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

I have to say dealing/working very closely with the RSPCA some years back I could see this happening. All the inspectors I knew left because of the sheer frustration from the suits above.
I was headed for joining the RSPCA as an inspector and decided against it from what I was witnessing it was not for me.
I think they went a little crazy with alot of money and never had/thought about the future/contingency.

The RSPCA do subsidize vet fees in extenuating circumstances but I am not sure I agree with people randomly having vet bills payed, it encourages irresponsible ownership, either insure your pet or don't get one otherwise it's going to suffer through your own selfishness/ignorance.

I have to say though I do think neutering is massively important considering we are dealing with the aftermath of mass production here which can only strain the system, it would also be cheaper to prevent than treat, so if folk cannot afford neutering they cannot afford an emergency pyo thats for sure and if the RSPCA have to fund or subside this, it's a bigger drain.
I think we need FREE neutering clinics everywhere.

An we certainly need education to try and educate tomorrows abusers/ignoramuses:p, Im not sure who other than the RSPCA who would perform this task? and who would fund it?

In regard to wild life then of course they should be on hand to attend, unless it's something managable and to be fair half the public could man up a little put said animals in a box and take it to an out of hours vet (they wont refuse it) esp the likes of injured, birds hedgehogs, rabbits or even cats/dogs found on the roadside. All the public need do is contact the RSPCA and they will direct you to a local vet and they will sort out log number if it's a cat/dog but some wont even travel up the road.

What services would you like to see the PDSA freed up to do? as mentioned somewhere above?
 
CAYLA said:
I

What services would you like to see the PDSA freed up to do? as mentioned somewhere above?
Click to expand...

If there was a government funded animal NHS if only for the animals of pensioners then the PDSA would be freed from providing for those animals and able to use their funds to provide for different but perhaps equally needy people and their animals.
 
Fenris said:
If there was a government funded animal NHS if only for the animals of pensioners then the PDSA would be freed from providing for those animals and able to use their funds to provide for different but perhaps equally needy people and their animals.
Click to expand...

You do of course realise in your wisdom that many people that use the PDSA's goodwill and funds are actually sat at home drinking heavily, smoking heavily, playing on new xbox's with all the latest games?

There needs to be an organisation, as the RSPCA does, taking those people to task and seeing that they start setting their priorities straight.
 
Moomin1 said:
You do of course realise in your wisdom that many people that use the PDSA's goodwill and funds are actually sat at home drinking heavily, smoking heavily, playing on new xbox's with all the latest games?

There needs to be an organisation, as the RSPCA does, taking those people to task and seeing that they start setting their priorities straight.
Click to expand...

Yep and some of them no doubt are the biggest culprits when it comes to the indiscriminate breeding of Staffordshire Bull Terriers and such like who end up putting extra strain on the charities in the UK, not forgetting the abundance of healthy dogs put to sleep every day.
 
Tormenta said:
Yep and some of them no doubt are the biggest culprits when it comes to the indiscriminate breeding of Staffordshire Bull Terriers and such like who end up putting extra strain on the charities in the UK, not forgetting the abundance of healthy dogs put to sleep every day.
Click to expand...

A voice of sensibility Tormenta!! Yes these are the very same folks that CAUSE the likes of heavily burdened charities to HAVE to turn away or potentially pts healthy animals - all in the name of animal welfare (it would not be in the animal's best interests to leave it with owner, but also not welfare minded to leave them going stir crazy in kennels for years on end trying to find a new home - with thousands of other staffies available and not wanted too). It's a nightmare. IMO better pts than leave with those types of people, or risk them ending up being passed around and bred from by that type.
 
Moomin1 said:
You do of course realise in your wisdom that many people that use the PDSA's goodwill and funds are actually sat at home drinking heavily, smoking heavily, playing on new xbox's with all the latest games?

There needs to be an organisation, as the RSPCA does, taking those people to task and seeing that they start setting their priorities straight.
Click to expand...

So how on earth is the RSPCA going to know who is sat at home drinking and smoking heavily whilst playing on their new xboxs? and how are they going to take them to task and get them to buck up their ideas.
 
Dobiegirl said:
So how on earth is the RSPCA going to know who is sat at home drinking and smoking heavily whilst playing on their new xboxs? and how are they going to take them to task and get them to buck up their ideas.
Click to expand...

Errr, because they visit houses like this every single day and take prosecutions on them?!

I could post a pic on here of a dog subject to such an example but I haven't got a clue how to do it.
 
But you make it sound like all people who visit the PDSA are all shysters this is clearly not true. How do you know the xboxs are not presents from someone else.

I think you will find the PDSA would take someone to task if an animal was brought in that was clearly neglected.
 
Dobiegirl said:
But you make it sound like all people who visit the PDSA are all shysters this is clearly not true. How do you know the xboxs are not presents from someone else.

I think you will find the PDSA would take someone to task if an animal was brought in that was clearly neglected.
Click to expand...

I'm not intending to make it sound as if everyone who takes their pets to PDSA are like that at all. I apologise if it came across that way. What I am trying to say is that many of those people could in actual fact fund their pets themselves if they had their priorities in line. The RSPCA work in line with PDSA often, by referring people to them, or following up complaints made by pdsa when people have brought in neglected animals or when people haven't followed up treatment as advised.

Members of public don't have this idea - they obviously don't realise that the RSPCA are the port of call for most organisations, including many vets and charities, to take further action when they are not satisfied with the people and animals they are dealing with. It is satisfying to know to that many succesful prosecutions have taken place as a result of the organisations notifying and working in conjunction with the RSPCA.

That in essence was what I was trying to say - the RSPCA needs the other organisations, as the other organisations also need the RSPCA. It's a shame all of the organisations don't show how they work together, because I can understand that to the general public it may not be obvious or clear that they really do form an effective lattice on many occassions.

As for the xbox instance - you ask any authority - be it housing, police, RSPCA, child protection etc, what they often encounter when they deal with neglect (of animals and children) - and what they see in the surroundings of the house.

Rubbish galore, dirt, neglected animals, neglected children, and LARGE SCREEN TV'S, PLAYSTATIONS, GAMES, ALCOHOL BOTTLES, CIGARETTE PACKETS, DRUGS. And debt collector's letters laying around by the letterbox...
 
Here is a thought.

If the police can recruit volunteers to walk the street when they dont have the manpower. Why cant the RSPCA.

If they were careful with selection and training perhaps these people could do the first checks. Obviously not when it was in someones home.

Be honest, any one of us could probably check a horse in a field and report back on whether it needed attention. If it did then the inspectors are called in.

Same with collecting wildlife (small) and dropping it at the RSPCA.

It would weed out the hoax and downright stupid calls at least. Perhaps free up the inspectors to do more for the really needy cases.

I bet they would get thousands of people willing to help.
 
Rockysmum, in theory good, in reality what it would cost to train the people to recognise offenses, plus insurance to cover these people. Baring in mind when an inspector knocks on a door for knows what they will face. Would probably make it not as cost effective as you would initially think. It takes 6 months to train an inspector in the associated legislation. What you are stating is similar in effect to the bhs. Who's field officers I believe are volunteers. Problem here is the quality of the person as they are such is far ranging. Plus they are only dealing with horses in fields, not going into people's homes.. Regarding collection of contained wildlife I am completely in qgreement
 
rockysmum said:
Here is a thought.

If the police can recruit volunteers to walk the street when they dont have the manpower. Why cant the RSPCA.

If they were careful with selection and training perhaps these people could do the first checks. Obviously not when it was in someones home.

Be honest, any one of us could probably check a horse in a field and report back on whether it needed attention. If it did then the inspectors are called in.

Same with collecting wildlife (small) and dropping it at the RSPCA.

It would weed out the hoax and downright stupid calls at least. Perhaps free up the inspectors to do more for the really needy cases.

I bet they would get thousands of people willing to help.
Click to expand...

You're right Rockysmum - that is in theory a good idea - and in fact what the RSPCA have over the past two years tried to do.

They used to have inspectors who dealt with complaints (all) and also a number of collections, and collection officers who solely dealt with collections. They thought it would be more efficient to do what the police have done and retrain the collection officers to become Animal Welfare Officers (AWO's) in order for them to concentrate on the low level complaints and collections whilst freeing up the inspectors to deal with high level complaints and prosecutions. This is the structure that the RSPCA currently operate under on the ground. But the sheer volume of calls coming in, in comparison with the amount of officers on the ground (taking into account maternity, paternity, sick leave, secondment etc etc) means that it does not work as effectively as the police who have hundreds and hundreds of officers in each region.

Plus, without actually attending the complaint - you never ever know what is behind the door to greet you. Something that sounds HORRENDOUS actually turns out to be nothing. And quite the opposite too.

Unfortunately we live in a culture where people like to cause trouble for their neighbours at the expense of well meaning charities, and more importantly, well meaning public who donate to those charities, who then unfortunately get understandably riled by the fact that their sincere calls and complaints wait a while whilst officers make visits to horrific sounding calls when in fact it's nothing but a domestic feud. Very sad.
 
Fenris said:
If there was a government funded animal NHS if only for the animals of pensioners then the PDSA would be freed from providing for those animals and able to use their funds to provide for different but perhaps equally needy people and their animals.
Click to expand...


The state we are in, I doubt an animal NHS for pensioners pets would be a priority, The number of pensioners using the service is actually pretty low in the grand scheme.
 
Moomin1 said:
They used to have inspectors who dealt with complaints (all) and also a number of collections, and collection officers who solely dealt with collections. They thought it would be more efficient to do what the police have done and retrain the collection officers to become Animal Welfare Officers (AWO's) in order for them to concentrate on the low level complaints and collections whilst freeing up the inspectors to deal with high level complaints and prosecutions. This is the structure that the RSPCA currently operate under on the ground. But the sheer volume of calls coming in, in comparison with the amount of officers on the ground (taking into account maternity, paternity, sick leave, secondment etc etc) means that it does not work as effectively as the police who have hundreds and hundreds of officers in each region.

QUOTE]

Thats interesting, so in theory the cases where people are complaining about inspectors might actually have been dealt with by the Animal Welfare Officers.


I dont think their current structure would stop them using more volunteers. Certainly they need to do something if their resources are so stretched. It would be better to tell people who ring they cant deal properly with the case, than promise to investigate and then not, or take too long.

If people were aware of this they would have the chance to try other charities or the local authority instead.
Click to expand...
 
rockysmum said:
Moomin1 said:
They used to have inspectors who dealt with complaints (all) and also a number of collections, and collection officers who solely dealt with collections. They thought it would be more efficient to do what the police have done and retrain the collection officers to become Animal Welfare Officers (AWO's) in order for them to concentrate on the low level complaints and collections whilst freeing up the inspectors to deal with high level complaints and prosecutions. This is the structure that the RSPCA currently operate under on the ground. But the sheer volume of calls coming in, in comparison with the amount of officers on the ground (taking into account maternity, paternity, sick leave, secondment etc etc) means that it does not work as effectively as the police who have hundreds and hundreds of officers in each region.

QUOTE]

If an AWO comes across something that is potentially a case - or looks serious - they should hand it promptly back to an inspector to deal. The sheer amount of serious complaints made per day means unfortunately, as with every other charity which has field officers (but a bit worse because the RSPCA deal with all animals AND collections of wildlife), that not every complaint can be seen to immediately or even within a few days. It is a case of prioritising on the information given - and even then it is very difficult becaus so many sound so bad. An individual officer covers an area specifically designated to them, which can be anything between 50 square miles to 250 square miles. So one inspector may have an area which is highly populated over 50 square miles in which they can drive from job to job quickly, whereas the rural inspectors (where the horsey complaints quite often are) can have an area of 250 square miles to cover and takes all day to get to one to the other and deal. It really is down to staffing and funds. If there were more staff - like the police, then I have no doubt whatsoever that the system you suggest would work very effectively.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
rockysmum said:
Here is a thought.

If the police can recruit volunteers to walk the street when they dont have the manpower. Why cant the RSPCA.

If they were careful with selection and training perhaps these people could do the first checks. Obviously not when it was in someones home.

Be honest, any one of us could probably check a horse in a field and report back on whether it needed attention. If it did then the inspectors are called in.

Same with collecting wildlife (small) and dropping it at the RSPCA.

It would weed out the hoax and downright stupid calls at least. Perhaps free up the inspectors to do more for the really needy cases.

I bet they would get thousands of people willing to help.
Click to expand...

Small charities have volunteers. Inspectors for home visits, 6 monthly check ups etc, I was one myself. If I had reported back that a horse/pony in the care of someone who loaned one of the equines were not adequately cared for the charity involved (small and local) had the legal right to remove and/or call the police for support. I can't see how this would be entirely out of the question for larger charities investigating cases if a volunteer Inspector was trained adequately. A volunteer Inspector could do the general checks freeing up a more trained Inspector to do proper cruelty/neglect/ignorance cases. I am sure they would have people willing to do that and they could quite easily be covered legally, as with some of the smaller charities.
 
Wildlife charities rely on their volunteers as do a lot of dog rescues, they just need to be people with common sense and there are a lot around surprisingly enough.

If other charities can do the same I dont see why the RSPCA cant do the same, and as for there not being enough Inspectors perhaps they could recruit more and not bother pursuing expensive cases like the thread title. I also think they should not get involved with the Grand National as they have. They have little knowledge of racing and have caused more deaths by their actions in trying to make it safer imo.
 
Dobiegirl. So recruit more inspectors.... But then don't pay for the prosecutions which result from having those inspectors.... Unfortunately it's a catch 22!! If the rspca didn't pursue this case, then who will? If no-one then what's the point in having the law.... If the law has been broken then the perpetrator imo should be held accountable...
 
For heaven sake just give up the RSPCA are crap,they keep asking for money but it's not spent where it is needed and the worse thing they ever did was going on tv as they came over as real bullys on people that should have needed help and now they have gone policitcal. Why should I spend my hard earnt money, helping them waste thousands.
 
competitiondiva said:
Dobiegirl. So recruit more inspectors.... But then don't pay for the prosecutions which result from having those inspectors.... Unfortunately it's a catch 22!! If the rspca didn't pursue this case, then who will? If no-one then what's the point in having the law.... If the law has been broken then the perpetrator imo should be held accountable...
Click to expand...

I do agree however its all about prioritising the use of limited resouces.

I personally would prefer that all animals in need were helped first. If they can afford it then prosecute the worst cases.

Often the penalties are small anyway and even those banned from owning animals seem to find a way round it.

I'm not saying this is right, but then neither are a lot of other things in the world.
 
Echo Bravo said:
For heaven sake just give up the RSPCA are crap,they keep asking for money but it's not spent where it is needed and the worse thing they ever did was going on tv as they came over as real bullys on people that should have needed help and now they have gone policitcal. Why should I spend my hard earnt money, helping them waste thousands.
Click to expand...

Considering this thread and having contributed to it previously I thought the proceedings I saw today quite apt.
I saw a man knocking on the door of someone living down the road from me when I was walking my dog this morning. When he got no reply he walked to a van parked nearby...an RSPCA van. He had come to investigate as last night they had a report that 2 dogs had been left 'home alone' while their owners went away for a long weekend. He has checked the dogs, he has taped a notice to the door and he is coming back later on tonight to check again. Not so 'crap' after all.........? And it did lift my spirits to see them doing the work that so many of you are slating them for supposedly not doing.
 
Echo Bravo said:
1life, how do you know they had been left alone for a long weekend?
Click to expand...


Because their neighbour had asked them where they were off to when they saw them loading the car and trailer up from Thursday onwards. I presume he thought they were taking the dogs with them...but it turns out they didn't. Don't know who reported them but it was obviously someone who was concerned.

Could have been someone going in to check them but I obviously don't know the full details - my POINT being that the RSPCA inspector obviously didn't know the full details either, so was investigating.
 
When I go away I have a lady go in twice a day to feed my cats and check all is ok. It costs a tenner a day but is much kinder than sticking them in an enclosed cattery when they are used to 24/7 freedom .
 
Ceris Comet said:
When I go away I have a lady go in twice a day to feed my cats and check all is ok. It costs a tenner a day but is much kinder than sticking them in an enclosed cattery when they are used to 24/7 freedom .
Click to expand...

My parents' neighbour used to look after their cat for them in return for the help they gave her round the house. The only problem was that when they came back they always had problems getting said cat to come back to theirs for her food...she obviously preferred the extra treats she had been spoiled with while they were way ;).
 
Haven't read all 21 pages of posts so sorry if this has already been said but just to clarify it IS the CPS that prosecutes criminal cases, not RSPCA. RSPCA gather evidence and then pass the file to CPS who make the decision on whether or not to prosecute.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top