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

competitiondiva said:
As you would imagine from a programme, selective editing can sometimes distort the message, but is it so bad that the inspector ran through all the expenses of keeping a pet to check the people were capable of meeting the animals needs?

Regarding a 'tidy' fee, do you realise that all animals rehomed by RSPCA have the neutering, vaccination, microchipping, worming, defleaing paid for??? The cost of doing all this far outweighs any adoption fee.....

If you have reported neglected animals, and not had anyone attend, either it's a case of too many calls, not enough inspectors. Or maybe on describing the animals to the call centre the urgency of the conditions was not fully understood? If these animals were/are in these conditions and no one has been out, either call call and call again, or if you don't support the rspca anyway. Then call someone else..........????
Click to expand...

You know what always strikes me with posts like this - (the ones you are referring to) is that they say that the RSPCA still haven't been out to these terribly neglected animals, yet there is no mention of whether they have rung another agency. Can't be that concerned.

If another agency has been called, can they tell us about the improvements that have now been made?
 
ahh marmalade you're one of the damned if they do and damned if they don't lot!

you infer that the rspca wanted the kitten to make money out of adoption fees, then when it's pointed out what that adoption fee pays for, you say, this cat wouldn't have cost them anything if they'd left it. And if they'd left it and the cat then got hit by a car and the new 'owners' hadn't considered this and couldn't afford it what then???

and please 'bloody cat'?????
 
Last edited:
marmalade76 said:
More than likely as the these rspca employees seem to know FA about horses!
Click to expand...

Yes I would be happy if an inspector questioned my financial ability to look after an animal. Too often inspectors come across people who take on animals willy nilly without a second's thought about whether they can afford them if something goes wrong. There is nothing more infuriating than someone who 'rescues' an animal and then doesn't have the means to actually meet the animal's needs themselves.

It sounds very much like the person in question came across as one of those sorts.
 
Although I see 'those sorts' on programmes and I often feel that they are a bit batty & ignorant rather than neccessarily cruel, my experience of the RSPCA is that inspectors are unlikely to act if the person who has had a complaint levelled at them is wealthy, or bullying.

I've seen pitiful cases reported to the RSPCA which were brushed under the carpet when the inspector was hoodwinked/bullied into thinking that this 'expert' knew better and look at all the other shiny healthy animals they have.I certainly support the statement that they really can be clueless.
 
I haven't read the entire thread but it sounds a bit like giving aid to countries that can afford nuclear weapons programs. Or our government asking us to tighten our belts whilst giving aid to countries that can afford nuclear weapons programs....
 
I stopped supporting them years ago. They care more about the press they will get from something like this than helping animals in my opinion.

I now support smaller charities instead who don't waste money.
 
Copperpot said:
I stopped supporting them years ago. They care more about the press they will get from something like this than helping animals in my opinion.

I now support smaller charities instead who don't waste money.
Click to expand...

It's a real shame that people feel this way because the less donations given means people like Jamie Grey won't be brought to justice. Too many people focus on the negative sides and don't focus on the positive. It is amazing how whenever a positive story comes on here of a succesful prosecution hardly anybody gives credit where credit is due - and instead of feeling pleased that justice has been done and an animal has been saved, people just find it more appropriate to slate the RSPCA. Very sad state of affairs.

If people on here really had animal welfare at heart they would perhaps look at the prosecution/rescue/rehoming statistics of the national society.

I stress again, each individual branch are SEPERATE charities under the RSPCA name. Experiences without rehoming branches do not reflect or have anything to do with the National Society.
 
It probably is a shame and it's not the RSPCA inspectors I have issues with. Maybe they are not trained as much as the should be according to others posts on here but I know they do not get paid much, so they obviously do the job as they care about animals.

It's more the hierarchy that I have issues with.

However, helping smaller charities is just as beneficial to animals. I have an ex death row dog sat next to me who would no longer be on this earth and I have helped financially with kennelling fees, vets fees for others. At least I can see where my money goes and that it is actually helping.
 
All registered welfare organisations do the best they can with what they have and all fully need our support whether small or large, maybe the RSPCA is guilty of trying to be everything to everyone, as it's run by councillors they each have their own priorities of what they want the RSPCA to be, so it tries to do it all. But in doing so spreads itself too thin??? Even on this forum peoples opinions of what they want the RSPCA to be are vastly different!

Regarding Inspectors who 'know naf all about horses' you're probably right, but that Inspector probably knows a hell of a lot about dogs, cats or some other animal etc, regarding training, I think it would be an impossible task to train every inspector to be fully knowledgeable about every animal that is covered by the law. But at the end of the day it is a vet who says whether an animal is suffering or not, not the inspector, if the inspector feels the animal is suffering then a vet will be called.

And regarding the whole 'not interested unless the press is there' theory..... Have you seen the statistics for the animals rescued, collected, cases brought etc, I for one can honestly say that i have not heard of that amount of stories in the press!!! The majority of an inspectors job is going giving improvement notices, these are usually acted upon, things improve and that's it, never hits the news. Similarly nor do all the collections of injured pigeons and gulls and myxy rabbits etc etc!
 
Last edited:
If the RSPCA and their inspectors are not always knowledgable about horses, should they even be involved. What would we say about a horse charity employing inspectors with little idea.

IMO horses should not come under the RSPCA, they should stick to smaller animals. Nor should they come under the farm animal inspectors.

Its time someone accepted that horses are different, vets have done it, many practices wont touch them.

Why dont we have a national horse charity with the same powers as the RSPCA. Not saying it has to be one of the existing ones, although that might make sense. Perhaps combine some of the better ones somehow. Maybe a totally seperate branch of the RSPCA, I dont know.

I'm pretty sure many at the RSPCA would be relieved and it would allow specialists to be recruited.
 
I agree that some RSPCA officers have a lack of equine knowledge. They were called to a TB locally, basically not being fed through the winter and was a walking hat rack. The little native type pony with him was poor but nowhere near as bad as the tb, as obviously he was able better to survive on fresh air. The RSPCA inspector stated that if it had just been the tb he would have removed it, but as the pony was okay (ish) he thought it might be an underlying problem so gave the owner time to get a vet to check it. Bizarrely the owner then paid a fortune for vet visits, bloods etc knowing full well the horse was thin as it hadn't been fed. Once it got some food down it not surprisingly he started looking better again, though was pts before the next winter.
 
Moomin1 said:
If people on here really had animal welfare at heart they would perhaps look at the prosecution/rescue/rehoming statistics of the national society.
Click to expand...

Well now the stats that the RSPCA put out, as you know, have been looked at time and again by the SHG. It is well known that at least 50% of all living creatures that come into possession of the RSPCA die. Not sure if the formatting will come over to here but let's think of treatments given, after all, one would expect that to be a real measure of the way in which the RSPCA helps animals.

1998 there were 286,540 treatments given.

2000 280,880

2004 238,265

2007 230,868

2008 214,657

2009 217,497

2010 211,188

2011 Not found this yet


Not very impressive to show a continual decline when demand is bound to be rising in a recession, is it?

How about the massive rises in cruelty according to the RSPCA media machine (aimed at parting everyone with their money).

According to the RSPCA comparing 2010 with 2011 figures there was a

24% rise in the number of people convicted for cruelty and neglect (1,341);
22% rise in the convictions relating to cruelty to dogs (2,105);
21% increase in disqualifications imposed by courts (1,100);
27% rise in prison sentences imposed by courts (74);
9% increase in the numbers of people reported to our prosecutions team (3,036); and
13% rise in the number of phone calls received by the RSPCA (1,314,795)

But is this really reflective of a massive rise year on year? Or do the figures show a different situation? (I have a spread sheet but can't find a way to transfer it over here. It will eventually hit the public domain). Not worked out the percentages for the following so:

Comparing 2011 with

2008 there was an an overall drop in convictions from 3252

2008 there was a very slight drop in disqualifications from 1104

2008 there was a dramatic drop in prison sentences from 133 with only 2010 being lower than 2011.

2008 there was a drop in the number of people reported to the prosecutions department from 3252

2008 telephone calls were higher in 2011 from 1098680 but the following year 2009 had 1338057 calls made.

But there were over 19000 more complaints investigated in 2011 than in 2008 which begs the question of why such a decrease in results.

The real result is that the figures vary year on year and it is easy to produce a low year or high year as required.

But then you might reflect on the new peer reviewed paper mentioned in the SHG blog post at

http://theshg.wordpress.com/2012/04/22/government-plans-to-microchip-dogs-has-no-evidential-support/

that states:

Furthermore, animal cruelty offences recorded by the police are not collected by the Home Office – we therefore have little other than anecdotal testimony in the absence of sustained criminological research to rely on in dealing with the seeming growth in the problem, for example, of abuse of dogs and their
involvement in crime and anti-social behaviour (see Hughes et al. [26]).
Click to expand...

"RSPCA and the criminology of social control" is an incredibly important paper and everyone who has doubts about the RSPCA stats that are published each year should read it.
 
Last edited:
rockysmum said:
If the RSPCA and their inspectors are not always knowledgable about horses, should they even be involved. What would we say about a horse charity employing inspectors with little idea.

IMO horses should not come under the RSPCA, they should stick to smaller animals. Nor should they come under the farm animal inspectors.

Its time someone accepted that horses are different, vets have done it, many practices wont touch them.

Why dont we have a national horse charity with the same powers as the RSPCA. Not saying it has to be one of the existing ones, although that might make sense. Perhaps combine some of the better ones somehow. Maybe a totally seperate branch of the RSPCA, I dont know.

I'm pretty sure many at the RSPCA would be relieved and it would allow specialists to be recruited.
Click to expand...

The RSPCA have no powers, there is no reason why the BHS or WHW couldn't take a prosecution, they choose not to because of the drain on resources, financial and staffing. So whilst i would agree with you, I think you first need to be contacting the other organisations to get them to take on this responsibility. The RSPCA take over cases started by these organisations if a prosecution entails, because they are the only ones willing to....
 
Wouldn't it be grand if someone (not me, I am not an RSPCA fan Imcase that had bypassed anyone! ) sent this thread to the RSPCA press and suggested that this thread is a very strong showing of the publics feelings about them.

BTW, I don't accept the arguement that the individual branches are completely separate from the main body. They carry the name, presumably have some sort of standards set. (..and if not WHY not?) so therefore are perceived to come under the same banner
 
Luci07 said:
Wouldn't it be grand if someone (not me, I am not an RSPCA fan Imcase that had bypassed anyone! ) sent this thread to the RSPCA press and suggested that this thread is a very strong showing of the publics feelings about them.

BTW, I don't accept the arguement that the individual branches are completely separate from the main body. They carry the name, presumably have some sort of standards set. (..and if not WHY not?) so therefore are perceived to come under the same banner
Click to expand...

I agree with what you have said and posted a similar answer about the public perception of the RSPCA. It dosnt matter whether it is right or wrong the important thing is their perception. We must all know brand names of goods that have been tarnished in some way so they have lost trade. The RSPCA will lose funds if they dont take up a massive publicity drive and try to restore confidence again. IMO they need to get back to the grass roots for which they were originaly formed.
 
Dobiegirl said:
The RSPCA will lose funds if they dont take up a massive publicity drive and try to restore confidence again. IMO they need to get back to the grass roots for which they were originaly formed.
Click to expand...

And then they'll be criticised heavily on here for wasting money in advertising and only being about publicity, as they already are.............
 
Luci07 said:
Wouldn't it be grand if someone .... sent this thread to the RSPCA press and suggested that this thread is a very strong showing of the publics feelings about them.

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

Yes, I think that it would be, but as most large and unwieldily bodies, the chances are that they'd simply refuse debate, and bury their collective heads in the sand.

It might be worth a try though! ;)

Alec.

Ets, and before anyone says "Well go on then", I would if only I knew how!! a
 
Dobiegirl said:
Whats your suggestion then?
Click to expand...

!!!?!?!?!?!

Unfortunately everyone wants it to be something different, and criticises it when it uses its money doing something else! Which is why so often they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Whereas organisations like dogs trust, cpl, WHW, bluecross in comparison keep their work centred in only a few areas, therefore attract the supporters who want their money spent on these things. The RSPCA is almost too big in that it tries to cater for almost anything and everything to do with an animal, therefore upsets some people in some areas but not in others. (not sure if I'm explaining myself right!!)

Of the list below where would you want your money as a supporter used?

a) caring, treating and rehoming of unwanted animals.
b) An inspectorate who goes into peoples homes and addresses the issues at the heart and if needs be (i.e if conditions are so bad or if there is no other option) brings prosecutions.
c) Campaingning
d) Helping aid those who cannot financially afford vet, neutering costs
e) Having people going out collecting injured and trapped animals both wild and domestic etc.
f) having education officers attend school giving talks/lessons.
g) research

plus am sure there are a hell of a lot of other areas I've missed!!!
 
competitiondiva said:
Of the list below where would you want your money as a supporter used?

a) caring, treating and rehoming of unwanted animals.[/OUOTE]

I would expect the RSPCA to undertake all of a).

More than that I would expect them to work to ensure that when people offer in animals for rehoming they try to find out why the animals can no longer be kept and to try to find a means of keeping animal and owner together.

I would not expect them to take animals off people who cannot afford veterinary treatment, that is just removing an animal from a home that is good in all other respects.

Too often people are told that the RSPCA will not treat their animal but will kill it for them, or will accept it to be signed over whereupon they will treat it and rehome it.

This turns animals into throw away commodities to be discarded when the going gets tough.

competitiondiva said:
b) An inspectorate who goes into peoples homes and addresses the issues at the heart and if needs be (i.e if conditions are so bad or if there is no other option) brings prosecutions.
Click to expand...

The Animal Welfare Act 2006 gave powers to local authority appointed inspectors and the police. It is a waste of donated money for a charity to double up on inspections, investigations and prosecutions when a perfectly good and free service is provided by the state. If people are unhappy with the service provided then they should complain via the local government ombudsman and the IPCC. They should certainly make their MP aware of the problems.

competitiondiva said:
c) Campaingning
Click to expand...

Depends on what and on the cost:benefit ratio.

ampaigns such as dogs in hot cars are important and non-political.

Other campaigns are clearly political and people who wish to undertake them should move into the political arena, not stay in the charity world.

competitiondiva said:
d) Helping aid those who cannot financially afford vet, neutering costs
Click to expand...

Helping with vet costs absolutely. Neutering costs no. Far too many concerns about the safety of neutering these days.

If all of the animal related legislation since the 1911 Act had been replaced by an animal NHS if only for the animals of pensioners, and run similarly to the NHS dental service, retaining private practitioners, it would have done far more for animal welfare than has been achieved with the waving of the big legislative stick method. It would help double the number of animals because it would free up charities like the PDSA to provide for a different group of needy animal owners.

These days it could be funded via the national lottery - give people a choice to tick whether they want their 'donation' to go to the usual 'good causes' or to fund an animal NHS.

competitiondiva said:
e) Having people going out collecting injured and trapped animals both wild and domestic etc.
Click to expand...

RSPCA usually call in the experts to do this anyway, be they the fire brigade or RNLI etc.

competitiondiva said:
f) having education officers attend school giving talks/lessons.
Click to expand...

Not really sure that this should be a specialist job. One for people with genuine experience if at all. Sooner see our failing schools teach children to read - then they can find information on the net themselves.

competitiondiva said:
g) research

plus am sure there are a hell of a lot of other areas I've missed!!!
Click to expand...

Again, not so sure about research. Plenty of institutions fund and carry out research. The RSPCA has a bad name for dumping research it funded when it didn't like the results. Research needs an open mind, and doesn't seem to be the right place for campaigners trying to prove their point.
Click to expand...
 
Fenris said:
competitiondiva said:
Of the list below where would you want your money as a supporter used?

a) caring, treating and rehoming of unwanted animals.[/OUOTE]

I would expect the RSPCA to undertake all of a).

More than that I would expect them to work to ensure that when people offer in animals for rehoming they try to find out why the animals can no longer be kept and to try to find a means of keeping animal and owner together.

I would not expect them to take animals off people who cannot afford veterinary treatment, that is just removing an animal from a home that is good in all other respects.

Too often people are told that the RSPCA will not treat their animal but will kill it for them, or will accept it to be signed over whereupon they will treat it and rehome it.

This turns animals into throw away commodities to be discarded when the going gets tough.



The Animal Welfare Act 2006 gave powers to local authority appointed inspectors and the police. It is a waste of donated money for a charity to double up on inspections, investigations and prosecutions when a perfectly good and free service is provided by the state. If people are unhappy with the service provided then they should complain via the local government ombudsman and the IPCC. They should certainly make their MP aware of the problems.



Depends on what and on the cost:benefit ratio.

ampaigns such as dogs in hot cars are important and non-political.

Other campaigns are clearly political and people who wish to undertake them should move into the political arena, not stay in the charity world.



Helping with vet costs absolutely. Neutering costs no. Far too many concerns about the safety of neutering these days.

If all of the animal related legislation since the 1911 Act had been replaced by an animal NHS if only for the animals of pensioners, and run similarly to the NHS dental service, retaining private practitioners, it would have done far more for animal welfare than has been achieved with the waving of the big legislative stick method. It would help double the number of animals because it would free up charities like the PDSA to provide for a different group of needy animal owners.

These days it could be funded via the national lottery - give people a choice to tick whether they want their 'donation' to go to the usual 'good causes' or to fund an animal NHS.



RSPCA usually call in the experts to do this anyway, be they the fire brigade or RNLI etc.



Not really sure that this should be a specialist job. One for people with genuine experience if at all. Sooner see our failing schools teach children to read - then they can find information on the net themselves.



Again, not so sure about research. Plenty of institutions fund and carry out research. The RSPCA has a bad name for dumping research it funded when it didn't like the results. Research needs an open mind, and doesn't seem to be the right place for campaigners trying to prove their point.
Click to expand...

and that is your version of the direction you would want rspca to go in.

But to address your points, the council yes are the ones appointed under the act, but very few have officers to deal with these welfare complaints. To do so would require a substancial increase in budget, the knock on effect is a substancial increase in council tax. Plus the choice on whether to prosecute would be a financial one, take for instance the gray case, those horses would have been disposed of by the most cost effective way at the earliest opportunity, i.e sold through the sales ring, where is the animal welfare there?

Am just shocked and speechless at your anti neutering stance!!!!!!!

Regarding collections and rescues, sorry i wasn't aware the fire brigade or RNLI went out collecting injured birds, hedgehogs, deer, myxy rabbits etc etc etc!!!????? granted they will attend where the specialist equipement is required.....
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Fenris I take issue with you as regards neutering, where and how do you think the thousands of dogs come from that go into rescue. By not neutering you are potentially allowing pets to breed indiscriminately. Spaying helps prevent mammary tumours and pyrometra in bitches which can be fatal.

I would like to see a drive by the RSPCA to help stop puppy farming and byb, also raising awareness of the pitfalls of giving dogs away for free on internet sites and the liklihood of them falling into the hands of fight gangs who use them for bait dogs.
 
Nothing can be done for myxie rabbits except put it out of it`s misery,which any country man could do there and then,no vet fees required. Pointless.
 
EAST KENT said:
Nothing can be done for myxie rabbits except put it out of it`s misery,which any country man could do there and then,no vet fees required. Pointless.
Click to expand...

And as even the hardened wouldn't be too struck on breaking the neck of a puss filled rabbit, the final act for them is generally administered with a stick. Kindness doesn't always have a pretty face.

Alec.
 
competitiondiva said:
and that is your version of the direction you would want rspca to go in.
Click to expand...

Those are my current thoughts - but the real test is what the donating public are prepared to support. The problem the RSPCA has now is that it has been depending on legacy income for a long time. The people who left them legacies are generally those who did so when they saw a very different RSPCA. An RSPCA that went round with flea spray and wormer in the van which they used on people's animals instead of seizing and prosecuting.

Legacy income is dropping - for whatever reason. They need to address the problem and to do that they need to persuade the people who are critical to come back on board.


competitiondiva said:
But to address your points, the council yes are the ones appointed under the act, but very few have officers to deal with these welfare complaints.
Click to expand...

Many have appointed an inspector with the powers of the Act. Indeed, some have more than one inspector.


competitiondiva said:
To do so would require a substancial increase in budget, the knock on effect is a substancial increase in council tax. Plus the choice on whether to prosecute would be a financial one, take for instance the gray case, those horses would have been disposed of by the most cost effective way at the earliest opportunity, i.e sold through the sales ring, where is the animal welfare there?
Click to expand...

Other organizations dealt with the re-homing of the Gray horses. More importantly though, local authorities have a proper complaints procedure that is governed by the local government ombudsman and they are also subject to judicial review of their decisions and actions. If they fail to act reasonably then any organization can take any of these steps.

Cost effectively it would only need one council or police force to have complaints about their failure to act upheld to send a shock wave through the rest of the country.

Equally cost effectively, how is it supportive of animal welfare for a charity which is losing the support of the public and which is rapidly going broke ? What decisions are then made in terms of who to prosecute and why? Even if we ignore the political influence which would generally be knocked out of any local authority or police/CPS prosecution?

competitiondiva said:
Am just shocked and speechless at your anti neutering stance!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

http://www2.dcn.org/orgs/ddtc/sfiles/LongTermHealthEffectsOfSpayNeuterInDogs.pdf

http://www.caninesports.com/SpayNeuter.html

http://www.caninesports.com/SNBehaviorBoneDataSnapShot.pdf

Essentially spay/neuter is elective invasive surgery that has major downsides as well as good and should in my view, not be undertaken lightly.

Even anaesthetic can cause problems for people as well as animals.

competitiondiva said:
Regarding collections and rescues, sorry i wasn't aware the fire brigade or RNLI went out collecting injured birds, hedgehogs, deer, myxy rabbits etc etc etc!!!????? granted they will attend where the specialist equipement is required.....
Click to expand...

And of course they don't, most such rescues are by small specialist organizations that do the jobs the RSPCA ought to be doing which is why there is such dissatisfaction!

However your original question stated:

e) Having people going out collecting injured and trapped animals both wild and domestic etc.

And of course I was thinking of sheep or horses trapped by the tide, animals off cliffs, cats up trees etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top