Sadly, there are so many self-inflicted wounds beside the ones you mentioned. I'll just add a few to your list.
Nearly all these stories were covered in major newspapers, on the television, or on radio broadcasts. Maybe the SPCA should sue those who are reporting on their actions in the major media, rather than going after a very small, powerless website, which really hasn’t been able to change very much at all. Why do they not do this? The chances for gaining a very large multi-million dollar settlement, or any settlement, would be much better if they were successful in a case against a major newspaper!
HERE ARE TEN SELF-INFLICTED WOUNDS FOR A START!
1. Revoking life members, like Heather Pettit, Maria Sorowski, and Mike Stephen, was very child-like, in my opinion. It sounded awful on the radio. "If you don't agree with me, you can't play with me." Grade 1 stuff! This all happened as so many costly mistakes were being made at Head Office. Was cashing the check and then refusing membership to Lyn MacDonald smart? What on Earth have these four people done wrong? What threat is Lyn, who works so hard for the animals on Saltspring, to this enormously wealthy group? Let's get real; Lyn is no threat at all! NOT AAS's doing!
2. Suing other animal groups. This is a total waste of donor's money, done entirely without their consent. The only ones who will gain will be the expensive SPCA lawyers. Even if successful in closing down the AAS website, there will still be people trying to ensure accountability. They will just have got rid of one flea from the back of the elephant- at enormous cost. Instead the SPCA should listen to criticism and discuss suggestions with their critics. SPCA staff are quite free to post on the AAS Board to rebut anything they consider is inaccurate. If there are errors, they can be fixed easily, without spending hundreds of thousands of dollars. A simple retraction of errors is much more effective than wasting donor money. NOT AAS's doing!
I feel strongly about animal groups suing other ones. "Those who sue are sewers" is my opinion on the use of law courts to settle suits the purpose of which appears to be to silence opposition. We're supposed to be working for the animals. In my opinion, lawsuits are a big deflection of time and money that should be spent on the animals. Discussion can resolve all problems. If one side tries to dominate discussions, everybody loses and trust is lost.
3. Not foreseeing that the Strategic Plan has taken away control from, and pride in, local SPCA affairs. Even now, with the Biscuit Fund, there is no local control for people who only want to support local animals. NOT AAS's doing!
4. Making people sign all sorts of things - like telling their age, agreements to go through proper channels to discuss things or present ideas, etc.- in order to be a member of the BC SPCA. Most groups have no paranoid fear of their members and no chains of command. Members are a group's biggest assets and should be treated as such. Why they want to know your age is anybody's guess! It could be legacy related. NOT AAS's doing!
5. Not reviewing the Strategic Plan, despite many suggestions that this be done. Many people have sent suggestions and tried to get changes made to this plan, including me! NOT AAS's doing!
6. Using the DTA4 and paying staff a fortune to devise this much-criticized programme, which has cost so many animals their lives. NOT AAS's doing!
7. Treating so many volunteers as if they were enemies, not their very best friends, even to the point of firing some wonderful people who volunteered for them for years. NOT AAS's doing!
8. Refusing to produce audited financial reports for so many years and being hostile towards people who had the nerve to request audits and who pointed out that the BC SPCA was contravening the law not to produce them.NOT AAS's doing!
9. Taking no action on behalf of dogs who have been chained for years, thus inspiring little confidence that there is real desire to help these hapless creatures.NOT AAS's doing!
10. Shocking the press and others with the story of Eva Vermerris who was so kind to the SPCA by building the memorial cat house in Chilliwack to honour a decreased relative. Then the shelter was closed. This shocked a lot of donors, who must wonder if their generosity is really appreciated. NOT AAS's doing!
The list could go on and on. The AAS Board had no part at all in any of these widely publicized self-destructive acts.
With a major review of the Strategic Plan and a review of programmes, all these problems could be handled. There seems to be a lack of an overall concerted plan of action to help the animals, which are the only issues that matter to me. The SPCA still has no 100% spay/neuter programme and shelter maintenance does not seem to be a high priority. Too many animals are losing their lives.
With a few changes of direction and a strengthened Board of Directors, the SPCA could be so much more effective. It has the money to effect change, which no other provincial animals groups do, despite their best efforts.
Jean Martin,
Lantzville, BC