RESCUE CHARITY THOUGHTS ON THIS?

Bertieb123

Well-Known Member
Joined
16 January 2013
Messages
129
Visit site
THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE I SAW POSTED ONTO A FB SITE, IT IS FROM A RESCUE CHARITY THAT SEEMS TO RESCUE ALL TYPES OF FARM ANIMALS AND HORSES ETC AFTER READING I REALLY DO WONDER WHEN 'THE RESCUE' OF ANIMALS SHOULD STOP IF THIS CHATITY DOES NOT GET FUNDS (OR OTHERS IN A SIMMILAR SITUATION DONT) WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO ALL THE ANIMALS THEN?

The extremely wet winter has taken a harder toll on our funds than we could ever have forecast. Some of our fields became so waterlogged, that we have used literally hundreds of additional large bales of straw to keep the animals comfortable. We were able to manage this financially for a while, but the damage caused to our fields through the extreme wet conditions, along with the recent cold weather which has prevented regrowth of grass, means that we are still providing large amounts of hay and other feed to horses, cattle and sheep, many of whom would now be keeping quite well just eating the spring grass.

Because of all this we haven’t been able to catch up with our hay bill which we are usually able to settle at this time of the year. Our hay suppliers, who have been quite patient, are now pressing for payment of bills before they bring further supplies. It is over two years since we have been in such a dire situation with a lack of funds which were being stretched to breaking point by the end of the winter.

All of this could not have come at a worse time as during the past twelve months we have taken in more animals than any other year, particularly horses and cows, that so desperately needed help and had nowhere else to go.

Because we give a home to so many animals, we are not a wealthy sanctuary but with the kindness of our supporters, we are generally able to raise sufficient funds for the animals’ day to day needs. I would like to tell you that, at present, the animals are well and have not gone without but our existing stocks are running very low without immediate funds to replenish them. With around 750 horses, ponies and donkeys, 650 sheep and goats and 300 cows, hay is always one of our main expenses.

It is only to you, our supporters, that we can turn to for help in this very desperate situation we find ourselves in.

If you are able to help with an urgent donation, however small, we would be so grateful on behalf of all the animals at ********. Thank you for reading this.
 
Do you think this is for real? That's a huge number of animals! Most responsible rescues re-home, particularly horses. It really does sound a bit irresponsible and maybe they should consider pts. I know that sounds heartless but it must cost a fortune to keep that lot going.
 
I do know a rescue in the SW whose trust details, as set up by the founder who is no longer with us, forbid rehoming. That particular one was experiencing problems with unexpected births too, as they were finding it impossible to separate the sexes. Not terribly responsible, albeit well meaning, not that I am suggesting this is the case here. If you would prefer, can you message me who it is, in case it is he same one.
 
I believe Hillside is run by Wendy Valentine, who started up Redwings many years ago. When WV was still involved with Redwings, they too had a policy where they would not rehome horses, so I wouldn't be surprised if Hillside have a similar rule.
But a rescue cannot go on and on taking in animals - surely they will run out of space as well as food?
 
It seems to be Hillside
Yes it is Hillside, I wasn't going to name them, but then again why not, others have probably seen the same article, it does show them in a irresponsible light, ok these rescue charities start with good intentions as this one seemed to but after reading some of their supporters comments on other posts on the page I think this particular one has gone from helping animals to downright almost extreme views on horse sports and people who eat meat! How many animals? I was also shocked! How many do the bunny brigade think they can 'save' before they themselves are entangled in a animal welfare issue?
 
Frankly it is ridiculous for any rescue to have that many animals. I can be quite fluffy myself on occasions but really 'rescuing' that many sheep and cows - where the f do they keep them all?

I do know a rescue in the SW whose trust details, as set up by the founder who is no longer with us, forbid rehoming.
The Trustees can apply to the charity commission to amend their charitable object. If it is seen to be a logical 'next step' in the evolution of the charity then it should be possible.

That particular one was experiencing problems with unexpected births too, as they were finding it impossible to separate the sexes.
What a shambles.
 
Yes, I agree. They have very extreme views and seem to be creating a welfare issue of their own. I know people who won't sell horses as they think others will not look after them as well as they can and they just end up as very bored, inexperienced field ornaments! It's such a waste and no good for the animals long term. Better to re-home as much as possible.
 
I do not understand why Hillside do not register as a charity as well as a limited company. At present they state they are a non profit - this means nothing. They are a Limited Company. They do not benefit from gift aid (that would sort out their feed problem at a stroke). They do not get discretionary business rate relief. Anyone know why they are not registered?
 
I have been told they do this every year, and quite often threaten to 'close down' without funding, with that amount of animals, I think they need to seriously think about cutting down! Thats shocking!
 
I take in rescues, with the stated intention of rehoming them. If I get asked to take one who clearly has no future (one was 17.2hh, built like a brick poo house, oh, and they couldn't keep him in a field, he kept trashing fences) I will always advise to put down in situ. I regard non homing policies as bed blocking, taking a space some other equine might need in rescue. I know at least one so called charity which is just some people collecting equines , (some in trouble and some not) and expecting the great british public to foot the bill. I can't imagine having 750 needing feeding and attention, surely they would be semi feral unless there were lots and lots of volunteers or employees to handle them.
 
Regardless of who the charity is, with such massive numbers to support, then expecting the general public to continue to dig deep, to keep animals alive which in many cases are maintained as they are, as evidence of the need for further funds, is quite simply, WRONG.

I've a suggestion for them, and any other well intentioned but misguided charity; If you've 650 sheep to maintain, and you can't, ship them over to me, I'll get them fit, market them, and pay to your charity the difference between my costs, and their sale price. It's called farming, and it's the way that the rest of us do it.

It is not my intention to be intentionally controversial, but in these straightened times, just what these charities think that they're doing, keeping animals alive, often in conditions which would attract the attention of the other charities, had they the courage to face them, is beyond me.

I understand that we're a nation of animal lovers, but all so often, that love of the animal is directed in such a way that it becomes cruelty.

Alec.
 
"It is over two years since we have been in such a dire situation with a lack of funds which were being stretched to breaking point by the end of the winter."

Sums it up really. They were in the doldrums two years ago yet have still taken on more animals knowing what the UK weather is like. As irresponsible as the people they are rehoming the animals from.
 
Regardless of who the charity is, with such massive numbers to support, then expecting the general public to continue to dig deep, to keep animals alive which in many cases are maintained as they are, as evidence of the need for further funds, is quite simply, WRONG.

I've a suggestion for them, and any other well intentioned but misguided charity; If you've 650 sheep to maintain, and you can't, ship them over to me, I'll get them fit, market them, and pay to your charity the difference between my costs, and their sale price. It's called farming, and it's the way that the rest of us do it.

It is not my intention to be intentionally controversial, but in these straightened times, just what these charities think that they're doing, keeping animals alive, often in conditions which would attract the attention of the other charities, had they the courage to face them, is beyond me.

I understand that we're a nation of animal lovers, but all so often, that love of the animal is directed in such a way that it becomes cruelty.

Alec.

Alec I entirely agree with you.
 
As said, it is Hillside. I emailed them on Monday of this week to express my concerns about the "ladies" who were buying up ponies from Beeston, as they were giving the impression they had Hillsides support. I received a standard reply stating that "due to pressure of work we may not be able to reply to you for a few days".
Since then I have had daily begging emails from them, including one with the wording as above, but as yet not reply to my original concerns.:(
 
Sorry for my ignorance regarding this charity but why do they not rehome - do they have a reason?

^^^ This! I simply don't understand either. Many equine charities I support (eg Horseworld, Redwings etc) have solid rehoming policies, whereby the animals remain the 'property' of the charity but go to new homes to enjoy life, even if it's only as a companion.

Dog rescues of course readily rehome the animals that come into their care.

This is how charities can continue their work and make room for new rescue cases. So why Hillside won't rehome is a mystery to me.
 
Last edited:
Aslec says, why don't they actually use the cattle and sheep for what they were bred for, get them sold or butchered and the proceeds go to feeding the five hundred.
Absolutely stupid policy they have there and I for one would run a mile before donating to it, it's good money down the drain. I mean if they can't feed them how do they medicate the ones that need it and so on. Sounds more like a lunatic asylum than a sensible well thought out strategy of moving stock on once it's recovered and ready for rehoming.
 
I do not understand why Hillside do not register as a charity as well as a limited company. At present they state they are a non profit - this means nothing. They are a Limited Company. They do not benefit from gift aid (that would sort out their feed problem at a stroke). They do not get discretionary business rate relief. Anyone know why they are not registered?

The charities commission require particular guidelines to be followed. For one thing, I don't think Hillside could do the level of political campaigning they do and legally be a charity.
 
As said, it is Hillside. I emailed them on Monday of this week to express my concerns about the "ladies" who were buying up ponies from Beeston, as they were giving the impression they had Hillsides support. I received a standard reply stating that "due to pressure of work we may not be able to reply to you for a few days".
Since then I have had daily begging emails from them, including one with the wording as above, but as yet not reply to my original concerns.:(
I do wonder if you would have had the same response if you were offering a amount of money to aid their cause?
 
The charities commission require particular guidelines to be followed. For one thing, I don't think Hillside could do the level of political campaigning they do and legally be a charity.

Oh I don't know, I can think of at least one large animal charity which seems to manage that quite well! However I do think that this lot of animal horders should not ever be given charitable status. I find the concept of 'rescue' cattle and pigs beyond bizzare
 
Last edited:
I also find the number of animals involved concerning, without a rehoming policy they will always be short of money! Can not believe 750 horses plus farm animals, no way to actually make a difference and improve the situation for all.

I do agree, why not use farm animals for what they were bred for.

I had not realised Hillside /Redwings link, I never supported Redwings in the days when they did not rehome.
 
Whats even more rich is they have acquired a mobile home new for 2013 wonder how much was spent on that..... enough for their hay bill?

Maybe im just being picky
 
Is it just me, or would others agree, that with the larger animal welfare charities, they reach a certain size, and then rather like the subjects of Orwell's Animal Farm, the idea overtakes the cause, and the subjects of the charity concerned, become of a secondary interest?

Fund raising, that's the trick! ;)

Alec.
 
Top