RSPCA asking for urgent donations yet in court case against the Heythrop?

EAST KENT said:
The rspca was behind the hunting ban,the banning of docking puppies..both these expensive moves have alienated thousands ,if not a million people.NO charity can afford to alienate anyone, donations tend to dry up if they do.
If they had stayed an ANIMAL charity ,then my fortune may have been left in part to them,as it is it will be anyone BUT the rspca. I detest them,they so often make nuisance calls on innocent people whose vile neighbours use them as a ploy against anyone they want to aggrieve.
Click to expand...

They may alienate many...but they will probably gain the support of many too.

I have never had a nuisance call from any animal chartity....insurance companies, however...!!!!

Yes, a sad few may make calls to aggrivate neighbours, but I would hazard that the majority are in good faith with animal welfare in mind.

I guess that is the key point here, as I guess the OP was hoping we would discuss. Everyone's opinion on what is a worthwhile cause and how much is worth spending on it is different.
 
DawnRay said:
It is mine. Especially in some breeds, uncontrolled breeding has produced a huge surplus of pets that cannot be re-homed. It is not a welfare issue putting them to sleep despite it being very sad for those involved. It is simply common sense until someone actually deals with the situation ie the government. The RSPCA are a welfare organisation and receive donations to deal with welfare issues they are not a control organisation.
Illegal hunting and killing foxes with dogs is a welfare issue and the RSPCA are correct to be spending their donated money on this issue.
Click to expand...

Then perhaps you should roll up your sleeves and spend time with a small rescue. Dogs are being PTS at an apalling rate. Healthy young dogs and yes of course it is a welfare issue and you are just turning away from this if you assume the answer is to keep destroying them till the govt step in and legislate. That is where a organisation such as the RSPCA should devote its energies.
 
Luci07 said:
Then perhaps you should roll up your sleeves and spend time with a small rescue. Dogs are being PTS at an apalling rate. Healthy young dogs and yes of course it is a welfare issue and you are just turning away from this if you assume the answer is to keep destroying them till the govt step in and legislate. That is where a organisation such as the RSPCA should devote its energies.
Click to expand...

How????? As I said earlier, you could spend millions on building a load more kennels, plus staff to man them etc, and all you would do is fill them, and still be in the same situation we are now..... The issue needs to be addressed at the heart of it.

Also consider the length of time all these extra dogs would have to wait in all these extra kennel spaces to find a new home?? The ones in centres already have to wait months... The simple fact is that they are being bred faster than they can be rehomed...
 
Last edited:
amymay said:
Yes, both of them are offenses in the eyes of the law.

However, as no other fail safe methods exist for managing fox's - i'll go with the hounds. Sorry.
Click to expand...

This. And that particularly ill-conceived, politically motivated law does, in fact, do the fox no favours.
 
Mrs B said:
This. And that particularly ill-conceived, politically motivated law does, in fact, do the fox no favours.
Click to expand...

...whereas hunting them with dogs does them a favour....? Are you really putting that forward as an arguement?

OP wasn't asking for a hunting debate, but it does not seem possible to discuss this thread without it becoming part of the material.
 
1life said:
...whereas hunting them with dogs does them a favour....? Are you really putting that forward as an argument?
Click to expand...

Well, whilst it might not be ideal in many's eyes - at least they are dispatched quickly - unlike snaring or shooting.

OP wasn't asking for a hunting debate, but it does not seem possible to discuss this thread without it becoming part of the material.
Click to expand...

That's the joy of free speech and debate.
 
Last edited:
The point of this thread was to discuss some people's opinions that a charity spending alot of money on a prosecution where there is sufficient evidence that people have broken animal welfare law was a waste of money.

If this was anything other than a hunting issue it would not be a news worthy story, but because it is here we are. In short this thread is nothing more than a hunting debate.....
 
Here's a novel idea - How about the hunts stop breaking the law and then the RSPCA could channel those much needed funds into education and rescue ?
Living in a democratic society means we all bear the responsiblity of obeying the law. Picking and choosing the ones you like, isn't an option.
If people didn't break the law, we'd save billions on policing, the court and prison system, insurance etc etc. The money could go to hospitals, schools, care of the elderly, lost staffie puppies....
 
horserider said:
Here's a novel idea - How about the hunts stop breaking the law and then the RSPCA could channel those much needed funds into education and rescue ?
Living in a democratic society means we all bear the responsiblity of obeying the law. Picking and choosing the ones you like, isn't an option.
If people didn't break the law, we'd save billions on policing, the court and prison system, insurance etc etc. The money could go to hospitals, schools, care of the elderly, lost staffie puppies....
Click to expand...

Utopia, and when you find it, you will let me know, wont you?

Alec.
 
1life said:
...whereas hunting them with dogs does them a favour....? Are you really putting that forward as an arguement?

........
Click to expand...

I can't speak for Mrs B, but for myself, then yes it is a valid argument, and one which makes perfect sense.

Our countryside has evolved, in part because of Hunting. I know of many opposed to Hunting, from the moral and humane aspect, who accept that our world has evolved, and that we are as we are because of our history. They view it all as rather like when we were young, and we were told to eat our crusts, in that cherry-picking the bits that you like, and discarding the rest, is hugely damaging to our rural way of life, and whilst I'm up on my back feet, that includes our village schools, our post offices and village shops, and our public transport system.

Now it seems, there are those who want to dismantle our world and change things, irrevocably. I'm glad that I'm the age that I am, and I don't want to see the world in 50 years time, thank you very much!! ;):D

Alec.
 
Alec Swan said:
Our countryside has evolved, in part because of Hunting. I know of many opposed to Hunting, from the moral and humane aspect, who accept that our world has evolved, and that we are as we are because of our history. They view it all as rather like when we were young, and we were told to eat our crusts, in that cherry-picking the bits that you like, and discarding the rest, is hugely damaging to our rural way of life, and whilst I'm up on my back feet, that includes our village schools, our post offices and village shops, and our public transport system.

Now it seems, there are those who want to dismantle our world and change things, irrevocably. I'm glad that I'm the age that I am, and I don't want to see the world in 50 years time, thank you very much!! ;):D

Alec.
Click to expand...

It's not a case of cherry-picking, it's a case of reviewing old traditions and seeing if they fit in the modern world.
I support my local post office and school, I work in the countryside every day and have done for the last 22 years and have seen many things change, often for the better. I'm more a 'pomp and ceremony' type of tradition person myself. Many things have changed, irrevocably, and quite often that has been through education not a wish to simply eradicate old ways. After all, if it wasn't for progress we wouldn't be having a debate on an internet forum now, would we ;) ?

amymay said:
Well, whilst it might not be ideal in many's eyes - at least they are dispatched quickly - unlike snaring or shooting.

That's the joy of free speech and debate.
Click to expand...

I didn't say 'hunting with dogs does them a favour INSTEAD of shooting or snaring'. My meaning was that I cannot see how hunting any animal with dogs could be classed as 'doing them a favour'. I wasn't debating alternatives.

So, for my conclusion, I do feel that MAYBE the RSPCA are spending a disproportionate amount of money on this case BUT who is anyone to decide which law they do and which law they do not adhere to, however ridiculous they may think that law is? Now, that really is a case of cherry picking ;) :).
 
competitiondiva said:
How????? As I said earlier, you could spend millions on building a load more kennels, plus staff to man them etc, and all you would do is fill them, and still be in the same situation we are now..... The issue needs to be addressed at the heart of it.

Also consider the length of time all these extra dogs would have to wait in all these extra kennel spaces to find a new home?? The ones in centres already have to wait months... The simple fact is that they are being bred faster than they can be rehomed...
Click to expand...

And that is Exactly what the Dog`s Trust are indeed doing..they get my vote every time.
 
EAST KENT said:
And that is Exactly what the Dog`s Trust are indeed doing..they get my vote every time.
Click to expand...

And mine. The point I was unsuccessfully trying to make was that we cannot turn our back on the welfare issue of the dogs in pounds and wait for our government to sort out the issue. Tackling this and raising the issue of over breeding , of treating domestic animals as a disposable commodity..that's where the RSPCA should be focusing public money and their efforts. Actually I wonder why they choose to keep the "royal", seeing as quite a few members of the royal family do hunt..

After seeing what I see going on with dumped dogs, it is nice to come on this forum to remember that there are a lot of people who love and care for their animals.
 
1life said:
It's not a case of cherry-picking, it's a case of reviewing old traditions and seeing if they fit in the modern world.
I support my local post office and school, I work in the countryside every day and have done for the last 22 years and have seen many things change, often for the better. I'm more a 'pomp and ceremony' type of tradition person myself. Many things have changed, irrevocably, and quite often that has been through education not a wish to simply eradicate old ways. After all, if it wasn't for progress we wouldn't be having a debate on an internet forum now, would we ;) ?
Click to expand...

So is that really how you do look at things? If so, then I'd say your 22 years working in the countryside have, sadly, been blinkered ones.

How can it have escaped you that IF (and the 'IF' is the only place a debate truly belongs after the Burns report) the fox population is to be controlled as humanely as possible, the 'best' means of dispatch is the most natural: by another predator?

Just ignore all the cr@p about 'people dressing up to tear a wild animal apart for pleasure' bit. It's emotive rubbish. It doesn't matter one iota to the fox as it's an incredibly swift death and that is all that should be of any consideration. And if it does matter to you (or any other anti reading this who has a similar take on it), I'd suggest you look at your motives. Is it the act or the perceived politics or class that's upsetting you? If so, it's being outraged by proxy - something we're sadly good at in this country.

Therefore you'd say the 'doing them a favour' bit, under the current law isn't to provide either a swift dispatch or total freedom - it's a high chance of dying slowly and painfully from a mis-aimed shot, poison or a snare?

NB ** All this is under the assumption that the fox population needs to be controlled.

Part of growing up is recognising when the law (though political intervention) has become an ass. And no, I do not break this law, much as I disagree with it.

And as for your last 'cherry-picking' comment: it makes you sound at once pompous and naive. "Who is anyone to decide which law they do and which law they do not adhere to?"

So you, hand on heart, never speed? Far more dangerous to far more people and animals that hunting with dogs - and with terrible, far reaching consequences when it goes wrong.

Or, more trivially, never litter by throwing an apple core out of your car? Or drop a cigarette butt, or don't declare a bit of cash for helping with someone's horse?

And back to the original post, which as far as I can see cannot be separated from the hunting debate.

The RSPCA are sadly now run by those with a political agenda first and a concern for animal welfare a long way second. Their 'concern' for the fox is as far removed from reality as was Tony Blair's when he tossed the Hunting Bill like an old bone as an appeasement to his back-benchers. The RSPCA have lost their way and understanding of what constitutes cruelty, more's the pity. I shall not support them again.
 
Last edited:
EAST KENT said:
And that is Exactly what the Dog`s Trust are indeed doing..they get my vote every time.
Click to expand...

Luci07 said:
And mine. The point I was unsuccessfully trying to make was that we cannot turn our back on the welfare issue of the dogs in pounds and wait for our government to sort out the issue. Tackling this and raising the issue of over breeding , of treating domestic animals as a disposable commodity..that's where the RSPCA should be focusing public money and their efforts. Actually I wonder why they choose to keep the "royal", seeing as quite a few members of the royal family do hunt..

After seeing what I see going on with dumped dogs, it is nice to come on this forum to remember that there are a lot of people who love and care for their animals.
Click to expand...

What is it you feel or know the Dogs trust to be doing that the RSPCA isn't to address this issue???
 
competitiondiva said:
What is it you feel or know the Dogs trust to be doing that the RSPCA isn't to address this issue???
Click to expand...

Exactly. The RSPCA offer free cat neutering vouchers to the more needy people, free microchipping, and assistance with veterinary treatment/consultations. They do animal action weeks across the country where people can go along with their pets and have them de-flead, wormed and chipped for nothing. They also work 24 hours a day going out to emergency complaints and collections, sometimes not getting home until 3,4,5am. Just because the officers cannot get to everything immediately does not mean nothing is being done. Each officer sometimes has between 60-100 jobs outstanding over an area of up to 250 square miles.

The RSPCA are the only ones to do that and the less money people provide then animals WILL suffer undoubtedly.
 
Do you know those people that you talk about?! Have you seen first hand the work they do? I hazard a strong guess no.

I can't tell you how mistaken you really are. These people DO have animal welfare at heart, and the RSPCA have a scientific and veterinary dept which looks into all the research necessary and makes informed decisions as to what constitutes suffering and cruelty. These people are VETS who are advising on this research.

Of course everyone will have differing opinions as to what is classed as suffering. Funnily enough, I bet half of the people on here would be up in arms over a tethered traveller's horse which had cracked hooves and no water for a few hours, yet they are not bothered about a fox being torn to shreds and being scared out of it's wits and run to exhaustion.
 
Mrs B said:
So is that really how you do look at things? If so, then I'd say your 22 years working in the countryside have, sadly, been blinkered ones.

I'd suggest you look at your motives. Is it the act or the perceived politics or class that's upsetting you? If so, it's being outraged by proxy - something we're sadly good at in this country.

Part of growing up is recognising when the law (though political intervention) has become an ass. And no, I do not break this law, much as I disagree with it.

And as for your last 'cherry-picking' comment: it makes you sound at once pompous and naive. "Who is anyone to decide which law they do and which law they do not adhere to?"

So you, hand on heart, never speed? Far more dangerous to far more people and animals that hunting with dogs - and with terrible, far reaching consequences when it goes wrong.

Or more trivially, never litter by throwing an apple core out of your car? Or drop a cigarette butt, or don't declare a bit of cash for helping with someone's horse?

Mrs B, you have reminded me of exactly the reason that I don't often enter H&H debates. You have turned an open debate into a personal attack. I don't need to look at my motives. Interestingly, I have never actually said if I do or do not support hunting, if I've ever been or observed hunting or if I've worked for a hunt. I've just debated people's statements.

The 'cherry-picking' comment was actually trying to touch on a little lighthearted humour by turning Alec Swan's phrase back at him. Maybe you hadn't read his post?
Click to expand...
 
Moomin1 said:
Exactly. The RSPCA offer free cat neutering vouchers to the more needy people, free microchipping, and assistance with veterinary treatment/consultations. They do animal action weeks across the country where people can go along with their pets and have them de-flead, wormed and chipped for nothing. They also work 24 hours a day going out to emergency complaints and collections, sometimes not getting home until 3,4,5am. Just because the officers cannot get to everything immediately does not mean nothing is being done. Each officer sometimes has between 60-100 jobs outstanding over an area of up to 250 square miles.

The RSPCA are the only ones to do that and the less money people provide then animals WILL suffer undoubtedly.
Click to expand...

They also offer assissted dog neutering. Aswell as having the inspector go out to these places and give advise direct to the people in the form of the complaints they attend, thereby tackling the less proactive dog owners.
 
The Dog`S Trust offers free neutering vouchers for staffies in rotating areas,so that dogs coming out of,say Croydon,in rescue or not ,can be neutered at no cost beyond fuel of getting to the vet.They operate a NO KILL policy on healthy dogs. `Nuff said really.And NO they are NOT political.
In fact they operate exactly as a charity should do,purely for the welfare of rescue dogs,no other agenda. The rspca has gathered a Hell of a lot of bad feeling ,especially among country folk and farmers,no charity can afford that
to happen;they ignored that rule and now want to raise funds to do a prosecution ,for God`s sake,that money would be better employed running their animal welfare facilities properly and with more compassion than as of the present.
Over the years we have had five or more rspca visits,each one a malicious phone call result.I strongly resent the fact they bluff Right of Entry,and the fact just how very ignorant the inspectors are. Next time they will be refused entry,we have all our animals in great condition and accommadation and have nothing to hide whatsoever,but little ignorant Hitlers best keep away .
It has a Hell of a long road to getting it`s respect back,and this latest stunt is just another nail in the coffin.
 
Used to support them by monthly DD, BUT having asked them to help with a awful welfare case and being given 'the evil eye' when the inspector realised that we hunted and shot and subsequetly ingnored the case. It dawned on me that they are purely a political lobbyist on the wrong side of my fence who use animals as a vehicle to persue political ambitions and keep themselves in jobs, no more, no less.

We persuaded the welfare case owner that the suffering animal needed to be helped - the local huntsman dealt with the matter humanely, kindly and without political posturing.

However, I then channelled my donations to a well known charity with bases in Egypt and hey presto! Negative vibes about them now - money is truly the root of all evil!
 
Lets face it the RSPCA have gone Political and as they are a Charity, they face having their license taken away and a good thing too. By doing what they have done over the Hunt people have lost them a good deal of good will up and down the country, I no longer support them and wouldn't allow them on my property for any reason.
 
What I dislike is the idea that they spend extremely large amounts of money helping to prosecute people who then essentially receive a slap on the wrist (generally speaking) that is unlikely to act as a deterrent. I can't help feeling that their money would be better spent helping the victims of abuse (i.e. the animals) and educating people about animal welfare.
I know that these hunt people have broken the law, but will spending a fortune prosecuting them change anything? Will they really receive the sort of punishment that would deter them (or others) in the future?
 
Dovorian said:
Used to support them by monthly DD, BUT having asked them to help with a awful welfare case and being given 'the evil eye' when the inspector realised that we hunted and shot and subsequetly ingnored the case. It dawned on me that they are purely a political lobbyist on the wrong side of my fence who use animals as a vehicle to persue political ambitions and keep themselves in jobs, no more, no less.

We persuaded the welfare case owner that the suffering animal needed to be helped - the local huntsman dealt with the matter humanely, kindly and without political posturing.

However, I then channelled my donations to a well known charity with bases in Egypt and hey presto! Negative vibes about them now - money is truly the root of all evil!
Click to expand...
Just like you, no help from our version (NI) of the RSPCA, far more interested in being on "tele", wasted money on buying an old zoo in the far end of now-where etc etc, I now give any spare money I have (very little) to local sanctuary (Crosskennan) and when I can the Brooke. I also have two ponies from Crosskennan. When I think of a long deceased relative of mine leaving money to the OLD RSPCA I could cry. How dare they spend money on pursuing cases against hunts, when, out there, animals are being subjected to savage cruelty, in this, suppposedly humane country. I feel for the guys and girls of the RSPCA on the ground, how must they feel, watching the guys in suits ruin the good, christian, honest name of the ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS. I would also suggest that if the government can relieve Sir Fred Goodwin of his title, they should suggest that the society loses its Royal title. I bet her Majesty would be up for this.
 
competitiondiva said:
Hashrouge... And knowing no one will hold them accountable for their law breaking will stop them????
Click to expand...

CPS!!! Thats who should do it - the RSPCA are supposed to be a welfare organisation not a political body. Their advertisements always tuck on the heart strings and would suggest that this is where all their money goes and this is not true.

So when the RSPCA goes in and takes some dogs out for rescue...brilliant you cry, doing what they are supposed to do, you say. Except in that instance, they didn't bother with the Stafford cross, they left that or behind. Luckily for that dog, another charity picked it up.
 
Luci please state fact, not fiction do I really need to put up a link to the rspca pet search for u to see how many staffi's and crosses are in rspca shelters.... Here it is for you anyway http://www.rspca.org.uk/allaboutanimals/pets/rehoming/petsearch

oh look random search and on the first page all but one are mastiff, staffi or bulldog crosses!!

But agree CPS should take the prosecutions, good luck with that one....... Also think on this, the CPS/trading standards (bodies who should be doing prosecutions) would never pay to board such as the amersham horses for 2 years plus etc, they would dispose of them as soon as possible by the most cost effective manner, Not necessarily one that would benefit the welfare of the animals. How would we on this forum feel if the amersham horses had been disposed of through the local sales ring????..... Just food for thought....
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top