessment (as happened recently), it invites discussion as to the usefulness of the DTA4 or CAMP in the first place. I don't know what version is being used in Nanaimo at this time

IMHO, the opinions of people who know the animals are of more value than tests like DTA4. It's a reasonable discussion point as to how euthanasia decisions should be made and what constitutes sufficiently bad health or a sufficient degree of aggression to euthanise. Many people within the SPCA are not happy with CAMP and DTA4. It costs a fortune to staff and pay for this programme, which does not meet my definitions of science.