The BC SPCA police are called Special Provincial Constables and work for the BC SPCA. A complaint can be made by the public against anyone at the BC SPCA with the SPC designation under the Police Act, Special Provincial Constable Complaints and Discipline Regulation within 6 months of the conduct complained of.

Both Eileen Drever and her husband Sean Eccles have the SPC designation and work together in the BC SPCA animal enforcement section.

Your complaint will be investigated internally so its unlikely that the outcome you want is the one you receive.

Special Provincial Constable Complaints and Discipline Regulation

In the Regulation, look for Part 2 - Complaints and Discipline, section 3 Procedure for complaint by member of public which is below:

Procedure for complaint by member of public
3 (1)A member of the public may make a complaint against a special provincial constable if the member of the public is directly affected by or directly witnesses conduct of the special provincial constable that is alleged to involve either of the following:

(a)the improper exercise or performance of a constabulary duty;
(b)neglect, without good or sufficient cause, to exercise or perform a constabulary duty.


(2)An individual who is known to and acting on behalf of a member of the public described in subsection (1) may make a complaint on behalf of the member of the public if the member of the public is incapable of giving consent, because of age or a mental or physical condition, to the complaint being made.

(3)A complaint must be submitted to the director or the supervisor, in writing, within 6 months after the occurrence of the conduct described in subsection (1).

(4)A complaint must include the following information: (a)the complainant's full name;
(b)an address for sending notices to the complainant in relation to the complaint;
(c)the details of the complaint, including the respondent's name if known;
(d)a description of the conduct, in as much detail as possible;
(e)the names of any witnesses and their respective addresses, if known.

(5)If a complaint is submitted to the director, the director must promptly send a copy of the complaint to the supervisor.


(6)If a complaint is submitted to the supervisor, the supervisor must promptly send a copy of the complaint to the director.


(7)After receiving a complaint from the director or complainant, the supervisor must promptly send a copy of the complaint to the respondent.

Once you have followed the above steps you have to wait for someone at the BC SPCA to decide if your complaint is "admissible or inadmissible". The criteria for that is in section 3.2:

Notice of determination respecting admissibility
3.2 (1)After determining whether a complaint is admissible or inadmissible, the director must promptly give written notice of the determination to the complainant and the supervisor.

(2)If the director determines that a complaint is inadmissible, the notice given under subsection (1) must include

(a)the director's reasons for the determination, and
(b)notice of the reconsideration process under section 3.3.

(3)After receiving the notice referred to in subsection (1), the supervisor must promptly send a copy of the notice, including, if applicable, the reasons and notice referred to in subsection (2), to the respondent.

You are referred to as the "respondent" in the Regulation if you made the complaint.

What if my complaint isn't accepted?

You are probably wondering what recourse you have if the supervisor provides you with notification of a decision by the director that your complaint is not admissible.

The recourse that you have is listed under section 3.3 below:

Reconsideration of determination based on new information

3.3 (1)The director may, on request of the complainant, reconsider a determination that a complaint is inadmissible if the director is satisfied that new and relevant information has become available or been discovered.

(2)The request under subsection (1) must be in writing and must be given to the director within 30 days after the complainant receives the notice referred to in section 3.2 (1).

(3)The director may extend the time period for requesting a reconsideration if

(a)the director is satisfied that special circumstances existed that precluded the request from being made within the 30-day time period referred to in subsection (2), or
(b)the director otherwise considers it appropriate to grant an extension.

(4)After receiving a request under subsection (1), the director must promptly send a copy of the request to the supervisor.

(5)After receiving a copy of the request sent under subsection (4), the supervisor must promptly send a copy of the request to the respondent.

(6)After considering a request under subsection (1), the director may

(a)confirm the director's determination, or
(b)determine that the complaint is admissible.

If you don't have "new and relevant information" then there are no further provisions under the Regulation for your (inadmissible) complaint to be re-considered.

BC Minister Of Agriculture

You can send a letter or email to the BC Minister Of Agriculture with any complaints about animal policing done by the BC SPCA and request that the Minister provides you with a reply. The B.C. government supports animal welfare with contributions through government activities and programs. The Minister oversees some aspects of animal welfare in the Province.

BC Premier

Pet owners in BC can also write directly to the BC Premier by letter or email with any animal policing concerns that they have or have experienced. In addition, an email advocating for animal policing change from a private charity (BC SPCA) to provincial oversight is available in pre-written form on the BC SPGA web site.

The public pays for animal policing costs

No matter who does the animal policing in BC - a private charity like the BC SPCA or the provincial government - the public pays for it. The only difference is that a private charity doesn't have to be accountable or transparent, nor abide by the Freedom Of Information laws. A provincial government has to disclose the requests received by the public with some very few exceptions.

With costs less than $4 million each year for animal policing the provincial government could easily assume animal policing which would bring transparency for the public and accountability. In Ontario the SPCA was relieved of animal policing which freed up the charity to pursue its charitable endeavours.

"The public pays for BC animal policing anyway so why not have an impartial and transparent government run system in place?" a BC SPGA spokesperson said. "The BC SPCA is not subject to freedom of information requests, they recently called the review of some pets they kill "moot" in the Supreme Court (and won that case), the boundaries between BC SPCA personal and professional staff and supervisor policing relationships is blurred, and now we find out with the BC SPCA Chief of the department and vet scandal what could be one other reason why the pet public who want their pets back very rarely succeed in the justice system."