Good work from RSPCA and WHW..
- Thread starter Moomin1
- Start date
touchstone
Well-Known Member
Good work from WHW I would think according to this comment:-
"I rang the rspca about this horse 2 years ago, they said that they 'had already had numerous phone calls about it over the last year' and that they would go and have a look at the horse, they phoned me back sayin that 'he was very old and they would keep an eye on him', shame his suffering lasted another 18 months."
"I rang the rspca about this horse 2 years ago, they said that they 'had already had numerous phone calls about it over the last year' and that they would go and have a look at the horse, they phoned me back sayin that 'he was very old and they would keep an eye on him', shame his suffering lasted another 18 months."
B_2_B
Well-Known Member
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
That doesn't mean the horse was in that condition two years ago!
RSPCA can't just remove horses willy nilly you know if they are in ok condition! It may well have just been in poor condition at that point - which you only need to look at many posts on here to show oldies can and do lose condition - we don't all suddenly think that those owners should be prosecuted when it happens do we?!! This person is assuming that the horse has suffered for 18mths - how on earth does he know that?
I can guarantee that the RSPCA or WHW would NEVER leave a horse in that condition - and if an officer did they would be sacked before they could mumble the word sorry.
Please lets not turn this into an RSPCA bashing thread - they have just spent thousands of pounds prosecuting this man and getting him a custodial - so fgs give credit where credit is due, and lets for once not make uninformed judgemental comments. Nobody knows what condition the horse was in two years ago.
touchstone
Well-Known Member
That doesn't mean the horse was in that condition two years ago!
RSPCA can't just remove horses willy nilly you know if they are in ok condition! It may well have just been in poor condition at that point - which you only need to look at many posts on here to show oldies can and do lose condition - we don't all suddenly think that those owners should be prosecuted when it happens do we?!! This person is assuming that the horse has suffered for 18mths - how on earth does he know that?
I can guarantee that the RSPCA or WHW would NEVER leave a horse in that condition - and if an officer did they would be sacked before they could mumble the word sorry.
Please lets not turn this into an RSPCA bashing thread - they have just spent thousands of pounds prosecuting this man and getting him a custodial - so fgs give credit where credit is due, and lets for once not make uninformed judgemental comments. Nobody knows what condition the horse was in two years ago.
Well it was obviously bad enough eighteen months ago to be reported several times and had to be pts eventually, so actually I do point the finger at the RSPCA for allowing the horse to get to this state when they already knew about it. It echoes exactly the experience I have had of them. Uninformed and judgemental as you might think I am, I would have wanted a welfare agency to step in well before now.
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
Do you actually think that EVERY animal which gets reported to the RSPCA is in a bad state or being neglected?! I would say that a high percentage of the complaints they investigate there is actually very little or nothing wrong.
Does it not occur to you that LOTS of elderly horses get reported daily for looking poor?! Does not mean that the RSPCA will go in and remove every one of them for being old and poor. This horse may well have just been in that category at that stage in time. Things may well have then got a whole lot worse and circumstances may well have changed.
And do you also think that if that horse was ANYWHERE near that state 18ths ago it would have lived this long?! It's organs would have failed months ago - especially being the age it is!
Also, please remember that the comment you read is from ONE person only. How do you know that person is credible?! He may well think a ribby horse is in fact emaciated. Just because it ended up the way it did does not mean he was necessarily right in thinking it was neglected two years ago. It may well have just been an old looking, dipped backed horse which was a bit ribby.
alsiola
Well-Known Member
The RPSCA have no greater powers than any other citizen of this country. There are numerous hoops to jump through to seize a horse i.e. it must be certified as suffering, or potential to suffer in its current environment by a vet, and also authorise by the police. Being a bit old and a bit skinny is not enough for this to happen.
Remember they are also funded entirely by public donations. In my area they are extremely understaffed, and some calls (where there is no acute pain/suffering) will take up to 2 weeks to attend to simply down to limited resources. If you want to see better response time then reach into your pocket and donate.
I personally think the court system has a lot to answer for in this country. We recently had a case with obvious neglect leading to severe suffering. After 6 months and £6000 the horse was back to good health. It took another £4000 to get the owner to court, where the case presented was so strong he changed his plea from innocent to guilty. The judge ordered him to pay back the £6000.... at a rate of £5/week. 24 years time it will be repaid. Also ordered the horse to be returned to the guilty owner. No ban from keeping animals. Fairly pathetic outcome after a lot of effort and expenditure.
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
guido16
Well-Known Member
Something has gone tragically wrong here. An old man who has had this horse for decades and this is how it does up. Correct verdict but we need to look deeper. HOW AND WHY did this happen.
He obviously looked after it for the first 3/4 of its life. Such a tragic end for this fine old horse.
He obviously looked after it for the first 3/4 of its life. Such a tragic end for this fine old horse.
touchstone
Well-Known Member
So how do you explain the fact that this horse was apparently being monitored by the RSPCA and allowed to get to this state? Presumably its teeth were in a state then too and just left.
I have had not just one, but several negative personal experiences with the RSPCA, so when someone has a similar experience of course I am going to think that it is probably correct, it certainly was in my experiences. I also had a very patronising phone call from the person that answered the phone as they had had lots of complaints about the horses in question and that it was natural for horses to eat wood - yes, but only because the poor bu**ers were starving having had no hay/feed and barely any grazing the whole of the winter and they'd taken to eating the trees in desperation, and yet despite over my forty years of owning and a number of those working with horses professionally and knowing what a thin neglected horse looks like they didn't act. Thank god the horses were moved on shortly afterwards as the landlord kicked the tennant off.
Another time I was left with a horse stuck in a river that had been there overnight and had no assistance from the rspca, as the inspector was in the area but wouldn't lead a strange young horse.
At sale rings I have seen tiny shetland foals ridden around the pens while the rspca inspectors did nothing.
Just a few of my experiences...
So please, don't get uptight with me for not thinking that the rspca are wonderful, of course I don't expect every thin elderly horse to be removed, but I do expect those in genuine need to be seen to.
Oh, and they won't be getting a penny from me, I prefer my money to be spent on animal welfare rather than the 'new' headquarters, conferences at the Hilton etc.
Last edited:
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
Yes it's very sad isn't it. Sometimes people just really lose their way when the animal's get older. Such a shame.
PeterNatt
Well-Known Member
I would suggest that if this had been reported to WHW or BHS initially rather than the RSPCA that they would have tried to educate the owner and if that had failed would have asked the RSPCA to take action. WHW and BHS specialises in horses and therefore their inspectors have a far greater in depth understanding of them.
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
Not necessarily the case - the RSPCA have equine officers who are people with many years of experience with horses, horse owners themselves normally, and also often have degrees etc in equine science/management (not that I think they are worth the paper they are written on - I have one myself!).
Plus - even the officers who aren't so well up on horses recieve basic training and knowledge on horses - they all know the general advice to be giving horse owners when faced with a thin horse. First, you establish how old the horse is, second what it is fed, third if it's under vet treatment, and also when it last had it's teeth looked and worming etc. The advice given will usually be the same - if under vet treatment - no problem - it's being dealt with. If not and horse is slightly underweight/ribby, advice on steps to be taken - ie altering feed (not telling them what feed - but suggesting they take advice from either a feed company or an equine vet), worming regularly, and if no improvement then advise to get a vet out. At the end of the day, there's only so much advice you can give to someone. If they don't take it then they are the ones who are negligent.
ponypilotmum
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry but the RSPCA are NOT knowledgeable enough about horses. If they were monitoring this horse then how did it become one of the thinnest horses the WHW had seen? HOW?
If you reported a neglected child to social services and they put that child on the 'at risk' register (meaning it was being 'kept an eye on'), and that child subsequently ended up looking like an anorexic through neglect - heads would roll, people would be sacked.
I've had a few dealings with the rspca, once when a yard full of thin emaciated lice ridden ponies were reported to them. The ponies were on bare grazing and two in foal. The rspca said they were fine. One mare lost her foal before it was born, the other foal died at two days old.
Another, a friend lived next to a field where a horse was in a similar condition. She reported it to the rspca to no avail. Asked me and I gave her WHW number. They had the horse removed and last heard it was doing well in a rescue centre.
If WHW and the BHS can do it, why can't the RSPCA? They have ROYAL status. The Queen is an animal lover, yet animals are dying daily because the RSPCA are negligent through lack of knowledge, time, and money (because they spend all their money on human comfort!).
RSPCA knock at my door and they get asked what their wage is to come and ask me for donations, then told to go and research their bosses wage, and add up all their wages vs what is spent on animal welfare, and told that will give them the answer as to why they will never have a penny of my money. BHS get my gold membership and WHW have my full support too.
If you reported a neglected child to social services and they put that child on the 'at risk' register (meaning it was being 'kept an eye on'), and that child subsequently ended up looking like an anorexic through neglect - heads would roll, people would be sacked.
I've had a few dealings with the rspca, once when a yard full of thin emaciated lice ridden ponies were reported to them. The ponies were on bare grazing and two in foal. The rspca said they were fine. One mare lost her foal before it was born, the other foal died at two days old.
Another, a friend lived next to a field where a horse was in a similar condition. She reported it to the rspca to no avail. Asked me and I gave her WHW number. They had the horse removed and last heard it was doing well in a rescue centre.
If WHW and the BHS can do it, why can't the RSPCA? They have ROYAL status. The Queen is an animal lover, yet animals are dying daily because the RSPCA are negligent through lack of knowledge, time, and money (because they spend all their money on human comfort!).
RSPCA knock at my door and they get asked what their wage is to come and ask me for donations, then told to go and research their bosses wage, and add up all their wages vs what is spent on animal welfare, and told that will give them the answer as to why they will never have a penny of my money. BHS get my gold membership and WHW have my full support too.
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
Oh I give up!! The RSPCA do not 'monitor' random horses for years on end - do you not think they have enough to do? They won't have been 'monitoring' this horse! The article says they visited two years earlier and at that time they said they had numerous calls about it and would go and have a look. They then cannot and should not continue to harrass people by turning up to 'monitor' their animals. They don't have a right to do that for a start.
As for WHW removing the other horse - they don't prosecute so likelihood is the owner signed the horse over to them.
The problem is that horsey people always have to be right! And if they make a call about a so called 'emaciated' horse - there's usually not an awful lot wrong with it other than being a bit ribby in winter with the odd cracked hoof and dirty water. That is not grounds to remove a horse.
I'll try not to take your first sentence personally by the way!
Last edited:
MileAMinute
Well-Known Member
If the RSPCA were as bad as everyone wants to make out, they surely wouldn't still be running, would they?
No one is going to donate to a charity they don't believe helps the animals in need.
I, for one, am support the RSPCA, any little helps. People are quick to jump on the 'ignorant charity' bandwagon but forget very high profile cases such as Jamie Grey, in which the RSPCA took a lot of time and effort to help resolve.
Just my two cents
No one is going to donate to a charity they don't believe helps the animals in need.
I, for one, am support the RSPCA, any little helps. People are quick to jump on the 'ignorant charity' bandwagon but forget very high profile cases such as Jamie Grey, in which the RSPCA took a lot of time and effort to help resolve.
Just my two cents
B_2_B
Well-Known Member
If the RSPCA were as bad as everyone wants to make out, they surely wouldn't still be running, would they?
No one is going to donate to a charity they don't believe helps the animals in need.
I, for one, am support the RSPCA, any little helps. People are quick to jump on the 'ignorant charity' bandwagon but forget very high profile cases such as Jamie Grey, in which the RSPCA took a lot of time and effort to help resolve.
Just my two cents
Exactly
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
If the RSPCA were as bad as everyone wants to make out, they surely wouldn't still be running, would they?
No one is going to donate to a charity they don't believe helps the animals in need.
I, for one, am support the RSPCA, any little helps. People are quick to jump on the 'ignorant charity' bandwagon but forget very high profile cases such as Jamie Grey, in which the RSPCA took a lot of time and effort to help resolve.
Just my two cents
Sadly Cobrastyle, people are all too quick to criticise and pick fault - usually saying that the RSPCA don't do anything, yet when they do read an article about a prosecution, they then slate the RSPCA again!!
People get all uppity about the fact a hq was built in Sussex which cost a lot of money. Get real people - buildings cost money. The RSPCA have been operating for over a hundred years, so why the **** should they not have a decent office to work from?!!! A happy workforce is a good workforce and most large workforces will have decent facilities.
And for the record - that building is just like any other normal office block. It has tables, chairs, computers, and a canteen. Oh, and toilets with hand dryers.
MileAMinute
Well-Known Member
Exactly
Ok, so what? Jamie Grey gets pulled up for the neglect and abuse for all those animals and the RSPCA should have sat back and done nothing? I'd imagine everyone on here would slate them for that, too.
guido16
Well-Known Member
Bottom line is that the owner was at fault. And love them or hate them, the rspca got the conviction.
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
Exactly
Well they are still running so that disproves your theory then doesn't it!?!
It would do well for people to remember that if nobody supported the RSPCA then nobody would ever be prosecuted for animal cruelty. Plain and simple.
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
VERY WELL SAID! People need to remember that if the RSPCA were to cease existing then NOBODY would get prosecuted for animal cruelty. Plain and simple.
So before anybody goes trying to dissuade people to donate, have a good old think about the consequences for animals in this country.
B_2_B
Well-Known Member
What?! I wasn't implying a theory
I was simply highlighting the "high profile" status, the RSPCA seem to have a great knack for appearing and doing wonderful things when there are TV cameras about.
And of course they shouldn't have done nothing, and yes we need them for prosecutions.
But as much as you are arguing the toss about them being wonderful, there are good and bad sides to the RSPCA and it's the bad sides that need dealing with and not swept under the carpet that most RSPCA advocates and die-hard supporters seem to want to do.
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
Exactly. People slate the RSPCA on the Jamie Grey case too - because they said that the place was reported years before. They automatically assume that when it was looked at years before it was the same scenario at that yard.
WTF would the RSPCA decide to then leave it a few years, for more and more horses to gather, starve etc etc, and THEN go in and spend EVEN MORE money on prosecuting than they would have had to years earlier. Not to mention the hours and hours and hours of work that one particular officer has to put in to completing all of the file. I'm afraid peeps that's not the way it works.
Shilasdair
Patting her thylacine
Moomin1 - I am starting to suspect you are paid for viral marketing on the RSPCA's behalf.
The truth is (as many of us who have worked in the equine industry for years know) that they do duck all to help animal welfare, and everything to gain donations and political leverage.
As an organisation, I wouldn't donate to them when there are so many genuine horse charities out there - like WHW and the BHS.
The RSPCA should be ashamed of their behaviour - every penny donated seems to go towards luxury and influence for the organisation, whilst they kill more than half the animals they 'rescue'.
S
The truth is (as many of us who have worked in the equine industry for years know) that they do duck all to help animal welfare, and everything to gain donations and political leverage.
As an organisation, I wouldn't donate to them when there are so many genuine horse charities out there - like WHW and the BHS.
The RSPCA should be ashamed of their behaviour - every penny donated seems to go towards luxury and influence for the organisation, whilst they kill more than half the animals they 'rescue'.
S
MileAMinute
Well-Known Member
I understand that too. Every thing, company, business, charity, has it's downsides, it's bad issues, but all I ever seem to hear on here is slating.
It's hard for me I think as I have friends who are inspectors. That might make me biased, but they are lovely, caring people who give a damn about animals and it angers me to think they are being blanket termed!
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
What?! I wasn't implying a theory
I was simply highlighting the "high profile" status, the RSPCA seem to have a great knack for appearing and doing wonderful things when there are TV cameras about.
And of course they shouldn't have done nothing, and yes we need them for prosecutions.
But as much as you are arguing the toss about them being wonderful, there are good and bad sides to the RSPCA and it's the bad sides that need dealing with and not swept under the carpet that most RSPCA advocates and die-hard supporters seem to want to do.
Maybe not die hard supporters but people with first hand knowledge that can shake their heads at the absolute bull**** that come out of some haters who throw wild accusations around!
With regard the cameras. This is a real bug bear of mine. Since Rolf Harris (who by the way dealt with RSPCA branches and hospitals not the inspectorate) and also Animal 24/7 being aired, people have got it into their heads that just because the camera shows an animal being removed because it's been abandoned that the inspector has gone along the very same day as some Tom, Dick or Harry has claimed it is abandoned - and removed it on their say so!! What in actual fact has taken place - is a good few days worth of investigation and sealing of doors on the property first - to PROVE that nobody is entering that house. People don't realise this side of it and when they call in - and demand that a dog is removed instantly - then don't get their demands actioned - they go hysterical talking about how "you always do infront of the camera though".
Moomin1
Well-Known Member
Moomin1 - I am starting to suspect you are paid for viral marketing on the RSPCA's behalf.
The truth is (as many of us who have worked in the equine industry for years know) that they do duck all to help animal welfare, and everything to gain donations and political leverage.
As an organisation, I wouldn't donate to them when there are so many genuine horse charities out there - like WHW and the BHS.
The RSPCA should be ashamed of their behaviour - every penny donated seems to go towards luxury and influence for the organisation, whilst they kill more than half the animals they 'rescue'.
S
Ha ha!! That will be the next accusation no doubt - viral marketing!!
It's a damn shame that WHW or BHS don't prosecute then isn't it?!
With regards pts - do you not think that statistics will be higher than other charities due to the sheer size of the RSPCA and the amount of work that comes in for them?!! I'm no good at maths but I'm afraid that one's obvious Shils!
russianhorse
Well-Known Member
Moomin1 - I am starting to suspect you are paid for viral marketing on the RSPCA's behalf.
The truth is (as many of us who have worked in the equine industry for years know) that they do duck all to help animal welfare, and everything to gain donations and political leverage.
As an organisation, I wouldn't donate to them when there are so many genuine horse charities out there - like WHW and the BHS.
The RSPCA should be ashamed of their behaviour - every penny donated seems to go towards luxury and influence for the organisation, whilst they kill more than half the animals they 'rescue'.
S
Well said
...and not just us in the equine industry, but also from first hand experience in the small animal world.........and I've told them so when they came begging for donations from me
Last edited:
B_2_B
Well-Known Member
That's not what I meant.
I meant the high profile cases that build up over time where they are sure to get news coverage and be first named as doing a wonderful job, sometimes at the expense of the other usually smaller charities that actually do most of the work, purely because the RSPCA are needed for the actual prosecution.
Yes, it is a damn shame the WHW and others can't prosecute, things would maybe be a damn site better for at least the equine side of things!