The point is simple: the SPCA is hanging onto its dog control/disposal business, even though that means (because it does not allot sufficient funds to rehabilitate physically or psychologically sick animals) that it will not save them, but will kill them. In other words, it is still not doing animal welfare and still is doing animal disposal.

To explain why it is still killing so many dogs, it created a "scientific test" to weed out any dogs that will take extra money to rehabilitate. The manual on this test actually says that iffy dogs are to be killed to make room for easy sellers. This test is a fraud. It is not scientific, the SPCA won't even produce data to support its contention that it is scientific.

The SPCA wont end its unlimited surrender policy either, the policy that encourages a culture of pet dumping and which crowds the SPCA with unwanted animals. When they sicken, either from diseases SPCAs are rife with, or from the psychological abuse the SPCA subjects them to, it has another excuse to kill the excess.

Don't believe that? Then read what Cindy Soules, BC SPCA Head Office, wrote to us in 2002:

"In terms of cats, we put far more down because they fail from uppper respiratory due to the stress, anxiety and fear they feel in the shelter."

Cindy Soules was the only honest person we dealt with at any SPCA, and she got fired.

The point is that though the SPCA was forced, kicking and screaming, to stop electrocuting dogs and finally to stop gassing cats, it is still not honest.

And it only reacts to strong and persistant criticism if it becomes bad P.R. and threatens its income.

An honest SPCA would be leading the way to the best animal welfare there is, not being prodded and poked to do better.

Question to everyone who still calls what Cindy Soules described, "shelters"... Why do you call them shelters?