Animal in need who would you call??

bikerchickone said:
You're clearly missing my point. I simply stated that an organisation like the RSPCA would have people in place to protect their reputation, not that I expected them to monitor anything.

My comment about your being ultra defensive came about courtesy of your excessive use of punctuation marks, although I accept that some younger people consistently comment like that so it may not have been intentional.

I admire your dedication to a cause you obviously believe in from your comments here and on your other pro RSPCA thread. I simply hope that you are never as let down by them as I have been.
Click to expand...

No not intentional!!!!!!!! lol (would do smiley face tongue out if had smilies!!!) oh and the other thread is not a pro RSPCA thread, though yes I support them and have done on it!

I would however be interested to know how many people actually just want abused/neglected animals cared for and rehomed etc, and how many want this and the person who did it to be brought to justice and prevented from owning animals again. I am quite surprised at the amount of replies I've read that seem to suggest they do not want these people prosecuted??
 
In that case then I would say that personally I would prefer the money to be spent on rescuing more animals than attempting to pursue offenders through the courts where punishments are minimal anyway.

I'd much rather more animals were saved than thousands spent on getting a community service sentence for one offender. It's not that I don't want them punished just that my first thought is for the safety and well being of other animals who wouldn't be reached otherwise.
 
bikerchickone said:
In that case then I would say that personally I would prefer the money to be spent on rescuing more animals than attempting to pursue offenders through the courts where punishments are minimal anyway.

I'd much rather more animals were saved than thousands spent on getting a community service sentence for one offender. It's not that I don't want them punished just that my first thought is for the safety and well being of other animals who wouldn't be reached otherwise.
Click to expand...

I accept that many people are not fully aware of the REAL ins and outs of how the RSPCA work behind the scenes, but I would just like to point out that it is not the time spent on prosecutions and going to court that prevents the officers getting to other needy animals quickly - it is the waste of time people who call in maliciously, day in, day out to make nuisance calls about neighbours/family members. On average, per day, each region (there are five regions) recieves about 2000 calls which are tasked out to officers across that region. A large proportion of those calls are either unfounded or are vastly exaggerated by the caller. A common one is people ringing in to say that a dog/cat/animal is EMACIATED and nearly collapsed with virtually no hair on it's body. In actual fact, when the officer gets there the dog is bouncing around the garden with a small patch of flea allergy, and the caller is merely pee'd off with the dog's barking so exaggerated it to get the officer there in the belief (yes, people do actually think this!) that the officer can actually remove a dog for barking.
 
Not too sure how my comment is related to hoax calls? Irrespective of these calls I'd still rather the money was spent on the animals than legal action.

I've been on the receiving end of one of those hoax calls. A jealous ex friend reported me for leaving my horses with no attention for a month whilst I went to Australia, they were on full livery at the time and so the visit was a ridiculous waste of time and resources. Such a shame people are so ignorant and self obsessed as to behave so selfishly.
 
bikerchickone said:
Not too sure how my comment is related to hoax calls? Irrespective of these calls I'd still rather the money was spent on the animals than legal action.

I've been on the receiving end of one of those hoax calls. A jealous ex friend reported me for leaving my horses with no attention for a month whilst I went to Australia, they were on full livery at the time and so the visit was a ridiculous waste of time and resources. Such a shame people are so ignorant and self obsessed as to behave so selfishly.
Click to expand...

I think moomin was just meaning that the prosecutions aren't what wastes the time of the inspector, it's the hoax calls that do?

Anyway regarding not prosecuting, and I understand what you are saying, but in the instances where the RSPCA cannot get into a property, have the shutters brought down, won't accept help or advice, refuse to do anything about a situation, etc etc, what then, the RSPCA can only have an animal removed by a police officer under law if the animal is suffering or likely to suffering, but once removed it is still the property of the owner, only a court case can reliquish ownership.
 
bikerchickone said:
Not too sure how my comment is related to hoax calls? Irrespective of these calls I'd still rather the money was spent on the animals than legal action.

I've been on the receiving end of one of those hoax calls. A jealous ex friend reported me for leaving my horses with no attention for a month whilst I went to Australia, they were on full livery at the time and so the visit was a ridiculous waste of time and resources. Such a shame people are so ignorant and self obsessed as to behave so selfishly.
Click to expand...

But the whole fact that people get taken to court, get the animals confiscated from them and they get a ban on animals aswell, PREVENTS cruelty and the need to be going around taking animals off people. Take a hoarder for example, who hoards cats for instance - if a charity just keeps kindly going along and removing dying/suffering cats that are stacked up in cages in pitch black sheds full of muck, without taking further action - when will it ever stop?! People need to face up to their responsibilities and actions. The RSPCA are right to prosecute and it would be a sad day if it ceased to happen.

Would you have liked to have seen Jamie Grey not prosecuted, but just had his animals rehomed? And before we get into an argument about whether or not the RSPCA should have done something sooner - I am not talking about that - I am asking the question as to whether it was correct for him to be prosecuted in that case. A man from Winsford has just been succesfully convicted for cockfighting and had 240 animals removed from him. He has a lifetime ban on all animals, a two year suspended sentence, probation, curfew, and a £50,000 fine. Should that man have been prosecuted or should the RSPCA just have gone along, had a nice little word with him and rehome his animals?
 
I agree with you that the people doing these things should be punished, I just wish it were easier to know which prosecution was actually going to get a result that would prevent further suffering. Nobody can know that ahead of time anyway so I'm not blaming the RSPCA here. I just don't think it's possible to generalise. I'd rather thousands spent obtaining a community service sentence were used to care for the animals who need it, but like I said, who knows which case will get a good result.

The OP asked for opinions and personal preferences, I'm just giving mine, not suggesting everyone has to agree with me. :)
 
Bikerchick, the rspca success rate on prosecutions is around 98%, whilst the 'punishment' may not always meet the crime, I personally feel it does help animal welfare if nothing other than the confiscation and disqualifications. But as you said you've given your opinion which you are perfectly entitled to. I'm just shocked by how few in here don't want prosecutions, when prosecutions are commonly the ONLY way to secure the welfare of those animals. The best quote I read somewhere was..... Whilst one animal may not be the world, removing that animal from abuse means the world to that animal. I would love to say both aspects should have full finances and staff to tackle them, but all we have are charities trying to do what they can.
 
Last edited:
rockysmum said:
After today I have changed my mind. BHS for horses every time :D
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree and for the same reasons:), a few years ago I went to Priddy fair and I saw a very sad sight, a little Shetland pony mare riddled with worms(classic pot belly) tied up to a lorry next to a huge horse trying to mount her. The vendor tried to convince me he was a gelding and a picture of 2 bricks came into my mind. I found 2 RSPCA officers and explained the situation they said they would go and check and walked off in theopposite direction looking at the stalls. There was a tap on my shoulder and a man behind me pulled out his card he was a BHS vet and asked me to show him. I took him to this pony and he was very cross, he told the vendor to put the pony mare back on the lorry with hay and water and she was not for sale. He took the vendors name address and then turned his attention to the gelding. At this stage I left but was satisfied in my mind that he was giving it his best attention.
 
Dobiegirl said:
I absolutely agree and for the same reasons:), a few years ago I went to Priddy fair and I saw a very sad sight, a little Shetland pony mare riddled with worms(classic pot belly) tied up to a lorry next to a huge horse trying to mount her. The vendor tried to convince me he was a gelding and a picture of 2 bricks came into my mind. I found 2 RSPCA officers and explained the situation they said they would go and check and walked off in theopposite direction looking at the stalls. There was a tap on my shoulder and a man behind me pulled out his card he was a BHS vet and asked me to show him. I took him to this pony and he was very cross, he told the vendor to put the pony mare back on the lorry with hay and water and she was not for sale. He took the vendors name address and then turned his attention to the gelding. At this stage I left but was satisfied in my mind that he was giving it his best attention.
Click to expand...

Am glad the BHS vet did something, mmmm what does the BHS employ a vet for? Sorry side tracked!! Just to turn your fair situation on it's head, for all you or I know the RSPCA officers may have needed to be in a certain part of the ground at that point as a visual deterent for cetain activities, I know they patrol a local fair to improve welfare, but also be a high visibility deterent! So what you see may not be the full story .....or it may?!!?! who knows!
 
bikerchickone said:
I agree with you that the people doing these things should be punished, I just wish it were easier to know which prosecution was actually going to get a result that would prevent further suffering. Nobody can know that ahead of time anyway so I'm not blaming the RSPCA here. I just don't think it's possible to generalise. I'd rather thousands spent obtaining a community service sentence were used to care for the animals who need it, but like I said, who knows which case will get a good result.

The OP asked for opinions and personal preferences, I'm just giving mine, not suggesting everyone has to agree with me. :)
Click to expand...

That's fine bikerchickone, it's good to have a healthy debate! :)

You are right, not every outcome given from magistrates are a good one. And this is so disappointing for the officer who has put all the hard work in to trying to gain justice for the animal who has suffered, and also to prevent any further animals from suffering at their hands. I have known officers to actually sit and cry outside the court out of sheer disappointment and frustration with lenient sentences. Overall though, most sentences given are in proportion to the offence and it is these that we must hold onto and keep pushing on for.
 
competitiondiva said:
Am glad the BHS vet did something, mmmm what does the BHS employ a vet for? Sorry side tracked!! Just to turn your fair situation on it's head, for all you or I know the RSPCA officers may have needed to be in a certain part of the ground at that point as a visual deterent for cetain activities, I know they patrol a local fair to improve welfare, but also be a high visibility deterent! So what you see may not be the full story .....or it may?!!?! who knows!
Click to expand...

Agree. Just because they walked in the opposite direction does not for one second imply that they weren't going to deal with the shetland at some stage. They may well have had a more pressing and urgent matter going on somewhere else on the grounds.
 
I would (and have had occasion before to do so) speak to the man that lives just down the road from me.....who happens to work for the RSPCA ;). Has helped enormously 2 times before and has given me sound advice on another.
 
competitiondiva said:
Am glad the BHS vet did something, mmmm what does the BHS employ a vet for? Sorry side tracked!! Just to turn your fair situation on it's head, for all you or I know the RSPCA officers may have needed to be in a certain part of the ground at that point as a visual deterent for cetain activities, I know they patrol a local fair to improve welfare, but also be a high visibility deterent! So what you see may not be the full story .....or it may?!!?! who knows!
Click to expand...

I can assure you its a true story, what the BHS vet was doing there Ive no idea, I can see what you are doing planting the seed. As for the RSPCA officers Ive sorry to disappoint you, they were last seen enjoying an ice-cream checking out the stalls in the non horse area, having a jolly came to mind.

Ido have another story also which reiterates my theory that they know naf all about horses.
 
Dobiegirl said:
I can assure you its a true story, what the BHS vet was doing there Ive no idea, I can see what you are doing planting the seed. As for the RSPCA officers Ive sorry to disappoint you, they were last seen enjoying an ice-cream checking out the stalls in the non horse area, having a jolly came to mind.

Ido have another story also which reiterates my theory that they know naf all about horses.
Click to expand...

RSPCA officers can have a break on their shift, and the shetland was hardly dying was it? I would be concerned if it was collapsed/dying/bleeding heavily and they were stood having an ice cream - but the fact that it was wormy really isn't a dire emergency that needs dealing with immediately. Not trying to make excuses - but trying to put that situation in proportion.

As for saying RSPCA officers know naff all about horses - are you saying that ALL RSPCA officers know naff all about horses? Very sweeping.:confused:
 
Moomin1 said:
RSPCA officers can have a break on their shift, and the shetland was hardly dying was it? I would be concerned if it was collapsed/dying/bleeding heavily and they were stood having an ice cream - but the fact that it was wormy really isn't a dire emergency that needs dealing with immediately. Not trying to make excuses - but trying to put that situation in proportion.

As for saying RSPCA officers know naff all about horses - are you saying that ALL RSPCA officers know naff all about horses? Very sweeping.:confused:
Click to expand...

You have missed the entire point:rolleyes:, this tiny Shetland was being constantly mounted by this large horse, what do you think the outcome of that would be.

All my dealings with the RSPCA have proved they know NAF all about horses and badgers. This is just my opinion based on my dealings with them and as an open forum I can state my views on them just the same as you. The only difference is its my experience not yours.
 
Dobiegirl said:
You have missed the entire point:rolleyes:, this tiny Shetland was being constantly mounted by this large horse, what do you think the outcome of that would be.

All my dealings with the RSPCA have proved they know NAF all about horses and badgers. This is just my opinion based on my dealings with them and as an open forum I can state my views on them just the same as you. The only difference is its my experience not yours.
Click to expand...

..No you're right - I haven't had any experience with the RSPCA so I wouldn't know about their work.

Did I at any point say you couldn't state your opinion?!! :confused:
 
Moomin1 said:
..No you're right - I haven't had any experience with the RSPCA so I wouldn't know about their work.

Did I at any point say you couldn't state your opinion?!! :confused:
Click to expand...

Either you are not reading my posts properly or you are deliberately pretending you havnt. I said my experience as in it happened to me not you, and I said it was also my opinion and I know you didnt state I couldnt have one.

You do seem to be confused a lot, perhaps you should seek help for that.
 
Dobiegirl said:
Either you are not reading my posts properly or you are deliberately pretending you havnt. I said my experience as in it happened to me not you, and I said it was also my opinion and I know you didnt state I couldnt have one.

You do seem to be confused a lot, perhaps you should seek help for that.
Click to expand...

Wow that's a bit harsh isn't it?:eek:
 
No its not harsh, I am at a complete loss to know why you have bypassed all the relevent points on my posts and continually posted:confused: and I am merely pointing this out.
 
I have only had one experience with the RSPCA.

A baby chick had been dumped on the main road opp my house. It seems as though it was thrown out of a car as it was a young male.

I rang the RSPCA who were helpful. They asked if we could keep hold of it overnight (they were very busy, and I respect that they have to prioritise cases and this little chick was healthy, we just couldn't keep it!)

We couldn't, due to 2 very young cats and nowhere to secure the chick. The guy on the phone asked if someone else could hold it for us. Luckily a friend from the yard looked after him overnight and the RSPCA called at hers the following morning.
The chick was rehomed just down the road to a lady who looks after ex battery hens and similar.

I would certainly use the RSPCA again, or if I knew a suitable, local wildlife charity I would also consider them, provided they were a registered charity and appropriate (not some backyard filled with 'rescued' animals!).

It annoys me that people get very het up about the RSPCA. I think people lose hindsight and forget who are the bad people in these cases - the abusers. Nobody is perfect and I'm sure that the inspectors do their very best to their limitations, and those that don't get dealt with very swiftly.
 
I don't think it is a matter of who people would call, whether the criticisms of the RSPCA are accurate or what success rate the RSPCA achieve in prosecutions.

The real problem is that for most charities there is no independent ombudsman to whom people can turn if they believe that their complaint hasn't been properly addressed.

The SHG has been campaigning for a Charities Ombudsman,

http://theshg.wordpress.com/2012/02...ncludes-a-proposal-for-a-charities-ombudsman/

During the run-up to the Charities Act review the SHG has been campaigning for the creation of a charities ombudsman. We have a petition running on the government e-petition site and have been asking people to raise the issue with their friends, family and, most importantly, their MP.

Imagine our delight when the Hodgson inquiry turns out to include questions asking:

“…..whether charities should pay an annual charge to cover the costs of running the Charity Commission, whether there should be a charities ombudsman and whether charities should be able to pay their trustees.”

They are also calling for evidence on complaints, appeals and redress.

We hope that all of our supporters will make their own submissions to the review and that you will support our calls for the creation of a charities ombudsman.

The SHG will publish the contents of our submission before the cut off date for those who may like to include some of our points in their own submissions, but please remember that you will have more impact if you present the issues you believe to be important in your own words.
Click to expand...

and has a petition running on the government e-petition website.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/645

Create a Charities Ombudsman

This petition calls on the government to create a Charities Ombudsman with the power to deal with complaints about charities and the authority to order a charity to provide adequate redress if a complaint is upheld..

The Charity Commission is unable to get involved in a wide range of complaints because they are not within its remit.

If a complainant is dissatisfied with the outcome of a Charity's own internal complaints procedure their only remaining option is the legal system. With legal aid being cut drastically this is beyond the reach of the majority of people.

Many charities are now running services or even acting as law enforcement agencies, so it is important that they are seen to be properly regulated and to have an effective and objective independent external complaints procedure.

We want Parliament to debate this issue.
Click to expand...

If you haven't already submitted a response to the Charities Act review, please consider signing and sharing the petition.
 
If it was a dire situation - I'd call everyone/organisation I could think of... Then ask people for more suggestions...:)

I do think the RSPCA have more familiarity with small animals - councils dealt with livestock and the RSPCA did household companion and/or wild animals... Horses often fall somewhere in the middle with numbers owned on a companionship basis growing fast - it's still fairly recent that someone like myself, non land owner and not particularly flush could own/keep/use horses...

The BHS, WHW, SWHP etc are geared more towards equines I guess which arguably allows for their welfare officers to be more species specific with their knowledge and have a greater familiarity...

I don't think we can write the RSPCA off... They do appear to undertake the majority of prosecutions (could do with a review of the sentencing guidelines which is a whole new thread) and cost wise can only really take on the ones they have a good prospect of winning... Like most big organisations - some of the staff on the front line are fabulous and will go the extra mile where possible, some are dire... And decisions made by management who might never have to see a distressed animal might be questionable...

I agree with the suggestion of a charities ombudsman and have already signed the direct gov petition...

:)
 
Ah, the RSPCA...

Honestly and truly I would love to support them - if only they did half of what their publicity claims and there didn't appear to be such an 'agenda' coming from higher up the ranks. They could be such a force for good if only they went back to their original aims as they are such a powerful, rich and generally well respected charity.

These are purely my opinions and experiences of the organisation over the last 10 - 15 years (so don't flame me too much!;))
They got far too involved in politics - by all means charities should have the right as well all do to comment but they've practically become lobbyists at parliament which IMHO is not why Joe Public donates to them. In fact, 90% at least of their mailshots etc make no mention of how active politically the charity is - they're all about the 'saved' puppy/kitten - so is it fair to conclude that the great majority of their donors give to help animals not lobby MPs?
Their Inspectors, not all but many seem to be very inept in their day to day dealing with people especially those who they could reach out to help them help their animals. Instead they appear to rely on first patronising and then vaguely threatening them in a manner that is pretty much guaranteed to cause a negative reaction in the 'offender' (I use that term loosely btw ). If I had only seen this with a few inspectors I could believe that they were the odd ones out but IME it is widespread so I have to conclude that they are trained this way by the RSPCA. The lack of knowledge regarding any large animals would be understandable if only they didn't give such misleading and downright BAD advice when asked for help .

The other thing that really puts me off them is their fundraising methods
1) they advertise heavily and expensively in Scotland but they don't actually operate there - it's the SSPCA (who do help animals in Scotland)who lose out on funds as a result.
2) they never ever mention that nationally raised money doesn't go to the local branch purely to HQ - Joe Public really doesn't know that!

Their branches are another issue - in my area anyway, it is run as a private fiefdom by a selection of power crazy nutters who issue official looking badges to volunteers who then think that one day a week in the shop allows them to demand entry to private property and abuse those on it with hysterical threats about how they will be sorry if they don't "do as they are told" This is a personal experience btw. I know this is only one area but there doesn't seem like anyway to complain to the national body when there is a problem, you just get brushed off in a patronising manner...

Sorry but none of the above inspires me with confidence so I don't call them or support them for anything.

For horses I call WHW, BHS or our local horse rescue (that one depends on circumstances tbh, they regularly implode through internal politics and are unusable until a new committee is formed but they do have local influences in this area which be very effective)

Cats - CPL, one branch is fantastic, the other not so much.

Wild life/exotics - we have a great charity locally, they really are good.

Livestock - that on is a bit harder, you tend to rely on peer pressure from the local farmers and/or them stepping in to improve conditions.
 
Cbmcts, fair comments. Though without their lobbying the animal welfare act would not be what it is. And just to point out that they are not 'rich' donkey sanctuary yes, RSPCA currently no.... And regarding other people's experiences, I think it vastly depends on where u live. My own personal experience of 2 other welfare charities was pretty abysmal, so if others have had this from rspca inspectors then I know somewhat how u feel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top