1.1 2.6 Animal Control
A case in point in relation to direct service is Animal Control. A number of people we interviewed told us that “a decision has already been made” to get out of animal control, i.e. enforcing local by-laws having to do with animal issues under contract to the local authorities. This decision is news to us.
We heard three key arguments for staying in the animal control business:
• It is a source of steady revenue (about $4 million annually);
• The vans and personnel with the BC SPCA logo on them help the BC SPCA maintain a high profile in the community;
• Animal control can lead to prevention of cruelty initiatives by identifying abusive situations and people.
Among the arguments for moving out of animal control are:
• By-law enforcement creates a bad image for the organization; control efforts are sometimes seen as unreasonable and inappropriate; the BC SPCA are viewed as regulators and police, not as promoters of animal welfare;
• Animal control activities can upset people who might otherwise support the BC SPCA with their donations, or by serving as staff or volunteers;
• Animal control takes time and energy that might, some argue, be better spent in education, advocacy, and promotion activities.
We found great deal of “heat” around this issue. It has been discussed for years. Our concern is that while there are strong opinions out there, there is not much “light”. We do not believe that a sufficient factual basis exists at present for the Society to decide one way or the other how to handle the animal control issue. For one thing, the Society must examine its role in animal control from the point of view of its Charter and related statements of direction and values.
There is also a need for greater clarity in two areas. The first is the definition of animal control, including whether it means sheltering and, if so, what kind of shelters. Shelters, as we have learned are at the core of the BC SPCA’s presence (for better or worse) in many communities. Many feel that to eliminate them in some communities could, to all intents and purposes, eliminate the organization’s credibility in that community. On the other hand, we can learn much about how the BC SPCA can promote animal welfare from communities in which the BC SPCA still has a strong identity and yet does not operate shelters.
Second, a better understanding is needed about the actual costs, both financial and non-financial (corporate image, political) of staying in or getting out of the animal control business, including the operation of shelters on behalf of others.

Recommendations:

(i) Review the costs and benefits, both financial and non-financial, of providing direct animal control services and determine, by the end of October, 2002, whether to remain in that business, phase it out, or to make decisions about animal control on a community-by-community basis.

Suggested Action:
• Use the Decision Making and Issues Management frameworks recommended in Sections 1.3 and 1.4 of this report to guide this process where it makes sense to do so.