The BC SPCA, a private charity, is at the center of controversies by some of the public primarily due to the perceived lack of professionalism among those leading and conducting animal policing investigations.

Combining charity work and law enforcement creates a complex environment where accountability and transparency may falter. This situation is particularly concerning when the individuals in charge are not held to the same standards as traditional law enforcement, leading to potential mismanagement and ethical dilemmas that can undermine public trust.

Recent incidents involving the BC SPCA have highlighted these issues, particularly with the actions of BC SPCA Marcie Moriarity, Chief of the Animal Police department, who is also a lawyer employed by the BC SPCA since 2005.

Court testimony indicates that Ms. Moriarity coached a veterinarian employed by the organization in an animal investigation on how to phrase her findings on an animal assessment form in what is supposed to be an impartial veterinary assessment for court proceedings.

A spokesperson for the BC SPGA noted that, "Ms. Moriarity is aiding behind the scenes with her extensive law knowledge of what Judges look for and wording that is pursuasive in court evidence against an animal guardian facing charges laid by the BC SPCA. This, we suggest, is clearly inappropriate for a Chief of a law enforcement department and if the Chief of the RCMP behaved similarly there would likely be public outrage."

The animal public have raised serious questions about the integrity of the investigative process and the independence of the veterinary assessments that are crucial for legal cases involving animal welfare.

Additionally, the conduct of Mrs. Eileen Drever Eccles, who supervises the animal police investigative officers, has come under scrutiny for allegedly blurring the lines between personal and professional relationships.

There is also evidence of Ms. Drever Eccles interference in a legal court matter that had not been the result of a BC SPCA animal investigation which shows a lack of professional conduct by the BC SPCA animal law enforcement manager.

"Mrs. Drever Eccles should not be influencing either court party to a legal claim filed in a BC Court with emails signed with "warmly," when the BC SPCA is not a party to those proceedings and the claim is not the result of a BC SPCA animal investigation" a spokesperson for the BC SPGA commented. "That could be perceived as mis-using her powerful management position with the BC SPCA to influence and manipulate one party against another behind the scenes."

Since the BC SPCA is not subject to the Freedom Of Privacy and Information Act many of their animal enforcement processes and influences are not subject to public scrutiny. The BC SPCA have made it publicly known that they are "proud" of their 95% success rate in keeping people's pets to sell or euthanize against the BC pet owners seeking the return of their pets in the animal appeals Tribunal.

"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."

Trending

• 🐶BC SPCA In Supreme Court
• 🐶Change Means No Change?
• 🐶Legislative change can't come soon enough
• 🐶Loss of pet and broken-hearted pet guardian
• 🐶Pet breeder fights for her beloved Dashshund puppies and mothers
• 🐶Loss of furry family members and broken-hearted pet guardian
• 🐶Build a better future for animals and their guardians
• 🐶BC SPCA funding reserve surplus surpasses $100 million
• 🐶Recognizing pain in cats and dogs