Animal Advocates Watchdog

3. Practicing unnecessary euthanasia

3) Practicing unnecessary euthanasia

This is the most sensitive area the SPCA must deal with. The current practices allow for frequent euthanasia when it is unnecessary. Some examples:

- killing of animals infected with easily curable illness

- killing of animals because of lack of kennel space when space for more kennels is readily available.

- Killing of animals for medical research (Natasha Baker told AAS that she was referring to the practice of using unsold SPCA animals to train staff to do cheap, in-house destruction. The SPCA is still doing this.)

This last case, which is absolutely inexcusable, involved perfectly healthy dogs and cats that were killed for no reason other than providing a group of veterinary students a subject on which to practice euthanasia.

This conflicts with the SPCA Code of Ethics: Point 1) and 2) subparagraph 3

Solution: Allow the showing of sick animals so that there is a chance they may be adopted and cured of the illness after explaining to the public that just because an animal is sick doesn’t mean one should kill it, also use euthanasia as a last resort when illness is a factor. Add more kennels, ban the abhorred practice of killing for medical research.

Symptoms: These practices compromise the integrity of the SPCA, frustrate staff and volunteers and cause the death of many innocent lives. Euthanasia is a difficult concept for everyone to deal with but unfortunately is sometimes necessary. It is much easier to swallow when one knows that everything possible has been done to avoid it – right now that is not happening.

Messages In This Thread

1998 letter from Scott and Natasha Baker: Still relevant because not enough has changed
The Vancouver SPCA has completely failed in this regard by: 1. Not providing any form of useful public education
2. Presenting a bad example when dealing with shelter animals
3. Practicing unnecessary euthanasia
A more careful reading of our notes to conversations with Natasha
4. Not providing enough kennels despite the space to do so
5. Not providing young animals with sufficient stimuli
6. Inadequate screening of potential adoptees
7. Being too rigid with respect to enforcing adoption hours
8. Not showing or adopting sick animals
9. No adoption councillor for the dogs
10. The wanton separation of an animal from its personal belongings
11. Insufficient effort to promote the adoption of shelter animals
12. Not suggesting alternatives to the surrender of animals
13. Poor and sometimes cruel displays of animals
14. The complete lack of training of volunteers
15. The complete lack of benefits to the volunteers
16. The complete lack of and adequate job description for volunteers
17. Lack of any hierarchy or chain of command
18. Lack of respect and trust by the staff
19. General lack of manners
20. No attempt to show compassion
21. Lack of a adequate communications channels
22. Lack of follow-up on adoptions
23. Not allowing for the pick-up of a lost cat after visiting hours
24. Misuse of donated funds
25. Inadequate seclusion of “stray” animals
From my time volunteering at the Burnaby SPCA, I came to these conclusions as well
We welcome comment from the SPCA
From the Prince George Free Press
Natasha is just one of hundreds: Brigitta MacMillan also tried to make the SPCA change, with no luck *PIC*
So too did Christine W.
So did Laura Dean
Another letter from Laura Dean
What has changed since November 2001? If I find out that anymore animals have been euthanized, I will go to the media
The organization of as large a scale as the SPCA needs critics and scrutinizing

Share