It saddens me so much to read about Bojangles and others like him that don't get the help and immediate treatment they so desperately need.

How disgraceful! If an individual allowed their dog to be in such distress and pain and they did nothing to fix it, wouldn’t there be a case for action to be taken under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act (PCA)? In this case who checks on the “enforcers” of the PCA when they are the ones in question?

There have to be changes made in the priorities for the money that is donated to the Society! If a dog that is in such a state cannot be given the medical treatment that it needs as an emergency, then there is something fundamentally wrong with the allocation of money within the BCSPCA.

There are some other examples that also raise questions as to how the money donated to the Society is being spent. These are from the recent - Annual Report - Management Operations Review Report - that accompanied the audited financial statements for 2003.

Some very specific items from within the report that are of concern include:
Spending priorities
It is extraordinary that while programs such as spay / neuter have been cut back or eliminated as a cost saving measure that at the same time there is money available for continuing to implement such an almost universally discredited program as DTA4.

Administration costs
Costs were cut in operating expenses and reduced staffing levels. This reduction, however, was almost completely at the operating level and similar cost cutting was NOT done at the Provincial Office. The Provincial Office expenses increased by $400,000!

Mortgages and Bank Loans - The “new” Head Office has a mortgage of $712,000 and there is a bank loan in place for $2,000,000!

Is it any wonder that there is a concern expressed about:
Donor Confidence
Within the report there it is stated that “without donor confidence, we have no revenues”. This being the case why are no effective actions being taken which will address this issue?