RSPCA. Knocking on doors.

[Moomin1]

Of course not - but it would be rather better to use good judgement on which ones they're most likely to be able to rehome - and which ones are so old/decrepit that putting THEM down makes sense!

See, funny you say that, because that EXACT judgement is what causes most people to moan about the RSPCA - about putting 'healthy animals to sleep just because they are elderly or not suitable for rehoming'.

I fully agree with you JG, judgements should be made on each animal as to whether it is suitable for rehome and if not pts.

 

[honetpot]

http://www.charitycommission.gov.uk/find-charities/ 219099 is the charity number, income last listed as ,£132,803,000 accounts 2012
I think the person who donates on the back of cold calling or those dreadful ads on tv has no idea how their money is used and that is what I object to. No one wants any animal to suffer, I want animals fed and watered not left starving and dehydrated so they are bad enough to try and get a prosecution.

 

[Queenbee]

What, prosecuting a hunt which err, broke the law?

Oh come on moomin don't be deliberately obtuse. Personally I'm sick of people donating thinking they are saving a sick kitten and it go towards something else, something completely inappropriate. Smacks of defrauding people and I for one wouldn't give them a penny, there are far better charities out there.

 

[Moomin1]

Oh come on moomin don't be deliberately obtuse. Personally I'm sick of people donating thinking they are saving a sick kitten and it go towards something else, something completely inappropriate. Smacks of defrauding people and I for one wouldn't give them a penny, there are far better charities out there.

78,000 advice notices were given by the RSPCA last year. 150,000 complaints were investigated. 130,000 animals were rescued (including wildlife, domestics/exotics/farm animals, nothing at all to do with 'just' prosecuting, that is just the animals 'rescued').

Out of all of those animals rescued, do you know how many cases were prosecutions? 4160.

 

[MerrySherryRider]

And - where possible - they happily dump surplus horses on other charities! And if they can't - and still have too many - they just put down the surplus - or ones that aren't part of an ongoing pending trial! And yes - that's fact. When BHS had its rescue centre, they took a number of horses off the RSPCA's hands - and I know a lass that is an experienced groom at one of their centres - it really pi**es her off the way the decide to bump off the latest in - with no real examination of the 'best' horses to keep!

The main animal charities work together and often pool resources. WHW works with the RSPCA and uses their legal resources for prosecutions, as do the RSPB and others. It makes economic sense. My horse was rescued by WHW, who outsourced his rehabilitation and worked with the RSPCA prosecutions dept for a successful prosecution of the man who starved my horse and his companions to the brink of death.
I donate monthly to the RSPCA for their amazing work here and internationally. During the floods recently, it was their flood rescue team that was out night after night rescuing hundreds of horses from drowning. They put themselves at risk for the welfare of frightened and hungry horses in appalling conditions and yet those posters who criticise them, offer no alternative solution for animal welfare.

I know where my money goes. They aren't perfect, but name me one national organisation that is. The banks, police force, NHS, pension funds .....
Name one national charity that is perfect. NSPCC ? Nope. Wouldn't give them a penny.All the big charities use marketing and professional companies to raise funds, they all waste money on glossy adverts, free pens and nice offices.

 

[happyclappy]

if i wish to donate to a charity i will go to them, not give because they have the audacity to knock on my door.

 

[Queenbee]

Oh come on moomin don't be deliberately obtuse. Personally I'm sick of people donating thinking they are saving a sick kitten and it go towards something else, something completely inappropriate. Smacks of defrauding people and I for one wouldn't give them a penny, there are far better charities out there.

That doesn't include the perfectly healthy deer we heard about on here that they told the vet to shoot as the couldn't be bothered to get off their backsides and come and see.

And I would also say that 130'000 is just a number, we don't know how many were seized from any one person, so alongside the 150'000 complaints it means very little.

Finally, if we are going to talk about prosecuting the hunt, (because actually I was referring more to their shockingly expensive premises and cars and other needless and totally inappropriate expenses) it's simple, I'm a firm believer that that money could have been put to far better use and helped a hell of a lot more animals, Christ, think of the land they could have bought to expand their accommodation remit alone!

Whatever your views, no one can deny that the feeling and respect toward this company from the public is waning significantly. Neither can anyone deny that they have changed their practices and not for the better, they are far more self serving and politically motivated than they ever have been.

We will forever be agreeing to disagree on this one I think, as personally no amount of statistics will ever make me change my mind on them. I am well aware that stats are a very powerful tool for manipulating the reality of a scenario to suit your own needs