I figure this is related enough that I won't waste the space by creating another thread.

I was talking to a Veterinary Technician at the spca hospital that I volunteer at. She was saying how the place is no longer "no kill" as they advertise; the new manager is very quick to euthanize healthy animals simply to save money and space.

These animals often have very treatable conditions (broken tooth, upper respiratory illness), or just plain older. She expressed her frustration and the desire to whistle blow but was afraid of losing her job.

A one year old pointer cross came in today with an ingested foreign matter. The owner surrendered, not able to afford to treat him. When the hospital staff contacted the new manager, he said without skipping a beat, "euthanize". The staff reasoned with him how he was much too young and there is nothing wrong. He finally relented and they were able to get a specialist vet who uses endoscope to see if he can retrieve it (he's donating his services).

My dilemma is: I'm more than happy to whistle blow him, but while doing that, I may very well be taking down the very thing that's there to help the animals. Last time a corrupt CEO was outed to the general public for making in excess of $225K, their donations plummeted (rightly so).

I believe what the manager's doing is wrong, just to save his hide to keep within budget. I think people should know that while they claim they are no-kill, they certainly are not. But I don't want to hurt them with people losing their trust when their donation rate has started to come back up.

I really need to win myself the jackpot so I can open up my own sanctuary of unwanted animals, much in the same vein as Best Friends Animal Sanctuary.

thanks for reading.